Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #401667 > unrolled thread
| Started by | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-09-06 15:45 +0200 |
| Last post | 2026-10-05 04:32 +0200 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 496 — 24 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-06 15:45 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-06 15:52 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-06 16:52 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-06 21:41 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-07 09:37 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-07 11:35 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-07 13:15 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-07 13:55 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-07 15:24 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-07 15:33 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-07 16:34 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-08 00:50 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-08 00:35 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lane W <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-07 17:43 -0600
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-07 16:52 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-09-09 15:24 +0800
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-09 10:18 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-09-09 20:16 +0800
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-09 14:31 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-09 14:37 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-09-09 21:37 +0800
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-18 09:38 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-09-18 17:42 +0800
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-08 03:11 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-08 16:40 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-08 20:08 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-09 09:35 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-09 10:18 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-09 12:32 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-09 14:30 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-09 15:09 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-09 16:58 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-09 18:34 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-09 18:37 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-09 20:12 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-09 22:11 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-09 21:15 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-09 23:37 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-09 21:39 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-09 21:39 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-10 09:07 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-09 14:41 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-09 23:31 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-09 15:10 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-08 09:25 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-09 09:59 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-09 10:35 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-09 11:35 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-09 14:43 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 14:08 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 14:14 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-11 09:16 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2026-09-14 19:14 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-09-18 08:29 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-09 02:45 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-09 15:07 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lane W <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-09 07:14 -0600
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-09 15:31 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lane W <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-09 07:41 -0600
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-09 15:58 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lane W <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-09 08:05 -0600
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-09 16:13 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-09 16:29 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances "Johann \"Myrkraverk\" Oskarsson" <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-09-18 10:23 +0800
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-09 16:10 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-09 16:19 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-09 17:02 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-09 15:11 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lane W <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-09 08:25 -0600
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-09 15:53 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-09 17:42 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-09 17:53 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-09 18:03 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-09 18:19 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-09 18:49 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-09 19:16 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-09 15:48 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-09 18:38 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-10 09:11 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-09 15:04 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-09 17:12 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances "Johann \"Myrkraverk\" Oskarsson" <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-09-09 23:59 +0800
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-09 15:30 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-10 06:50 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-09 15:13 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2026-09-09 15:16 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-09 15:43 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-10 07:16 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-09-08 00:02 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-08 12:47 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-09-09 01:59 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-09 10:26 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-09 19:12 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances tTh <tth@none.invalid> - 2026-09-09 21:01 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-09 21:45 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-09 21:18 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-10 09:32 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-09 23:26 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-09 23:30 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-10 08:45 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-10 13:09 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 14:37 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 15:11 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 15:16 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 15:28 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-10 14:33 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 15:51 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 16:03 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-10 15:27 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 16:45 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 16:59 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-10 16:57 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 18:18 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-11 01:04 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 16:47 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 16:54 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 17:06 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 17:15 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-10 18:10 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 18:21 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-10 18:45 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 18:56 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 19:01 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 19:20 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 20:19 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 20:25 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 19:17 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-11 09:21 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-11 12:46 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-11 14:13 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2026-09-11 13:41 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-11 14:55 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-11 15:01 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-11 15:04 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-11 15:08 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-11 15:13 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-11 15:17 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 21:02 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 21:59 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 16:41 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-10 09:48 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-11 00:06 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-10 23:48 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 15:52 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-11 00:48 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 17:11 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-12 08:01 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-12 08:20 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-12 09:09 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-12 12:35 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-12 12:40 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-12 11:55 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-12 14:37 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-12 14:49 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-12 15:00 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-12 14:24 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-12 15:44 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-12 15:53 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-12 16:05 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-12 16:16 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-12 17:20 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-12 17:08 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lane W <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-12 10:53 -0600
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-12 19:23 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-12 18:58 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-12 20:35 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-12 20:46 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-12 20:49 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-12 22:16 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lane W <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-12 15:40 -0600
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-13 10:15 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-13 10:27 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-13 10:39 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-13 10:30 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-13 11:47 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-13 11:53 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-13 11:26 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-13 12:37 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-13 12:47 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-13 12:55 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-13 13:11 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lane W <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-13 05:29 -0600
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-13 13:43 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-09-13 14:00 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Ike Naar <ike@sdf.org> - 2026-09-13 10:53 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-13 13:46 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-13 15:21 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-13 15:31 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-13 16:34 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-13 16:58 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-13 18:01 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-13 21:14 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-13 17:17 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-13 17:23 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-13 17:27 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-13 17:06 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-14 15:01 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-14 18:11 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances tTh <tth@none.invalid> - 2026-09-14 20:21 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-14 22:54 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-14 23:56 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-15 09:07 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-15 09:41 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-15 10:22 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-15 11:51 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-15 12:53 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-18 09:10 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-18 11:37 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-19 09:03 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-19 13:01 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-05 01:57 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-14 18:54 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-14 22:55 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-14 21:03 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-15 00:33 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-13 10:50 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-13 12:32 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-12 20:15 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-12 19:34 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-12 19:39 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-12 15:23 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lane W <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-12 07:45 -0600
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-11 00:37 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-09-13 18:55 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-14 01:44 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-09-14 07:41 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-14 14:01 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-14 14:09 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-09-15 02:42 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-14 23:41 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-09-15 01:48 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-15 07:39 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-15 11:28 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-09-15 14:54 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-15 21:56 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-15 21:34 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-16 00:36 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-09-16 02:21 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-16 09:08 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-16 11:21 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-16 13:47 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-16 15:20 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-16 17:53 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-17 00:36 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-16 16:59 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-17 01:49 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-16 19:43 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances tTh <tth@none.invalid> - 2026-09-17 09:24 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-17 11:29 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-17 15:06 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-18 02:04 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-17 18:19 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-18 11:27 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-18 11:21 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-18 13:17 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-18 15:44 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-19 09:16 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-09-18 12:55 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-18 17:53 +0300
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-18 15:47 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-19 21:22 +0300
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-20 15:58 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-21 21:06 +0300
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-22 15:04 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-22 21:07 +0300
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-18 15:41 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-18 11:34 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-17 12:52 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-17 13:15 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-17 15:16 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-17 15:25 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-17 17:05 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-17 16:46 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-17 20:22 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-17 20:19 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances tTh <tth@none.invalid> - 2026-09-17 21:55 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-17 23:47 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances tTh <tth@none.invalid> - 2026-09-17 21:31 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-17 20:54 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-17 15:44 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-17 23:48 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances "Steven G. Kargl" <sgk@REMOVEtroutmask.apl.washington.edu> - 2026-09-18 00:04 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-18 01:34 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-17 17:50 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-18 17:45 +0300
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-18 15:28 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-18 18:34 +0300
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-18 18:08 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-18 11:26 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-09-18 20:39 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-19 13:10 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-19 13:20 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-19 17:30 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-19 09:38 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-19 21:00 +0300
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-20 10:17 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-20 11:29 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-20 12:52 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-10-06 01:06 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-09-20 15:58 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-20 15:55 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-21 20:41 +0300
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-09-22 01:53 +0800
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-22 11:28 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-22 11:34 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-22 15:00 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2026-09-22 14:22 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2026-09-22 15:04 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-22 16:38 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-30 02:28 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-10-06 01:29 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-19 22:01 +0300
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-18 20:28 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances "Steven G. Kargl" <sgk@REMOVEtroutmask.apl.washington.edu> - 2026-09-18 05:42 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-18 08:08 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-18 10:23 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-18 15:24 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-18 16:31 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-18 11:29 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-18 20:14 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-18 12:42 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Jim Jackson <jj@franjam.org.uk> - 2026-09-19 13:39 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-19 16:24 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances "Steven G. Kargl" <sgk@REMOVEtroutmask.apl.washington.edu> - 2026-09-19 00:19 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-19 02:06 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-18 20:20 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances "Steven G. Kargl" <sgk@REMOVEtroutmask.apl.washington.edu> - 2026-09-19 03:26 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-19 09:56 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-19 11:08 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances tTh <tth@none.invalid> - 2026-09-19 13:25 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-19 10:45 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-19 15:09 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-19 16:17 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-19 09:45 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-18 13:11 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-18 14:03 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-18 17:24 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-18 11:06 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-18 20:07 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-18 12:26 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-18 22:57 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-19 17:27 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-19 20:09 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-20 12:31 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-20 12:42 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-20 15:08 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-20 14:22 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-20 14:54 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-20 23:24 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-21 15:06 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-21 16:36 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-21 17:45 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-21 20:54 +0300
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-22 15:02 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-22 21:02 +0300
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-20 15:58 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-20 15:19 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-20 23:49 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-20 16:17 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-20 15:49 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-20 15:18 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-20 15:41 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances tTh <tth@none.invalid> - 2026-09-17 21:53 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-17 21:05 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-09-17 14:38 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-17 17:15 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-09-17 16:33 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-17 20:26 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-09-17 13:26 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-09-17 13:25 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-17 12:36 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-17 13:03 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-17 14:51 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-17 14:32 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-17 15:17 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-17 15:24 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-18 09:06 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-18 02:08 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-18 11:01 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-18 03:05 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-18 11:13 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-16 17:33 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-16 19:19 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-16 18:34 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-16 20:21 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-09-16 13:16 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-16 15:26 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-09-16 15:58 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-16 19:13 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-16 18:30 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-16 20:30 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-16 21:16 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-09-17 02:56 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-30 02:32 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-29 19:58 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-05 02:15 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-29 03:22 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-14 09:49 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-14 11:27 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-14 16:03 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-14 16:15 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-22 23:27 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-23 01:01 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-23 23:38 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-24 02:00 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-24 02:41 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-23 20:23 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-24 11:27 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-24 23:54 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-25 01:23 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-25 03:47 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-25 11:38 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-26 02:49 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-26 11:44 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-26 14:03 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-28 00:05 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-29 00:56 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-29 14:27 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-30 02:02 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-30 11:18 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-09-30 13:37 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-30 17:17 +0300
Re: Official list of top C annoyances cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-09-30 14:39 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-30 22:39 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-10-01 15:23 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-02 02:38 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-10-02 09:17 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-25 12:17 +0300
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-25 11:31 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-26 02:34 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-09-24 08:50 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-24 11:31 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-24 11:29 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-09-25 21:09 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-26 11:59 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-09-29 04:06 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-29 04:47 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-29 23:49 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-09-30 12:19 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-09 10:13 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-09 10:38 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-09 11:40 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-09 12:05 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2026-09-09 15:23 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-09 23:07 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-09 15:52 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 01:00 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances "Johann \"Myrkraverk\" Oskarsson" <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-09-18 10:17 +0800
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-18 09:29 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Jim Jackson <jj@franjam.org.uk> - 2026-09-19 13:46 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-25 09:15 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-10 06:16 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 14:38 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 18:35 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-10 18:36 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-10 10:11 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-11 00:48 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-29 03:18 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-09-18 12:58 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-22 23:21 +0000
Re: Official list of top C annoyances "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-09-08 12:47 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-07 15:20 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-07 09:53 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-07 23:59 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lane W <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-07 16:04 -0600
Re: Official list of top C annoyances "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-09-07 04:06 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-09-07 20:05 +0800
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-07 15:32 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-08 12:59 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-08 13:09 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-08 14:15 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-08 14:35 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-08 14:49 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-08 16:05 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-08 16:18 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lane W <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-08 09:45 -0600
Re: Official list of top C annoyances David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-09-08 20:41 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-09-08 12:39 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-08 15:55 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lane W <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-08 18:02 -0600
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-08 17:39 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lane W <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-08 18:47 -0600
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-08 18:19 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lane W <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-08 19:24 -0600
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-09-08 19:26 -0700
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-09 03:25 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-09 09:13 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Lane W <cactus_DAC@yahoo.com> - 2026-09-09 07:38 -0600
Re: Official list of top C annoyances "Johann \"Myrkraverk\" Oskarsson" <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-09-09 22:16 +0800
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-09 09:02 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances Jan van den Broek <balglaas@dds.nl> - 2026-09-09 12:50 +0000
And then we reached C# (was Re: Official list of top C annoyances) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-09-09 08:51 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-09-08 14:54 +0100
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-08 16:10 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-09-25 14:22 +0200
Re: Official list of top C annoyances fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2026-10-05 04:32 +0200
Page 23 of 25 — ← Prev page 1 … 21 22 [23] 24 25 Next page →
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-09 10:38 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <117r5ta$s9ir$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401762 |
On 09/09/2026 10:13, Janis Papanagnou wrote: > On 2026-09-08 13:47, bart wrote: >> On 08/09/2026 01:02, Waldek Hebisch wrote: >>> [...] >> [...] >> >> Still, modern languages tend to have a module scheme, suggesting the >> 'flexible' C approach (I'd use the term 'prehistoric') wasn't quite >> enough. > > A necessary consequence of the growing systems and software > architectures. But even some legacy languages had already > modularization concepts back then! So it's not an excuse to > provide only a primitive #include mechanism. But I wouldn't > be so critical given the time when "C" had been designed. > You should take into account C's design-principles and also > when it came out and sort them in, in comparison to other > language schools; compare (for example) the release dates > of Pascal -> Modula (and what these two provided here). > AFAIK, Pascal originally did not have any kind of "unit" system (its module equivalent) - you used textual inclusion files. But you then compiled everything as one big Pascal file rather than having separate compilation. (This may have varied between Pascal implementations.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-09 11:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <117r9if$3r5qn$7@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401767 |
On 2026-09-09 10:38, David Brown wrote: > On 09/09/2026 10:13, Janis Papanagnou wrote: >> On 2026-09-08 13:47, bart wrote: >>> On 08/09/2026 01:02, Waldek Hebisch wrote: >>>> [...] >>> [...] >>> >>> Still, modern languages tend to have a module scheme, suggesting the >>> 'flexible' C approach (I'd use the term 'prehistoric') wasn't quite >>> enough. >> >> A necessary consequence of the growing systems and software >> architectures. But even some legacy languages had already >> modularization concepts back then! So it's not an excuse to >> provide only a primitive #include mechanism. But I wouldn't >> be so critical given the time when "C" had been designed. >> You should take into account C's design-principles and also >> when it came out and sort them in, in comparison to other >> language schools; compare (for example) the release dates >> of Pascal -> Modula (and what these two provided here). >> > > AFAIK, Pascal originally did not have any kind of "unit" system (its > module equivalent) - you used textual inclusion files. But you then > compiled everything as one big Pascal file rather than having separate > compilation. (This may have varied between Pascal implementations.) Yes, exactly. - Original Pascal didn't have anything, then came "C" timely - providing something that Pascal didn't have! - and Wirth's next language Modula then had a concept. Sorry if I was unclear. Janis
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-09 12:05 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <117rb1b$11cac$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401774 |
Janis Papanagnou pisze: > On 2026-09-09 10:38, David Brown wrote: >> On 09/09/2026 10:13, Janis Papanagnou wrote: >>> On 2026-09-08 13:47, bart wrote: >>>> On 08/09/2026 01:02, Waldek Hebisch wrote: >>>>> [...] >>>> [...] >>>> >>>> Still, modern languages tend to have a module scheme, suggesting the >>>> 'flexible' C approach (I'd use the term 'prehistoric') wasn't quite >>>> enough. >>> >>> A necessary consequence of the growing systems and software >>> architectures. But even some legacy languages had already >>> modularization concepts back then! So it's not an excuse to >>> provide only a primitive #include mechanism. But I wouldn't >>> be so critical given the time when "C" had been designed. >>> You should take into account C's design-principles and also >>> when it came out and sort them in, in comparison to other >>> language schools; compare (for example) the release dates >>> of Pascal -> Modula (and what these two provided here). >>> >> >> AFAIK, Pascal originally did not have any kind of "unit" system (its >> module equivalent) - you used textual inclusion files. But you then >> compiled everything as one big Pascal file rather than having separate >> compilation. (This may have varied between Pascal implementations.) > > Yes, exactly. - Original Pascal didn't have anything, then came "C" > timely - providing something that Pascal didn't have! - and Wirth's > next language Modula then had a concept. > > Sorry if I was unclear. > > Janis > note this pascal sign := is not stupid in some way but it has disadvanteges - whose in best approach should be none := DIS 1) it has worse looking (look) than =; note its important coz = is much more simple much more clean its also one type and is in ascii := ADV 2) it has sense of direction (compared to =) := DIS 3) it has only left right sense of direcion - and preferably it should have jet up down (so 4 possible versions) = DIS 4) it collides with normal math world and normal world meaning of "=" which are not quite assign - though it kinda painlessly may be used to assign it maybe come form basiclike let a=2 without let a=2 is if-like hipothesis and let changes its meaning so in c this let is like skipped and its standable. but.... (but there are some subtle reservations = ADV 5) it has also some advantage its traditional now/widely taken (should not make thuis numbered list becouse i wanted to list := dis/adv but then it shows i talk on =) overally fact imo is assigns in c imo shouldnt be a=2 like, you ned close dynamic sign but not this - i made 2 proposition there is yet third *************** * *************** there are in fact more if this above is opened rectangle it also ould be opened traingle (but such noy high but more flat and so on), even maybe this "harpoon" i mean liek arrow with no one propeler blade (only one) ..harpoons maybe not such bad, (herpoon being lying 1 when there also lying L is an option and so on)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-09 15:23 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <117rq5g$177ru$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401776 |
On 09/09/2026 11:05, fir wrote: > Janis Papanagnou pisze: >> On 2026-09-09 10:38, David Brown wrote: >>> On 09/09/2026 10:13, Janis Papanagnou wrote: >>>> On 2026-09-08 13:47, bart wrote: >>>>> On 08/09/2026 01:02, Waldek Hebisch wrote: >>>>>> [...] >>>>> [...] >>>>> >>>>> Still, modern languages tend to have a module scheme, suggesting >>>>> the 'flexible' C approach (I'd use the term 'prehistoric') wasn't >>>>> quite enough. >>>> >>>> A necessary consequence of the growing systems and software >>>> architectures. But even some legacy languages had already >>>> modularization concepts back then! So it's not an excuse to >>>> provide only a primitive #include mechanism. But I wouldn't >>>> be so critical given the time when "C" had been designed. >>>> You should take into account C's design-principles and also >>>> when it came out and sort them in, in comparison to other >>>> language schools; compare (for example) the release dates >>>> of Pascal -> Modula (and what these two provided here). >>>> >>> >>> AFAIK, Pascal originally did not have any kind of "unit" system (its >>> module equivalent) - you used textual inclusion files. But you then >>> compiled everything as one big Pascal file rather than having >>> separate compilation. (This may have varied between Pascal >>> implementations.) >> >> Yes, exactly. - Original Pascal didn't have anything, then came "C" >> timely - providing something that Pascal didn't have! - and Wirth's >> next language Modula then had a concept. >> >> Sorry if I was unclear. >> >> Janis >> > > note this pascal sign := is not stupid in some way but it has > disadvanteges - whose in best approach should be none > > := DIS 1) it has worse looking (look) than =; note its important coz = > is much more simple much more clean its also one type and is in ascii > := ADV 2) it has sense of direction (compared to =) > := DIS 3) it has only left right sense of direcion - and preferably it > should have jet up down (so 4 possible versions) > > = DIS 4) it collides with normal math world and normal world meaning of > "=" which are not quite assign - though it kinda painlessly may be used > to assign > > it maybe come form basiclike > > let a=2 > > without let a=2 is if-like hipothesis and let changes its meaning > so in c this let is like skipped and its standable. but.... (but there > are some subtle reservations > > = ADV 5) it has also some advantage its traditional now/widely taken > > > (should not make thuis numbered list becouse i wanted to list := dis/adv > but then it shows i talk on =) > > overally fact imo is assigns in c imo shouldnt be a=2 like, > you ned close dynamic sign but not this - i made 2 proposition there is > yet third > > *************** > * > *************** None of you proposed glyphs are easy to type - if they exist at all. People are used to "=" and "==", and I don't think there is an actual problem to be solved. I don't think anyone wants to go back to trigraphs. > > > there are in fact more if this above is opened rectangle it also ould be > opened traingle (but such noy high but more flat and so on), > > even maybe this "harpoon" i mean liek arrow with no one propeler blade > (only one) ..harpoons maybe not such bad, (herpoon being lying 1 when > there also lying L is an option and so on) > > > > > > > > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-09 23:07 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <117shqp$3r5qn$10@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401809 |
On 2026-09-09 16:23, Richard Harnden wrote: > On 09/09/2026 11:05, fir wrote: >> Janis Papanagnou pisze: >>> On 2026-09-09 10:38, David Brown wrote: >>>> On 09/09/2026 10:13, Janis Papanagnou wrote: >>>>> On 2026-09-08 13:47, bart wrote: >>>>>> On 08/09/2026 01:02, Waldek Hebisch wrote: [ Below post is completely unrelated to what had been quoted here so I'm snipping all of it ] >>> >> >> note this pascal sign := is not stupid in some way but it has >> disadvanteges - whose in best approach should be none (No one yet said, suggested, or implied that symbol being "stupid".) >> >> := DIS 1) it has worse looking (look) than =; note its important coz >> = is much more simple much more clean its also one type and is in ascii I consider "worse looking" as an expression of your personal opinion; as opposed to a fact-based real and commonly accepted disadvantage. (Personally I think that '=;' is an extremely bad proposal for that purpose. On a green field, my own preference would probably be some sort of arrow as assignment operator, say '<-', '->', or even ← or → (*if* it would be easily usable in various technical environments). But I'm also completely fine with ':=' (or ':-' for REFs in Simula). And luckily I can also "master" C's '=' for that purpose easily, or even program in many different languages in parallel that support all sorts of variants for assignments and comparison operators.) >> := ADV 2) it has sense of direction (compared to =) Yes, I think that indicating a direction can be advantageous (to the uninitiated, at least). >> := DIS 3) it has only left right sense of direcion - and preferably it >> should have jet up down (so 4 possible versions) (I don't know what's going on in your brain to ask for "4 versions".) Common language designs have typically defined one direction, and this is sufficient. - Most(?) languages seem to have a <target> <- <source> convention but there's also languages with <source> -> <target> syntax. I wouldn't mind; I can use the convention of the languages I use with no problem. >> >> = DIS 4) it collides with normal math world and normal world meaning >> of "=" which are not quite assign - though it kinda painlessly may be >> used to assign Yes, that's a long and well-known disadvantage of '=' for assignments. >> >> it maybe come form basiclike (It predates BASIC.) But there need not be a problem using '=' for assignments and also for comparisons if the respective languages could tell them apart by context and with appropriate semantic rules. >> >> let a=2 >> >> without let a=2 is if-like hipothesis and let changes its meaning >> so in c this let is like skipped and its standable. but.... (but there >> are some subtle reservations >> >> = ADV 5) it has also some advantage its traditional now/widely taken >> >> >> (should not make thuis numbered list becouse i wanted to list := dis/ >> adv but then it shows i talk on =) >> >> overally fact imo is assigns in c imo shouldnt be a=2 like, >> you ned close dynamic sign but not this - i made 2 proposition there >> is yet third (Please, for the sake of the people that haven't killfiled you, use an online-translator to create comprehensible texts! - In case that your native language *is* English I suggest to translate your text to some other language and then back to English; the translators are obviously good enough to fix your language or writing problems in that process.) Janis >> [...]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-09 15:52 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <117snvl$1g635$5@kst.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #401840 |
Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> writes:
[...]
> (Please, for the sake of the people that haven't killfiled you, use an
> online-translator to create comprehensible texts! - In case that your
> native language *is* English I suggest to translate your text to some
> other language and then back to English; the translators are obviously
> good enough to fix your language or writing problems in that process.)
The above was addressed to "fir". As I recall, his native language
is Polish.
"fir" has been posting here for a long time. Here's something our own
David Brown wrote about him in 2015. I can't directly vouch for its
accuracy, but it seems plausible.
He does not have dyslexia. English is a second language for him,
but he is capable of writing much better than he does (I have seen
him do so) - he /intentionally/ writes in this manner because he
considers himself too much of a grand thinker and philosopher to
lower himself to our mere "commoner" language. As far as I
understand it, he writes in a similar manner in his own language.
Many of us have tried to suggest he changes his manner for his own
good as well as ours - but to no avail.
Reference:
Subject: Re: Recursion or loop, design questions
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2015 08:45:25 +0200
Message-ID: <mpsbb5$3s9$1@dont-email.me>
I suggest that one more attempt to get fir to write clearly is
unlikely to be effective. I've solved the problem for myself by
adding him to my killfile.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-10 01:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <117soeg$1i0a9$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401855 |
Keith Thompson pisze: > Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> writes: > [...] >> (Please, for the sake of the people that haven't killfiled you, use an >> online-translator to create comprehensible texts! - In case that your >> native language *is* English I suggest to translate your text to some >> other language and then back to English; the translators are obviously >> good enough to fix your language or writing problems in that process.) > > The above was addressed to "fir". As I recall, his native language > is Polish. > > "fir" has been posting here for a long time. Here's something our own > David Brown wrote about him in 2015. I can't directly vouch for its > accuracy, but it seems plausible. > > He does not have dyslexia. English is a second language for him, > but he is capable of writing much better than he does (I have seen > him do so) - he /intentionally/ writes in this manner because he > considers himself too much of a grand thinker and philosopher to > lower himself to our mere "commoner" language. As far as I > understand it, he writes in a similar manner in his own language. > Many of us have tried to suggest he changes his manner for his own > good as well as ours - but to no avail. > > Reference: > > Subject: Re: Recursion or loop, design questions > Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2015 08:45:25 +0200 > Message-ID: <mpsbb5$3s9$1@dont-email.me> > > I suggest that one more attempt to get fir to write clearly is > unlikely to be effective. I've solved the problem for myself by > adding him to my killfile. > funny, honestly i dont know why i write such way as i write i suspect its in big extent becouse if i think on c language ideas im kina highly focused and 'turning' to think on all this letters is on kinda different plane so it annoys me, its hard to be focused on thinking on higher c topics and on editing sentences, translating text in google or chat gpt..its robably possible but so wearing that the oryginal thoughts would sufer too much i may say hovver i got some friends on some irc i used for years and they never complained for some reason..though i wrote in polish there and on chat you look on text much more than when you write messages on usenet
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Johann \"Myrkraverk\" Oskarsson" <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-18 10:17 +0800 |
| Message-ID | <2b1rS.540144$hGY7.72691@fx16.ams4> |
| In reply to | #401857 |
On 9/10/2026 7:00 AM, fir wrote: > Keith Thompson pisze: >> Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> writes: >> [...] >>> (Please, for the sake of the people that haven't killfiled you, use an >>> online-translator to create comprehensible texts! - In case that your >>> native language *is* English I suggest to translate your text to some >>> other language and then back to English; the translators are obviously >>> good enough to fix your language or writing problems in that process.) >> >> The above was addressed to "fir". As I recall, his native language >> is Polish. >> >> "fir" has been posting here for a long time. Here's something our own >> David Brown wrote about him in 2015. I can't directly vouch for its >> accuracy, but it seems plausible. >> >> He does not have dyslexia. English is a second language for him, >> but he is capable of writing much better than he does (I have seen >> him do so) - he /intentionally/ writes in this manner because he >> considers himself too much of a grand thinker and philosopher to >> lower himself to our mere "commoner" language. As far as I >> understand it, he writes in a similar manner in his own language. >> Many of us have tried to suggest he changes his manner for his own >> good as well as ours - but to no avail. >> >> Reference: >> >> Subject: Re: Recursion or loop, design questions >> Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2015 08:45:25 +0200 >> Message-ID: <mpsbb5$3s9$1@dont-email.me> >> >> I suggest that one more attempt to get fir to write clearly is >> unlikely to be effective. I've solved the problem for myself by >> adding him to my killfile. >> > > funny, honestly i dont know why i write such way as i write > > i suspect its in big extent becouse if i think on c language ideas im > kina highly focused and 'turning' to think on all this letters is on > kinda different plane so it annoys me, its hard to be focused on > thinking on higher c topics and on editing sentences, translating text > in google or chat gpt..its robably possible but so wearing that the > oryginal thoughts would sufer too much > > i may say hovver i got some friends on some irc i used for years and > they never complained for some reason..though i wrote in polish there > and on chat you look on text much more than when you write messages on > usenet I also find it funny, that when I write /clearly/ here in comp.lang.c, I get accused of being an L.L.M. This is apparently special for comp. lang.c, because I've received no such accusation in other Usenet groups. Also, I.R.C. users are probably more used to idiosyncratic text mess- ages, and therefore have no reason to /killfile/ you, just because they don't have enough reading comprehension to read what they decide is "bad English." At least, I have no problem understanding you. Best wishes, and happy forking C! -- Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/ I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via Easynews.com https://bsky.app/profile/myrkraverk.bsky.social | for ( ;; ) _:;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-18 09:29 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <118ip96$126jg$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #402203 |
Johann "Myrkraverk" Oskarsson pisze: > On 9/10/2026 7:00 AM, fir wrote: >> Keith Thompson pisze: >>> Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> writes: >>> [...] >>>> (Please, for the sake of the people that haven't killfiled you, use an >>>> online-translator to create comprehensible texts! - In case that your >>>> native language *is* English I suggest to translate your text to some >>>> other language and then back to English; the translators are obviously >>>> good enough to fix your language or writing problems in that process.) >>> >>> The above was addressed to "fir". As I recall, his native language >>> is Polish. >>> >>> "fir" has been posting here for a long time. Here's something our own >>> David Brown wrote about him in 2015. I can't directly vouch for its >>> accuracy, but it seems plausible. >>> >>> He does not have dyslexia. English is a second language for him, >>> but he is capable of writing much better than he does (I have seen >>> him do so) - he /intentionally/ writes in this manner because he >>> considers himself too much of a grand thinker and philosopher to >>> lower himself to our mere "commoner" language. As far as I >>> understand it, he writes in a similar manner in his own language. >>> Many of us have tried to suggest he changes his manner for his own >>> good as well as ours - but to no avail. >>> >>> Reference: >>> >>> Subject: Re: Recursion or loop, design questions >>> Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2015 08:45:25 +0200 >>> Message-ID: <mpsbb5$3s9$1@dont-email.me> >>> >>> I suggest that one more attempt to get fir to write clearly is >>> unlikely to be effective. I've solved the problem for myself by >>> adding him to my killfile. >>> >> >> funny, honestly i dont know why i write such way as i write >> >> i suspect its in big extent becouse if i think on c language ideas im >> kina highly focused and 'turning' to think on all this letters is on >> kinda different plane so it annoys me, its hard to be focused on >> thinking on higher c topics and on editing sentences, translating text >> in google or chat gpt..its robably possible but so wearing that the >> oryginal thoughts would sufer too much >> >> i may say hovver i got some friends on some irc i used for years and >> they never complained for some reason..though i wrote in polish there >> and on chat you look on text much more than when you write messages on >> usenet > > I also find it funny, that when I write /clearly/ here in comp.lang.c, > I get accused of being an L.L.M. This is apparently special for comp. > lang.c, because I've received no such accusation in other Usenet groups. > > Also, I.R.C. users are probably more used to idiosyncratic text mess- > ages, and therefore have no reason to /killfile/ you, just because they > don't have enough reading comprehension to read what they decide is "bad > English." > > At least, I have no problem understanding you. > in most cases i think it may be understood but sometimes if i read my post some words i dont understand this is becouse of unfortunate typos, but i write a big amounts of posts and if iwould carefully read it all before osting i couldnt focus (so its eventually better to write is as a stream of thought and then post errata to it) > > Best wishes, and happy forking C! i wouldnt like to fork but i consider this situation that you have 1) oryginal C and B (parts of it you could name as 'shallow' c, though og c is not shallow but some of its things seen by some people who dont try to see deeper may constitute shallow c shore) 2) there is deeper deep c of various posibilities (which is maybe open, i mean you maybe cant just finish that coz this posibilities maybe are just not limited (i dont know) 3) and there is Ↄ which is maybe kinda arbitrary conglomerate but based on some diving in this theoretical deep c
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jim Jackson <jj@franjam.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-19 13:46 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrn11at4h1.8o9.jj@iridium.wf32df> |
| In reply to | #402210 |
On 2026-09-18, fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> wrote: > > in most cases i think it may be understood but sometimes if i read my > post some words i dont understand > > this is becouse of unfortunate typos, but i write a big amounts of > posts and if iwould carefully read it all before osting i couldnt focus > > (so its eventually better to write is as a stream of thought and then > post errata to it) Do you also program in this way? Sometimes it is worth taking time to think before writing. I mostly ignore your scribblings precisely because of your stream of consciousness style. I suspect a lot of others do too. But keep on if you are happy!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-25 09:15 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <119572o$3c4e4$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #402278 |
Jim Jackson pisze: > On 2026-09-18, fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> in most cases i think it may be understood but sometimes if i read my >> post some words i dont understand >> >> this is becouse of unfortunate typos, but i write a big amounts of >> posts and if iwould carefully read it all before osting i couldnt focus >> >> (so its eventually better to write is as a stream of thought and then >> post errata to it) > > Do you also program in this way? Sometimes it is worth taking time to > think before writing. > > I mostly ignore your scribblings precisely because of your stream of > consciousness style. I suspect a lot of others do too. But keep on if > you are happy! > i tld you i couldnt focus if i would focus myself on reading and revriting.. youre right about stream of conscious its becouse im in stream of thought and walking out the stream to reread/revrite would ruin it more or less..when typos (99% of it i gues ) just may be corrected if need later but the thoughts or additional thoughts usually cant/or simply wont (like some could say, you will not enter exactly the same stream of thought twice)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-10 06:16 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <117taul$1ls9r$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401855 |
On 2026-09-10 00:52, Keith Thompson wrote: > Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> writes: > [...] >> (Please, for the sake of the people that haven't killfiled you, use an >> online-translator to create comprehensible texts! - In case that your >> native language *is* English I suggest to translate your text to some >> other language and then back to English; the translators are obviously >> good enough to fix your language or writing problems in that process.) > > The above was addressed to "fir". [...] Yes. > [ background info snipped ] > > I suggest that one more attempt to get fir to write clearly is > unlikely to be effective. I've solved the problem for myself by > adding him to my killfile. Thanks for the the info and warning. - Actually he is already in my killfile, so I see his writings only when he gets quoted my someone. Janis
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-10 14:38 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <117u8bs$202t7$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401864 |
Janis Papanagnou pisze: > On 2026-09-10 00:52, Keith Thompson wrote: >> Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> writes: >> [...] >>> (Please, for the sake of the people that haven't killfiled you, use an >>> online-translator to create comprehensible texts! - In case that your >>> native language *is* English I suggest to translate your text to some >>> other language and then back to English; the translators are obviously >>> good enough to fix your language or writing problems in that process.) >> >> The above was addressed to "fir". [...] > > Yes. > >> [ background info snipped ] >> >> I suggest that one more attempt to get fir to write clearly is >> unlikely to be effective. I've solved the problem for myself by >> adding him to my killfile. > > Thanks for the the info and warning. - Actually he is already in my > killfile, so I see his writings only when he gets quoted my someone. > > Janis > welcome in keith team ;c
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-10 18:35 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <117um9g$25hm2$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401876 |
fir pisze: > Janis Papanagnou pisze: >> On 2026-09-10 00:52, Keith Thompson wrote: >>> Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> writes: >>> [...] >>>> (Please, for the sake of the people that haven't killfiled you, use an >>>> online-translator to create comprehensible texts! - In case that your >>>> native language *is* English I suggest to translate your text to some >>>> other language and then back to English; the translators are obviously >>>> good enough to fix your language or writing problems in that process.) >>> >>> The above was addressed to "fir". [...] >> >> Yes. >> >>> [ background info snipped ] >>> >>> I suggest that one more attempt to get fir to write clearly is >>> unlikely to be effective. I've solved the problem for myself by >>> adding him to my killfile. >> >> Thanks for the the info and warning. - Actually he is already in my >> killfile, so I see his writings only when he gets quoted my someone. >> >> Janis >> > > welcome in keith team ;c anti-fir Keith's Team of funny asses >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-10 18:36 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <117umbd$25g0k$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401895 |
fir pisze: > fir pisze: >> Janis Papanagnou pisze: >>> On 2026-09-10 00:52, Keith Thompson wrote: >>>> Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> writes: >>>> [...] >>>>> (Please, for the sake of the people that haven't killfiled you, use an >>>>> online-translator to create comprehensible texts! - In case that your >>>>> native language *is* English I suggest to translate your text to some >>>>> other language and then back to English; the translators are obviously >>>>> good enough to fix your language or writing problems in that process.) >>>> >>>> The above was addressed to "fir". [...] >>> >>> Yes. >>> >>>> [ background info snipped ] >>>> >>>> I suggest that one more attempt to get fir to write clearly is >>>> unlikely to be effective. I've solved the problem for myself by >>>> adding him to my killfile. >>> >>> Thanks for the the info and warning. - Actually he is already in my >>> killfile, so I see his writings only when he gets quoted my someone. >>> >>> Janis >>> >> >> welcome in keith team ;c > > anti-fir Keith's Team of funny asses (joking)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-10 10:11 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <117too8$1o1jf$6@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401840 |
On 09/09/2026 23:07, Janis Papanagnou wrote: > On 2026-09-09 16:23, Richard Harnden wrote: >> On 09/09/2026 11:05, fir wrote: >>> Janis Papanagnou pisze: >>>> On 2026-09-09 10:38, David Brown wrote: >>>>> On 09/09/2026 10:13, Janis Papanagnou wrote: >>>>>> On 2026-09-08 13:47, bart wrote: >>>>>>> On 08/09/2026 01:02, Waldek Hebisch wrote: > > >>> >>> = DIS 4) it collides with normal math world and normal world meaning >>> of "=" which are not quite assign - though it kinda painlessly may be >>> used to assign > > Yes, that's a long and well-known disadvantage of '=' for assignments. Sometimes "=" is used for "assignment" or "definition" in mathematics, as well as for equality comparison. But mathematics has the advantage that the meaning is generally clear from the context. Fun fact - in Metafont and MetaPost, "=" is used in a symmetrical fashion. You can write "x = 10" or "10 = x". You can also write "x + 2*y = 40, 45 - y = 3 * x". These are not exactly assignment statements - they are declarations that the language can use to figure out the correct values for the variables. > > But there need not be a problem using '=' for assignments and also > for comparisons if the respective languages could tell them apart by > context and with appropriate semantic rules. Agreed. In my "dream language", assignment would be a statement, not an expression, which lets you use the same symbol. Indeed, assignment would be very rare - normally variables would be initialised once, and never changed. > >>> >>> let a=2 >>> >>> without let a=2 is if-like hipothesis and let changes its meaning >>> so in c this let is like skipped and its standable. but.... (but >>> there are some subtle reservations >>> >>> = ADV 5) it has also some advantage its traditional now/widely taken >>> >>> >>> (should not make thuis numbered list becouse i wanted to list := dis/ >>> adv but then it shows i talk on =) >>> >>> overally fact imo is assigns in c imo shouldnt be a=2 like, >>> you ned close dynamic sign but not this - i made 2 proposition there >>> is yet third > > (Please, for the sake of the people that haven't killfiled you, use an > online-translator to create comprehensible texts! - In case that your > native language *is* English I suggest to translate your text to some > other language and then back to English; the translators are obviously > good enough to fix your language or writing problems in that process.) > As I understand it from previous discussions, fir writes equally badly in his native tongue - so online translators would have as much trouble as we do. He considers standardised spelling and grammar as a limitation on his genius creativity, I think. But sometimes his posts can lead to interesting and topical discussions, which is always nice.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-11 00:48 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <117vc4k$1ls9r$5@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401873 |
On 2026-09-10 10:11, David Brown wrote: > On 09/09/2026 23:07, Janis Papanagnou wrote: [...] >> >> But there need not be a problem using '=' for assignments and also >> for comparisons if the respective languages could tell them apart by >> context and with appropriate semantic rules. > > Agreed. In my "dream language", assignment would be a statement, not an > expression, which lets you use the same symbol. I'm not sure it's a good idea to have the same symbol here. I'd certainly prefer a separate symbol anyway. (Notwithstanding that a context dependent differentiation is or might be possible.) I suppose "C" has adopted the assignment being an expression from Algol 68; but in the latter case we *do* have separate symbols. I suspect that "C" might have just used a '=' instead of the back then already not uncommon ':=' just to save some tying? The "problem" is obviously not the assignment-expression per se; but the comprised design choices of the C-language as a whole. > Indeed, assignment > would be very rare - normally variables would be initialised once, and > never changed. Incidentally that's exactly what I observed in recent times when I recovered my Algol 68 programming; the language defines such a handling by "identity declarations". INT answer = 42 defines an item of reference level 0 (constant) INT state := 0 defines/initializes a variable (reference level 1) and I noticed in my programs a prevalence of identity declarations and mostly only few variables. Given that observation it may be unfortunate that we need explicit 'const' to specify such identities in "C", a language that strived for terseness (as it seems). Janis > [...]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-29 03:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <119famt$2trdt$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401809 |
On Wed, 9 Sep 2026 15:23:43 +0100, Richard Harnden wrote: > People are used to "=" and "==", and I don't think there is an > actual problem to be solved. > > I don't think anyone wants to go back to trigraphs. There are languages that need “===” as well. It wouldn’t be needed if not for their somewhat brain-damaged system of automatic type conversions, but there you go.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-18 12:58 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <86mrtetjqf.fsf@linuxsc.com> |
| In reply to | #401774 |
Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> writes: > On 2026-09-09 10:38, David Brown wrote: > >> On 09/09/2026 10:13, Janis Papanagnou wrote: >> >>> On 2026-09-08 13:47, bart wrote: >>> >>>> On 08/09/2026 01:02, Waldek Hebisch wrote: >>>> >>>>> [...] >>>> >>>> [...] >>>> >>>> Still, modern languages tend to have a module scheme, suggesting >>>> the 'flexible' C approach (I'd use the term 'prehistoric') wasn't >>>> quite enough. >>> >>> A necessary consequence of the growing systems and software >>> architectures. But even some legacy languages had already >>> modularization concepts back then! So it's not an excuse to >>> provide only a primitive #include mechanism. But I wouldn't >>> be so critical given the time when "C" had been designed. >>> You should take into account C's design-principles and also >>> when it came out and sort them in, in comparison to other >>> language schools; compare (for example) the release dates >>> of Pascal -> Modula (and what these two provided here). >> >> AFAIK, Pascal originally did not have any kind of "unit" system (its >> module equivalent) - you used textual inclusion files. But you then >> compiled everything as one big Pascal file rather than having >> separate compilation. (This may have varied between Pascal >> implementations.) > > Yes, exactly. - Original Pascal didn't have anything, then came "C" > timely - providing something that Pascal didn't have! - and Wirth's > next language Modula then had a concept. The module ideas in Modula came from the earlier programming language Mesa, which was developed at Xerox PARC. To give credit where it is due, it is almost certainly true that some of the constructs in Mesa were influenced by or inspired by features in Pascal. But modules began in Mesa (and perhaps also some earlier work done by Butler Lampson but I haven't read that material). Mesa was developed in roughly the same time frame as early C. There was a Mesa compiler for one architecture, with Mesa code running on that architecture, in 1974. Later that same year work was started on a Mesa compiler for another architecture, running I believe early the next year. As it turns out I was writing code in Mesa a few years before I started writing code in C. It's nice to have modules as first class constructs in the language; in practice though I find the C pattern of .h/.c relationships to be workable, in place of modules, for the software development needs of typical software projects.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-22 23:21 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <118v2ia$19jvc$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401704 |
On Tue, 8 Sep 2026 00:02:06 -0000 (UTC), Waldek Hebisch wrote: > C gives you choice: you can have detailed control of what is > imported at cost of writing a lot of '#include' lines or you can > have common header which includes "everthing". Neither one really gives you detailed control. The trouble is that #include is a fudge to make up for the lack of a decent import mechanism. Imports with namespaces would let you more easily keep track of where each name came from. It would also help in tracking down imports that have become unnecessary as a result of code changes/refactoring, and can be removed. This I would happily accept as an “official top C annoyance”.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 23 of 25 — ← Prev page 1 … 21 22 [23] 24 25 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web