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 17 of 25 — ← Prev page 1 … 15 16 [17] 18 19 … 25 Next page →
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-18 12:42 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <118k47q$1grii$6@kst.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #402248 |
bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
> On 18/09/2026 19:29, Keith Thompson wrote:
>> bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>>> On 18/09/2026 16:24, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> [...]
>>>> Those familiar with unix would understand implicitly, as many
>>>> commands will read from stdin if no filename is specified.
>>> So how do they tell whether a program is hanging, or is waiting for input?
>> By typing Control-D.
>
> How would they know without a message?
By understanding how Unix commands typically work, and that typing
Ctrl-D is the normal way to trigger and end-of-file condition when
reading from a keyboard.
> But suppose they did that, what happens, the program stops? What if it
> was just busy; wouldn't Ctrl-D screw it up?
No.
>>> FFS would it hurt to print a message showing what is expected?
>> Yes, it would. I won't offer an explanation because you would not
>> care about it or admit that you understand it.
>
> Try me.
Let's be clear. Are you asking me to explain? If I explain, will you
accept my explanation as a sincere attempt to educate you, and not whine
to me about the fact that "as" doesn't behave the way you think it
should?
Are you really interested in learning something? Your history here does
not suggest that, but if you've changed your mind about that, I'm
willing to try to explain it. (Though I'm not sure I can explain
anything that hasn't already been explained in this thread.)
> (In my last post I showed an example of my C compiler taking input
> from stdin (requested, not as default!) and it displays a message. The
> world is still turning.
Some programs read input from stdin if they don't receive any file name
arguments. Others do not. Both approaches are valid. Apparently your
C compiler is an example of the latter.
One particular program, "as", can read its input from stdin. Have you
somehow inferred from that that we all think your compiler should do the
same?
--
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 | Jim Jackson <jj@franjam.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-19 13:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrn11at44u.8o9.jj@iridium.wf32df> |
| In reply to | #402250 |
On 2026-09-18, Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote: > > Are you really interested in learning something? Your history here does > not suggest that, but if you've changed your mind about that, I'm > willing to try to explain it. (Though I'm not sure I can explain > anything that hasn't already been explained in this thread.) > >> (In my last post I showed an example of my C compiler taking input >> from stdin (requested, not as default!) and it displays a message. The >> world is still turning. > > Some programs read input from stdin if they don't receive any file name > arguments. Others do not. Both approaches are valid. Apparently your > C compiler is an example of the latter. > > One particular program, "as", can read its input from stdin. Have you > somehow inferred from that that we all think your compiler should do the > same? > Some fish have spent their lives living in a very small pool and know it very well, and then they go for a trip in the sea and it is very frightening! It contains environments and objects that they have no comprehension off, and if the fish is old and set in his or her ways the wider world will always be a mystery!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-19 16:24 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <118m9gb$2ceqh$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #402277 |
On 19/09/2026 14:39, Jim Jackson wrote: > On 2026-09-18, Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Are you really interested in learning something? Your history here does >> not suggest that, but if you've changed your mind about that, I'm >> willing to try to explain it. (Though I'm not sure I can explain >> anything that hasn't already been explained in this thread.) >> >>> (In my last post I showed an example of my C compiler taking input >>> from stdin (requested, not as default!) and it displays a message. The >>> world is still turning. >> >> Some programs read input from stdin if they don't receive any file name >> arguments. Others do not. Both approaches are valid. Apparently your >> C compiler is an example of the latter. >> >> One particular program, "as", can read its input from stdin. Have you >> somehow inferred from that that we all think your compiler should do the >> same? >> > > Some fish have spent their lives living in a very small pool and know it > very well, and then they go for a trip in the sea and it is very > frightening! It contains environments and objects that they have no > comprehension off, and if the fish is old and set in his or her ways > the wider world will always be a mystery! So the 'as' assembler and its cronies are the wider world?! Or are these prehistoric utilities the fish? So the habit of naming every output file 'a.out' will persist for ever?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Steven G. Kargl" <sgk@REMOVEtroutmask.apl.washington.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-19 00:19 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <118kkdq$1pe33$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #402248 |
On Fri, 18 Sep 2026 20:14:29 +0100, bart wrote: > On 18/09/2026 19:29, Keith Thompson wrote: >> bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: >>> On 18/09/2026 16:24, Scott Lurndal wrote: >> [...] >>>> Those familiar with unix would understand implicitly, as many >>>> commands will read from stdin if no filename is specified. >>> So how do they tell whether a program is hanging, or is waiting for input? >> >> By typing Control-D. > > How would they know without a message? <Rinse> By reading the friendly documentation that comes with the tool. <repeat> -- steve
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-19 02:06 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <118kn61$1q7ch$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #402255 |
On 19/09/2026 01:19, Steven G. Kargl wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Sep 2026 20:14:29 +0100, bart wrote:
>
>> On 18/09/2026 19:29, Keith Thompson wrote:
>>> bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>>>> On 18/09/2026 16:24, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>>> Those familiar with unix would understand implicitly, as many
>>>>> commands will read from stdin if no filename is specified.
>>>> So how do they tell whether a program is hanging, or is waiting for input?
>>>
>>> By typing Control-D.
>>
>> How would they know without a message?
>
> <Rinse>
>
> By reading the friendly documentation that comes with the tool.
In the case of 'as', that is 2,500 lines of text.
For gcc, it is 26,000 lines.
Look, just admit these ancient applications have a shitty interface that
no one has been able to improve or hasn't been allowed to.
Why pretend that how they work is actually desirable?
I've just installed Go-lang. If I type 'go', it doesn't say FATAL ERROR,
it says this:
c:\go\bin>go
Go is a tool for managing Go source code.
Usage:
go <command> [arguments]
The commands are:
...
It looks easy on the eye too. It is worth making the effort.
Further, if I compile hello.go with it ('go build hello.go') it creates
an output file called 'hello.exe'. How TF did it manage to figure that out?
Because gcc can't do that at all; it generates 'a.exe' and 26K lines of
help isn't going to explain why that is better.
It's funny how all these idiosyncratic programs always seem to originate
from Unix.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-18 20:20 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <118kv2n$1rpeo$1@kst.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #402256 |
bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
[...]
> Look, just admit these ancient applications have a shitty interface
> that no one has been able to improve or hasn't been allowed to.
>
> Why pretend that how they work is actually desirable?
[...]
I apologize to the group for engaging in this discussion.
The "as" command is not about the C programming language.
Explanations about how to use it might be marginally topical, since
it's commonly invoked (implicitly!) by C compilation systems, but
opinions about whether its interface is reasonable or shitty are not.
I expect bart will continue to whine about it. I will no longer
help him to do so.
I had offered to try to explain it to him. I hereby rescind
that offer.
If he wanted to discuss it reasonably, there are other newsgroups
where he might do so.
--
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 | "Steven G. Kargl" <sgk@REMOVEtroutmask.apl.washington.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-19 03:26 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <118kvdk$1s6rl$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #402256 |
On Sat, 19 Sep 2026 02:06:09 +0100, bart wrote: > On 19/09/2026 01:19, Steven G. Kargl wrote: >> On Fri, 18 Sep 2026 20:14:29 +0100, bart wrote: >> >>> On 18/09/2026 19:29, Keith Thompson wrote: >>>> bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: >>>>> On 18/09/2026 16:24, Scott Lurndal wrote: >>>> [...] >>>>>> Those familiar with unix would understand implicitly, as many >>>>>> commands will read from stdin if no filename is specified. >>>>> So how do they tell whether a program is hanging, or is waiting for input? >>>> >>>> By typing Control-D. >>> >>> How would they know without a message? >> >> <Rinse> >> >> By reading the friendly documentation that comes with the tool. > In the case of 'as', that is 2,500 lines of text. > The info is in the 5th paragraph of the Description section. This is the 20 and 21st lines of material that you has a user should have at least skimmed. The first two sections are simply an abbreviated enumeration of options and supported targets. Again, why would you use a tool without actually learn how the tool works? -- steve
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-19 09:56 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <118lf7q$scqh$6@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #402259 |
On 2026-09-19 05:26, Steven G. Kargl wrote: > On Sat, 19 Sep 2026 02:06:09 +0100, bart wrote: >> [...] > > Again, why would you use a tool without actually learn how > the tool works? Inherent (and incurable) mental inabilities? Janis
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-19 11:08 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <118lmv9$24ka0$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #402268 |
On 19/09/2026 08:56, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
> On 2026-09-19 05:26, Steven G. Kargl wrote:
>> On Sat, 19 Sep 2026 02:06:09 +0100, bart wrote:
>>> [...]
>>
>> Again, why would you use a tool without actually learn how
>> the tool works?
>
> Inherent (and incurable) mental inabilities?
Regarding assemblers, usually that is the very least of the problems
when using an unfamiliar one for the first time.
The simplest thing to do is just try it and see what see what happens.
And the most obvious thing to try is to type its name:
c:\fasm>fasm
flat assembler version 1.73.35
usage: fasm <source> [output]
...
c:\fasm>yasm
yasm: No input files specified
c:\fasm>aa
AA7 Assembler 29-Aug-2026
Usage:
aa filename[.asm] # Assemble filename.asm to filename.exe
...
c:\fasm>nasm
nasm: fatal: no input file specified
Type nasm -h for help.
c:\fasm>as
<hangs>
^C
Here, fasm and aa show usage info. Nasm invites you to use '-h' for help.
Yasm is not too helpful. Still, you can infer that you need to supply
the name of your file!
The least helpful, if you use this approach, is 'as'.
So it is perfectly reasonable for somebody to question why it sucks like
that.
But according to you, anyone trying out programs like this without first
seeking and then perusing 1000s of lines of content, is mentally deficient?
I might consider anyone who routinely did that to be to have a condition.
In any case, it's quite possible to invoke some of these inadvertently
by mistyping. Oh, I forgot, you are a perfect typist too!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | tTh <tth@none.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-19 13:25 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <118lrfn$1tbt$1@news.gegeweb.eu> |
| In reply to | #402271 |
On 9/19/26 12:08, bart wrote:
> In any case, it's quite possible to invoke some of these inadvertently
> by mistyping. Oh, I forgot, you are a perfect typist too!
$ sl
--
** **
* tTh des Bourtoulots *
* http://maison.tth.netlib.re/ *
** **
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-19 10:45 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <118llkh$23nbl$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #402259 |
On 19/09/2026 04:26, Steven G. Kargl wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Sep 2026 02:06:09 +0100, bart wrote:
>>> By reading the friendly documentation that comes with the tool.
>> In the case of 'as', that is 2,500 lines of text.
>>
>
> The info is in the 5th paragraph of the Description section.
> This is the 20 and 21st lines of material that you has a user
> should have at least skimmed. The first two sections are
> simply an abbreviated enumeration of options and supported
> targets.
>
> Again, why would you use a tool without actually learn how
> the tool works?
Last year someone asked for my C compiler to generate GAS format. So
learning how that worked was the main obstacle, since docs for it are so
poor.
Of course, I had to be able to test the output by assembling it, and
only 'as' could do that. (Since my 'client' wanted to assemble the
output with their own version of 'as', and the results processed with
their linker, I tested directly against 'as' rather than use gcc.)
It quirks were a nuisance but for this one-off task I used a script
ass.bat like this:
as %1.asm -o%1.obj && gcc %1.obj -o%1.exe
it was invoked as:
ass prog
This then did the same job as my own assembler that already worked
exactly like that:
aa prog
So it's not a question of me having to learn all this stuff, I can
figure it out in a few minutes.
I'm questioning why such a tool, called an 'assembler', worked in such a
strange manner in the first place:
* /Silently/ defaults to reading from the keyboard if you type its
name
* Writes its output file to 'a.out' and not 'prog.o' or 'prog.obj'
* If assembling two or more assembly files, it silently combines
them into one
And:
* Why NOBODY here (bar Michael S!) questions that and seems to think
it is completely reasonable when it is clearly at odds with how
other assemblers generally work
Apparently a tool like this can get away with anything provide its
behaviour matches it docs! Example:
> man as
- skip 1234 lines -
"Note: Running as with no input will immediately delete all your
files"
....
That's alright then; if that happens, it would be my fault! Definitely
not a poor UI.
(In fact something like this DOES happen; if I have a critical file - on
Windows - that happens to be called 'a.out', then 'as' will silently
overwrite it, if I type 'as file.s' expecting it to write 'file.o'.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-19 15:09 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pAxrS.102832$klT4.13202@fx43.iad> |
| In reply to | #402256 |
bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>On 19/09/2026 01:19, Steven G. Kargl wrote:
>> On Fri, 18 Sep 2026 20:14:29 +0100, bart wrote:
<snip> a bunch of irrelevent text that boils down to a single acronym:
RTFM
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-19 16:17 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <118m930$2c7iu$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #402279 |
On 19/09/2026 16:09, Scott Lurndal wrote: > bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: >> On 19/09/2026 01:19, Steven G. Kargl wrote: >>> On Fri, 18 Sep 2026 20:14:29 +0100, bart wrote: > > <snip> a bunch of irrelevent text that boils down to a single acronym: > > RTFM So nothing ever changes or improves. Nobody asks questions, nothing is ever criticised, and the same quirks perpetuate forever to keep compatibilty.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-19 09:45 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <118leja$scqh$5@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #402233 |
On 2026-09-18 17:24, Scott Lurndal wrote: > bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: >> On 18/09/2026 01:04, Steven G. Kargl wrote: >>> On Thu, 17 Sep 2026 20:54:35 +0100, bart wrote: >>> >>>> Most command-line compilers give you version and help info when no >>>> parameters follow. But at least it says something; try this: >>>> >>>> c:\c\as >>>> >>>> and it apparently hangs (it's waiting for you type an assembly program >>>> from the console!) >>>> >>> >>> Most people read (or at least skim) the documentation >>> that comes with the software they use. >> >> Most people probably don't. They will try running such programs without >> input, as often that gives usage info. > > Please try to speak for yourself. > > Those familiar with unix would understand implicitly, as many > commands will read from stdin if no filename is specified. I think the problem has indeed to do which ones "IT-socialization"; IIRC the piping-concept was originally unknown in the "DOS world", and when they at some point introduced the '|' (pipe) syntax their "OS" created a temporary file anyway. (Please CMIIW.) Janis > [...]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-18 13:11 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <118j685$16vae$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #402186 |
On 17/09/2026 21:54, bart wrote: > On 17/09/2026 20:31, tTh wrote: >> On 9/17/26 17:46, bart wrote: >>> >>> Somebody needs some a few lines of info from a program, but the tool >>> buries it in 1000 lines of output, and your suggestion is to just to >>> scroll up and down trying to find it? >>> >>> Anything but fix the problem! >> >> May be you can code a patch who fix the^Wyour problem, and >> send it to the Gcc team ? Any positive contribution is >> benefit to all of us. > > I'm not interested in gcc. I have my own solutions. > > This is just one more annoying thing about that program. The issue here > is that nobody is daring to criticise its crass behaviours, while trying > to deflect issues onto users. > > Its crassness starts here: > > c:\c>gcc > gcc: fatal error: no input files > compilation terminated. > Simple, clear, and to-the-point. > Most command-line compilers give you version and help info when no > parameters follow. Some do, some do not. Most command-line tools - gcc included - give you version information if you write "gcc --version", and help if you give "gcc --help". > But at least it says something; try this: > > c:\c\as > > and it apparently hangs (it's waiting for you type an assembly program > from the console!) Many programs can work as pipes. It is waiting for input from stdin, not particularly from the console. Programs that often get their input directly from other programs work this way. > > How did programs which work like some student's crude first console app > ever make it into the wild? Perhaps it is because the developers know how to write programs designed to do useful jobs in a way that is convenient and efficient for the tasks they actually have to do? Maybe the developers of "as" expected users to have a clue about what they are doing?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-18 14:03 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <118jcq4$1a109$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #402222 |
On 18/09/2026 12:11, David Brown wrote: > On 17/09/2026 21:54, bart wrote: >> On 17/09/2026 20:31, tTh wrote: >>> On 9/17/26 17:46, bart wrote: >>>> >>>> Somebody needs some a few lines of info from a program, but the tool >>>> buries it in 1000 lines of output, and your suggestion is to just to >>>> scroll up and down trying to find it? >>>> >>>> Anything but fix the problem! >>> >>> May be you can code a patch who fix the^Wyour problem, and >>> send it to the Gcc team ? Any positive contribution is >>> benefit to all of us. >> >> I'm not interested in gcc. I have my own solutions. >> >> This is just one more annoying thing about that program. The issue >> here is that nobody is daring to criticise its crass behaviours, while >> trying to deflect issues onto users. >> >> Its crassness starts here: >> >> c:\c>gcc >> gcc: fatal error: no input files >> compilation terminated. >> > > Simple, clear, and to-the-point. > >> Most command-line compilers give you version and help info when no >> parameters follow. > > Some do, some do not. > > Most command-line tools - gcc included - give you version information if > you write "gcc --version", and help if you give "gcc --help". > >> But at least it says something; try this: >> >> c:\c\as >> >> and it apparently hangs (it's waiting for you type an assembly program >> from the console!) > > Many programs can work as pipes. It is waiting for input from stdin, > not particularly from the console. Programs that often get their input > directly from other programs work this way. > >> >> How did programs which work like some student's crude first console >> app ever make it into the wild? > > Perhaps it is because the developers know how to write programs designed > to do useful jobs in a way that is convenient and efficient for the > tasks they actually have to do? Maybe the developers of "as" expected > users to have a clue about what they are doing? > Both are at odds with how similar command line tools work. gcc and as are even at odds with each other: - gcc complains about the missing input file (in a manner that treats it as a compilation error) - as defaults to reading content from stdin - Given two files, gcc compiles them independently; as assembles them after effectively combining them (imagine if gcc concatenated all the .c files you give it; it would be ludicrous). So I repeat that this is not how you would sensibly write such tools. I mean, is it unreasonable to expect '-shared' on Windows to result in a file ending with .dll rather than .exe? But gcc and as are given a pass because ... that's how the original crude versions worked and for some reason it was never practical to change it? In that case say so, rather than pretending that those quirks are really desirable features. I mean, you do 'gcc prog1.c', wait some time for it to produce 'a.exe'. Now you do 'gcc prog2.c', and it promptly overwrites the 'a.exe' from the last compile! That is quite laughable. At the moment, compiling my bignum library on Windows looks like this: gcc -shared -s bignum.c -o bignum.dll # .dll is 101KB bcc -dll bignum # .dll is 16KB Yes, I know, you never use gcc directly; invocations are hidden within makefiles, IDEs, and shell scripts. But I'm discussing their merits /as/ command-line tools that you use hands-on.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-18 17:24 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <118jl30$1cukn$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #402225 |
On 18/09/2026 15:03, bart wrote: > On 18/09/2026 12:11, David Brown wrote: >> On 17/09/2026 21:54, bart wrote: >>> On 17/09/2026 20:31, tTh wrote: >>>> On 9/17/26 17:46, bart wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Somebody needs some a few lines of info from a program, but the >>>>> tool buries it in 1000 lines of output, and your suggestion is to >>>>> just to scroll up and down trying to find it? >>>>> >>>>> Anything but fix the problem! >>>> >>>> May be you can code a patch who fix the^Wyour problem, and >>>> send it to the Gcc team ? Any positive contribution is >>>> benefit to all of us. >>> >>> I'm not interested in gcc. I have my own solutions. >>> >>> This is just one more annoying thing about that program. The issue >>> here is that nobody is daring to criticise its crass behaviours, >>> while trying to deflect issues onto users. >>> >>> Its crassness starts here: >>> >>> c:\c>gcc >>> gcc: fatal error: no input files >>> compilation terminated. >>> >> >> Simple, clear, and to-the-point. >> >>> Most command-line compilers give you version and help info when no >>> parameters follow. >> >> Some do, some do not. >> >> Most command-line tools - gcc included - give you version information >> if you write "gcc --version", and help if you give "gcc --help". >> >>> But at least it says something; try this: >>> >>> c:\c\as >>> >>> and it apparently hangs (it's waiting for you type an assembly >>> program from the console!) >> >> Many programs can work as pipes. It is waiting for input from stdin, >> not particularly from the console. Programs that often get their >> input directly from other programs work this way. >> >>> >>> How did programs which work like some student's crude first console >>> app ever make it into the wild? >> >> Perhaps it is because the developers know how to write programs >> designed to do useful jobs in a way that is convenient and efficient >> for the tasks they actually have to do? Maybe the developers of "as" >> expected users to have a clue about what they are doing? >> > > Both are at odds with how similar command line tools work. gcc and as > are even at odds with each other: I am suspicious of your concept of "similar command line tools" here. gcc and as are not similar - they do very different jobs, and used in very different ways, and are written by completely independent groups. (The two groups cooperate and agree on standards, formats, flags, etc., but write and maintain their projects in very different ways.) The program "gcc" is a driver program, written by the GCC folks, and run directly by developers. "as" is an assembler, written by the binutils folks, that is very rarely used directly by developers. "gcc" can be used with any assembler that follows expected standards - traditionally on *nix systems, the "system compiler" calls the "system assembler" and "system linker" to link with the "system library", all of which may be developed entirely independently. In a "typical" gcc installation, the assembler and linker are written by the same group, but the compiler and standard library are done by different people. But on a commercial Unix system, you might find more of the parts coming from the same commercial vendor. Within my projects, there are usually a couple of assembly files, generated by the various "project wizards" and "configuration generator" tools provided by microcontroller manufacturers - these cover things like very low-level startup code. There may also be an assembly file or two for task switching in an RTOS. (Most other assembly is inline assembly within C code.) I assemble these using gcc - I do not call "as" directly. Using the "gcc" driver program makes it a lot easier to keep consistent switches for choice of microcontroller details, paths, and all the other options I use. (Similarly, it is normal to use "gcc" for linking, rather than running "ld" directly.) So "gcc" and "as" are wildly different tools that are used in wildly different ways, written by completely separate groups of people. The fact that they have different defaults is hardly surprising - a compiler will rarely be used with piped input from outside, whereas for "as", that is by far the most common mode of operation. > > - gcc complains about the missing input file (in a manner that treats it > as a compilation error) > Yes. It /is/ a compilation error - there is nothing to compile (or assemble, or link). > - as defaults to reading content from stdin Yes. That is far and away the most common usage of "as", to assemble the output generated by a compiler. It is indeed the primary task of "as" - being usable as a standalone assembler is a bonus feature. > > - Given two files, gcc compiles them independently; as assembles them > after effectively combining them (imagine if gcc concatenated all the > .c files you give it; it would be ludicrous). They are different kinds of programs, doing different things. Assembly files can reasonably be concatenated, C files cannot. "gcc" is a driver program, not a C compiler - it also deals with lots of different file types. It would not make sense to concatenate C files, assembly files, object files, linker command files, Fortran files, and whatever else you might choose to throw at it. (I did not know that "as" combines multiple assembly files as you describe. But it is not a driver program - it simply takes its input, and assembles it.) > > So I repeat that this is not how you would sensibly write such tools. "Truth by repetition" is not a valid argument. I appreciate that it is not how /you/ write assemblers and compilers, or how /you/ expect them to work. But we have already established that your opinions on such matters do not often match those of many others. > I > mean, is it unreasonable to expect '-shared' on Windows to result in a > file ending with .dll rather than .exe? > As I understand it, the format for dll and exe files is the same on Windows (as is the format for various other files), and both can contain directly executable code and resources that can be used by other programs. It's not something I have looked at in detail, however. Still, it is unreasonable to expect people to specify the name they want for a program or shared library? It is normal for a program (or shared library) to consist of multiple files - I think it would be highly unusual to want to turn a single "x.c" file into a dll "x.dll". > But gcc and as are given a pass because ... that's how the original > crude versions worked and for some reason it was never practical to > change it? I don't use gcc to make dlls on Windows - or so files on Linux. And if I did, I would almost certainly not be doing so using a single source file. It would be part of a project (even if it was a relatively small project), and have a makefile to track the options I want. That would include the name of the output file. I am sure that it makes sense that "gcc -shared x.c" could generate "x.dll" on Windows. I am far from sure that failing to use "x.dll" as the default name is a bother to anyone else. Other than a quick test of how gcc works, it's hard to imagine a use-case. And of course, remember that gcc (and as) are native to an OS where the type of a file is determined by the file, not by part of its name. Naming conventions are definitely convenient, especially when it is hard to identify a file type accurately, but it is not the file extension that says if a file is an executable, or shared library, or whatever. > > In that case say so, rather than pretending that those quirks are really > desirable features. > > I mean, you do 'gcc prog1.c', wait some time for it to produce 'a.exe'. > Now you do 'gcc prog2.c', and it promptly overwrites the 'a.exe' from > the last compile! That is quite laughable. > So don't do that. Or, if it amuses you, laugh. > At the moment, compiling my bignum library on Windows looks like this: > > gcc -shared -s bignum.c -o bignum.dll # .dll is 101KB > > bcc -dll bignum # .dll is 16KB > > > Yes, I know, you never use gcc directly; invocations are hidden within > makefiles, IDEs, and shell scripts. > > But I'm discussing their merits /as/ command-line tools that you use > hands-on. > If you don't like the way gcc (or any other tools) work, and you feel that your own tools are better for your uses, then use your own tools. Or if you feel that you /have/ to use gcc, and that you can't cope with writing all these nasty, awkward switches and arguments, and think that build tools are just crutches for those that don't want to spend all day doing manual project management, then write a batch file: gcc-dll.bat : @echo off gcc -shared -s %1.c -o %1.dll gcc-exe.bat : @echo off gcc %1.c -o %1.exe There. After decades of gnashing your teeth and pulling out your hair, I've given you the solution. I can't imagine you will use it, but there it is.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-18 11:06 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <118juim$1grii$1@kst.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #402232 |
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes:
[...]
>>> On 17/09/2026 21:54, bart wrote:
[...]
>>>> I'm not interested in gcc. [...]
[...]
> The program "gcc" is a driver program, written by the GCC folks, and
> run directly by developers. "as" is an assembler, written by the
> binutils folks, that is very rarely used directly by developers.
David, bart say he's not interested in gcc. I suggest taking him
at his word.
[...]
--
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 | bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-18 20:07 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <118k25v$1jbis$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #402232 |
On 18/09/2026 16:24, David Brown wrote:
> On 18/09/2026 15:03, bart wrote:
So "gcc" and "as" are wildly different tools that are used in wildly
> different ways, written by completely separate groups of people. The
> fact that they have different defaults is hardly surprising - a compiler
> will rarely be used with piped input from outside, whereas for "as",
> that is by far the most common mode of operation.
Actually, gcc on Windows seems to generate temporary .s files that are
submitted to 'as'. Piping isn't used.
Both gcc and 'as' take inputs which are one or more files (sequences of
bytes) and write outputs that are one or more files.
You probably can't get any simpler than that in a computer program.
Neither of them are really intended for interactive use either: that is,
interaction while they run, beyond invoking them.
But if either seriously expect source code to be entered 'live', then
they should show a prompt; how hard would that be?
(An older version of 'bcc' supported this:
c:\bcx>bcc -stdin t
Reading from stdin. Finish with Ctrl-Z:
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void) {puts("Hey it worked!");}
^Z
c:\bcx>t
Hey it worked!
It still needs a filename, which is used for the output. And notice the
prompt. See, it's easy.)
>> - Given two files, gcc compiles them independently; as assembles them
>> after effectively combining them (imagine if gcc concatenated all the
>> .c files you give it; it would be ludicrous).
>
> They are different kinds of programs, doing different things. Assembly
> files can reasonably be concatenated, C files cannot.
That is nonsense. ASM can contain local, non-exported symbols just like
HLLs. For example two people might be writing two ASM files and they
shouldn't need to ensure that their choices of labels do not clash.
Neither should they /depend/ on using a symbol that may be provided by
another file without needing to formally export it from one file.
With as, you can take any ASM file, split in arbitrarily into two halves
A.s and B.s, and be able to assemble using:
as A.s B.s
Yes, that works because it concatenates them together again. But what is
the point of that? Each half will be incomplete; this will likely fail:
gcc -c A.s B.s
because each is assumed to be well-formed.
So the question is, what sort of crazy person maintains ASM programs as
a collection of malformed files that can only be assembled via 'as' when
presented in an exact order?
You are defending something that is ludicrous.
> "gcc" is a driver
> program, not a C compiler - it also deals with lots of different file
> types.
So what's the name of the actual C compiler then, cc1.exe? That doesn't
appear usable by itself:
cc1 Hangs
cc1 hello.c Errors (can't find include files)
cc1 --help Lists 2118 options
> (I did not know that "as" combines
> multiple assembly files as you describe. But it is not a driver program
> - it simply takes its input, and assembles it.)
So what's the name of the assembler proper? It seems everything comes
under the 'gcc' umbrella, out of necessity rather than convenience,
since the different components - cc1, as, ld - are pretty much unusable
by themselves.
In this case, gcc must be the de facto C compiler, but since it does
every other job too, it makes it harder to use.
Here's an example of more dedicated tools (which I thought was the Unix
ethos) working together better.
'cc' is the development version of bcc. It can be made to discrete
intermediate representations before it gets to EXE. That works like this:
c:\cx>cc -p hello # generate IL
Compiling hello.c to hello.pcl
c:\cx>pc -a hello # convert IL to ASM
Processing hello.pcl to hello.asm
c:\cx>aa hello # assemble ASM to EXE
Assembling hello.asm to hello.exe
c:\cx>hello
Hello, World!
Notice:
* Each tool consistently works the same way
* Each tool knows the type of input file it deals with so
the file extension is optional (none are typed here)
* Each tool can somehow figure out the name of the output file
(I really scratched my head over that one)
* Not needing the extension also simplifies scripting:
cc -p %1 && pc -a %1 && aa %1 && %1
It's not about leaving them out here, but if the parameter to this batch
file was "hello.c" rather than "hello", it would screw things up. It is
a bonus though.
> to work. But we have already established that your opinions on such
> matters do not often match those of many others.
OK. For some irrational reason, you are defending some behaviours
determined decades ago, which were clearly wrong, ludicrous, unsafe, or
inconsistent.
You know, it would cost you nothing to say, Bart, you're right. But for
historical and other reasons we're stuck with them and need to make the
best of a bad job.
>> I mean, is it unreasonable to expect '-shared' on Windows to result in
>> a file ending with .dll rather than .exe?
>>
>
> As I understand it, the format for dll and exe files is the same on
> Windows (as is the format for various other files), and both can contain
> directly executable code and resources that can be used by other
> programs.
They have the same format, but files used as DLLs have extra stuff:
* Base relocation tables
* Must have relocatable code
* I think there is an extra segment
* An export table
* Different flags are set in the header
The .dll extension is normally used for these. Experiments trying to
load a DLL via LoadLibrary (ie. dlopen on Linux) suggest that an
extension other than .dll would be troublesome.
LoadLibrary Arg lib.dll lib.exe (actual name of DLL)
"lib" Yes No
"lib.dll" Yes No
"lib.exe" No Yes
So it makes sense to use "lib" or "lib.dll" as the argument, and for
DLLs to use ".dll".
In any case, using .exe for DLLs would be confusing.
> Still, it is unreasonable to expect people to specify the name they want
> for a program or shared library?
I was mildly surprised that gcc on Windows allows "-o prog" and gcc will
generate the file "prog.exe" without needing the extension.
This could reasonably lead people to think that with "-shared", it would
write a .dll file. They would be wrong.
> It is normal for a program (or shared
> library) to consist of multiple files - I think it would be highly
> unusual to want to turn a single "x.c" file into a dll "x.dll".
C compilers that don't follow gcc (clang follows gcc, and tcc follows it
on Linux only), tend to take the name of the first submitted C file as
the default name of the output, when there is one output.
(-c -S options generate multiple files.)
> I am sure that it makes sense that "gcc -shared x.c" could generate
> "x.dll" on Windows. I am far from sure that failing to use "x.dll" as
> the default name is a bother to anyone else. Other than a quick test of
> how gcc works, it's hard to imagine a use-case.
It's just wrong. A million people will use gcc and some of those will
encounter some issue like this which at best wastes their time.
> And of course, remember that gcc (and as) are native to an OS where the
> type of a file is determined by the file, not by part of its name.
Fine. In that case don't bother with the extension if the extension is a
lie.
But for DLLs, the extensions is important to make it visible, and there
will of course be further checks that are done.
>> I mean, you do 'gcc prog1.c', wait some time for it to produce
>> 'a.exe'. Now you do 'gcc prog2.c', and it promptly overwrites the
>> 'a.exe' from the last compile! That is quite laughable.
>>
> So don't do that.
Something else which is just plain wrong, and can waste a lot of time.
When you have to do twice the work of specifying an input, or you may
have to repeat a lengthy compile if you need to run an earlier, now
overwritten, a.exe again.
> If you don't like the way gcc (or any other tools) work, and you feel
> that your own tools are better for your uses, then use your own tools.
That's exactly what I do. But gcc came up in this thread.
> Or if you feel that you /have/ to use gcc, and that you can't cope with
> writing all these nasty, awkward switches and arguments, and think that
> build tools are just crutches for those that don't want to spend all day
> doing manual project management, then write a batch file:
>
> gcc-dll.bat :
> @echo off
> gcc -shared -s %1.c -o %1.dll
>
>
> gcc-exe.bat :
> @echo off
> gcc %1.c -o %1.exe
>
>
> There.
I do that too. It is a small C program called gc used like this:
gc prog
gc prog opt
It generates prog.exe and also adds the long-winded options needed for
my generated C code.
But it's not flexible enough for ad hoc needs. Then I have to use gcc
and it's a nuisance because of its quirks.
> After decades of gnashing your teeth and pulling out your hair,
> I've given you the solution. I can't imagine you will use it, but there
> it is.
It's a workaround. gcc is what, 85,000 source files, but I still have to
write scripts to make it usable?!
>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-18 12:26 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <118k39e$1grii$5@kst.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #402247 |
bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
[...]
> But if either seriously expect source code to be entered 'live', then
> they should show a prompt; how hard would that be?
There is no serious expectation that "as" will be read its input
from a keyboard. You are complaining about things you clearly do
not understand and do not want to understand.
--
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]
Page 17 of 25 — ← Prev page 1 … 15 16 [17] 18 19 … 25 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web