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 7 of 25 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 25 Next page →
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-10 18:45 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <117ums0$25mcu$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401894 |
On 10/09/2026 18:21, fir wrote: > David Brown pisze: >> >> This is all getting /very/ far from C. Might it be a good time to >> start a new thread in comp.lang.misc instead? >> >> If you are serious about making his own language in some way, then I >> am sure he would benefit from paying some attention to Bart's advice >> (I might not like his language, or have any use of it, but there's no >> doubt he has more experience than most in language design). >> >> And maybe in comp.lang.misc the thread will attract others that have >> interest in new languages, or advice based on different language >> experience. >> > this is theoretical c imo - c has some set of ideas internally and is > "made" from this ideas so exploring those ideas ic C imo but more > theoretical > > i make some theory and some of it is more general (like say this last > things that objects are indeed knots/webs, or code jumping problem)but > its also a c if it uses c > No, it is not C. You might have started off thinking about small changes to C, but you are now talking about something completely different. Either this is just a waste of time (and the fact that most of your posts are replies to your own posts suggest that this is the case), or you are really interested in making a new language - and comp.lang.misc would be a better place to discuss it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-10 18:56 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <117ung0$25r35$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401897 |
David Brown pisze: > On 10/09/2026 18:21, fir wrote: >> David Brown pisze: > >>> >>> This is all getting /very/ far from C. Might it be a good time to >>> start a new thread in comp.lang.misc instead? >>> >>> If you are serious about making his own language in some way, then I >>> am sure he would benefit from paying some attention to Bart's advice >>> (I might not like his language, or have any use of it, but there's no >>> doubt he has more experience than most in language design). >>> >>> And maybe in comp.lang.misc the thread will attract others that have >>> interest in new languages, or advice based on different language >>> experience. >>> >> this is theoretical c imo - c has some set of ideas internally and is >> "made" from this ideas so exploring those ideas ic C imo but more >> theoretical >> >> i make some theory and some of it is more general (like say this last >> things that objects are indeed knots/webs, or code jumping problem)but >> its also a c if it uses c >> > > No, it is not C. You might have started off thinking about small > changes to C, but you are now talking about something completely different. > > Either this is just a waste of time (and the fact that most of your > posts are replies to your own posts suggest that this is the case), or > you are really interested in making a new language - and comp.lang.misc > would be a better place to discuss it. > it is but you dont understand it becouse you have shallow view on c in this context c is like an iceberg it has its surface (i call it skin) but it has the rationale and deep design decisions under the water surface level... so if i prove for example that c typical "skin" (i call it gothic (at least those part around(,,,,); ) san be changed form foo(a,b, "text",c); into foo a b "text" c it is/are thesis on c not on different anguage - they are about c consciousnes and about potential sjkin changes (and are also about new skinn too, thats right)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-10 19:01 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <117unp5$25r35$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401898 |
fir pisze: > David Brown pisze: >> On 10/09/2026 18:21, fir wrote: >>> David Brown pisze: >> >>>> >>>> This is all getting /very/ far from C. Might it be a good time to >>>> start a new thread in comp.lang.misc instead? >>>> >>>> If you are serious about making his own language in some way, then I >>>> am sure he would benefit from paying some attention to Bart's advice >>>> (I might not like his language, or have any use of it, but there's >>>> no doubt he has more experience than most in language design). >>>> >>>> And maybe in comp.lang.misc the thread will attract others that have >>>> interest in new languages, or advice based on different language >>>> experience. >>>> >>> this is theoretical c imo - c has some set of ideas internally and is >>> "made" from this ideas so exploring those ideas ic C imo but more >>> theoretical >>> >>> i make some theory and some of it is more general (like say this last >>> things that objects are indeed knots/webs, or code jumping problem)but >>> its also a c if it uses c >>> >> >> No, it is not C. You might have started off thinking about small >> changes to C, but you are now talking about something completely >> different. >> >> Either this is just a waste of time (and the fact that most of your >> posts are replies to your own posts suggest that this is the case), or >> you are really interested in making a new language - and >> comp.lang.misc would be a better place to discuss it. >> > > it is but you dont understand it becouse you have shallow view on c > > in this context c is like an iceberg it has its surface (i call it skin) > but it has the rationale and deep design decisions under the water > surface level... so if i prove for example that c typical "skin" > (i call it gothic (at least those part around(,,,,); ) > > san be changed form > > foo(a,b, "text",c); > > into > > foo a b "text" c > > it is/are thesis on c not on different anguage - they are about > c consciousnes and about potential sjkin changes (and are also about new > skinn too, thats right) > if so some could sa y well if so then takin about all languages different than c could be considered as taking on c but i see it different its about a thing that if you will take some arbitary bad changes this make another alanguage but if youre keeping to this inner c right spirit and being scentific in this decisions on it then it is ima on inner side/part of c and those people whi see c as only its surfaces are medicores
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-10 19:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <117uosk$26gp0$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401898 |
fir pisze: > David Brown pisze: >> On 10/09/2026 18:21, fir wrote: >>> David Brown pisze: >> >>>> >>>> This is all getting /very/ far from C. Might it be a good time to >>>> start a new thread in comp.lang.misc instead? >>>> >>>> If you are serious about making his own language in some way, then I >>>> am sure he would benefit from paying some attention to Bart's advice >>>> (I might not like his language, or have any use of it, but there's >>>> no doubt he has more experience than most in language design). >>>> >>>> And maybe in comp.lang.misc the thread will attract others that have >>>> interest in new languages, or advice based on different language >>>> experience. >>>> >>> this is theoretical c imo - c has some set of ideas internally and is >>> "made" from this ideas so exploring those ideas ic C imo but more >>> theoretical >>> >>> i make some theory and some of it is more general (like say this last >>> things that objects are indeed knots/webs, or code jumping problem)but >>> its also a c if it uses c >>> >> >> No, it is not C. You might have started off thinking about small >> changes to C, but you are now talking about something completely >> different. >> >> Either this is just a waste of time (and the fact that most of your >> posts are replies to your own posts suggest that this is the case), or >> you are really interested in making a new language - and >> comp.lang.misc would be a better place to discuss it. >> > > it is but you dont understand it becouse you have shallow view on c > > in this context c is like an iceberg it has its surface (i call it skin) > but it has the rationale and deep design decisions under the water > surface level... so if i prove for example that c typical "skin" > (i call it gothic (at least those part around(,,,,); ) > > san be changed form > > foo(a,b, "text",c); > > into > > foo a b "text" c > > it is/are thesis on c not on different anguage - they are about > c consciousnes and about potential sjkin changes (and are also about new > skinn too, thats right) > > > i could agree that some considerations and examples when im searching for good syntax those nut used pieces of syntax are not c but final scientific conclusions imo are (and that some parts are not, well they some kind necessary syntax foam - but they lead to more c grounded conclusions)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-10 20:19 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <117usbr$27ulf$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401898 |
fir pisze: > David Brown pisze: >> On 10/09/2026 18:21, fir wrote: >>> David Brown pisze: >> >>>> >>>> This is all getting /very/ far from C. Might it be a good time to >>>> start a new thread in comp.lang.misc instead? >>>> >>>> If you are serious about making his own language in some way, then I >>>> am sure he would benefit from paying some attention to Bart's advice >>>> (I might not like his language, or have any use of it, but there's >>>> no doubt he has more experience than most in language design). >>>> >>>> And maybe in comp.lang.misc the thread will attract others that have >>>> interest in new languages, or advice based on different language >>>> experience. >>>> >>> this is theoretical c imo - c has some set of ideas internally and is >>> "made" from this ideas so exploring those ideas ic C imo but more >>> theoretical >>> >>> i make some theory and some of it is more general (like say this last >>> things that objects are indeed knots/webs, or code jumping problem)but >>> its also a c if it uses c >>> >> >> No, it is not C. You might have started off thinking about small >> changes to C, but you are now talking about something completely >> different. >> >> Either this is just a waste of time (and the fact that most of your >> posts are replies to your own posts suggest that this is the case), or >> you are really interested in making a new language - and >> comp.lang.misc would be a better place to discuss it. >> > > it is but you dont understand it becouse you have shallow view on c > > in this context c is like an iceberg it has its surface (i call it skin) > but it has the rationale and deep design decisions under the water > surface level... so if i prove for example that c typical "skin" > (i call it gothic (at least those part around(,,,,); ) > > san be changed form > > foo(a,b, "text",c); > > into > > foo a b "text" c > > it is/are thesis on c not on different anguage - they are about > c consciousnes and about potential sjkin changes (and are also about new > skinn too, thats right) > > > you also my not damn know how hard it is in c i make i would say two work - one s those 'semantic' (?) ideas (liek one core of cpu on assembly level seing state of other core for example..great idea of makin cpu's and assembly great again ;c (potentially as im not sure how it would work)) but i also do this skin work and this skin work is hard for example ide of _x 640 _y 480 as a syntax for int declarations seem neat but when considered in expressions like foo _x 640 _y 480 (which is foo(int x =640, int y = 480); seems problematic becouse in eye it may look more like foo takes 4 args etc) such thing as foo x'640 y'480 where ' can be replaced by some unicode would spare 2 spaces so maybe x'640 y'480 is better as initialisation - but it in turn looks less neat yet all this mus be compatible with all other syntaxes or maybe i should say COMPATIBLE WITH ALL other syntaxes so its hard work that should be valued - its not a trash (compared to what soem othar people in languages do do they make often trash - they design decision are flawedon first flawed step so where they go in 100th step? (nowhere as they will not go )
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-10 20:25 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <117usmg$282oj$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401902 |
fir pisze: > fir pisze: >> David Brown pisze: >>> On 10/09/2026 18:21, fir wrote: >>>> David Brown pisze: >>> >>>>> >>>>> This is all getting /very/ far from C. Might it be a good time to >>>>> start a new thread in comp.lang.misc instead? >>>>> >>>>> If you are serious about making his own language in some way, then >>>>> I am sure he would benefit from paying some attention to Bart's >>>>> advice (I might not like his language, or have any use of it, but >>>>> there's no doubt he has more experience than most in language design). >>>>> >>>>> And maybe in comp.lang.misc the thread will attract others that >>>>> have interest in new languages, or advice based on different >>>>> language experience. >>>>> >>>> this is theoretical c imo - c has some set of ideas internally and is >>>> "made" from this ideas so exploring those ideas ic C imo but more >>>> theoretical >>>> >>>> i make some theory and some of it is more general (like say this >>>> last things that objects are indeed knots/webs, or code jumping >>>> problem)but >>>> its also a c if it uses c >>>> >>> >>> No, it is not C. You might have started off thinking about small >>> changes to C, but you are now talking about something completely >>> different. >>> >>> Either this is just a waste of time (and the fact that most of your >>> posts are replies to your own posts suggest that this is the case), >>> or you are really interested in making a new language - and >>> comp.lang.misc would be a better place to discuss it. >>> >> >> it is but you dont understand it becouse you have shallow view on c >> >> in this context c is like an iceberg it has its surface (i call it >> skin) but it has the rationale and deep design decisions under the >> water surface level... so if i prove for example that c typical "skin" >> (i call it gothic (at least those part around(,,,,); ) >> >> san be changed form >> >> foo(a,b, "text",c); >> >> into >> >> foo a b "text" c >> >> it is/are thesis on c not on different anguage - they are about >> c consciousnes and about potential sjkin changes (and are also about >> new skinn too, thats right) >> >> >> > > you also my not damn know how hard it is > > in c i make i would say two work - one s those 'semantic' (?) ideas > (liek one core of cpu on assembly level seing state of other core > for example..great idea of makin cpu's and assembly great again ;c > (potentially as im not sure how it would work)) > > but i also do this skin work and this skin work is hard > > for example ide of > > _x 640 > _y 480 > > as a syntax for int declarations seem neat > but when considered in expressions like > > foo _x 640 _y 480 > > (which is foo(int x =640, int y = 480); > > seems problematic becouse in eye it may look more like foo > takes 4 args etc) > > such thing as > > foo x'640 y'480 > > where ' can be replaced by some unicode > > would spare 2 spaces > > so maybe > > x'640 > y'480 > > is better as initialisation - but it in turn looks less neat > > yet all this mus be compatible with all other syntaxes or maybe > i should say COMPATIBLE WITH ALL other syntaxes MORE WORSE " they sometimes need to be compatible witn new underlying semantics becouse flaws in present semantics may make things hard of flaws in present semantics may make solutions break when new semantics would show better (so it is real hard searching here..sad its not valued to much by some shallow minds (if it is not valued)) > > so its hard work that should be valued - its not a trash > (compared to what soem othar people in languages do do they > make often trash - they design decision are flawedon first flawed step > so where they go in 100th step? (nowhere as they will not go ) > > > > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-10 19:17 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <117uong$26gp0$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401897 |
David Brown pisze: > On 10/09/2026 18:21, fir wrote: >> David Brown pisze: > > > Either this is just a waste of time (and the fact that most of your > posts are replies to your own posts suggest that this is the case), or > you are really interested in making a new language - and comp.lang.misc > would be a better place to discuss it. > how it suggest that? note thise are 'replies' maybe in some technical sense of a usenet reader..but on thought /write level they are just continuation of thoughts/topic..its rather quite artificall to write ll you got to say in one post and assume you have nothing to add ..i often have things to add im also this type fellow who dont like to spend time boring. so im rather active in some places i go for some thime but this also makes weariness so - dont worry if something worries - when i get weary and exhausted form ideas in given time i will take break (possibly for weeks months of not years) ;c
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-11 09:21 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1180a6n$2l1ub$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401900 |
On 10/09/2026 19:17, fir wrote: > David Brown pisze: >> On 10/09/2026 18:21, fir wrote: >>> David Brown pisze: >> >> >> Either this is just a waste of time (and the fact that most of your >> posts are replies to your own posts suggest that this is the case), or >> you are really interested in making a new language - and >> comp.lang.misc would be a better place to discuss it. >> > > > how it suggest that? note thise are 'replies' maybe in some technical > sense of a usenet reader..but on thought /write level they are just > continuation of thoughts/topic..its rather quite artificall to write ll > you got to say in one post and assume you have nothing to add ..i often > have things to add > Public forums - like a Usenet group - are not like having a whiteboard on your wall. If you ask questions that are topical to the group, or make comments or replies that are topical to the group, that's great. When you ramble with wild ideas, post after post, that's just wasting everyone's time. People don't give any feedback, and mostly skip them. So please, write your ramblings on a bit of paper or a whiteboard. When you have something worth sharing with other people, and you want feedback or help, post them to an appropriate group. If it is actually about C, that's comp.lang.c. If it is about a weird new language with lots of Unicode signs and a very different syntax, comp.lang.misc is a better choice. This is surely not difficult to understand.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-11 12:46 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1180m5p$2qhui$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401933 |
David Brown pisze: > On 10/09/2026 19:17, fir wrote: >> David Brown pisze: >>> On 10/09/2026 18:21, fir wrote: >>>> David Brown pisze: >>> >>> >>> Either this is just a waste of time (and the fact that most of your >>> posts are replies to your own posts suggest that this is the case), >>> or you are really interested in making a new language - and >>> comp.lang.misc would be a better place to discuss it. >>> >> >> >> how it suggest that? note thise are 'replies' maybe in some technical >> sense of a usenet reader..but on thought /write level they are just >> continuation of thoughts/topic..its rather quite artificall to write >> ll you got to say in one post and assume you have nothing to add ..i >> often have things to add >> > > Public forums - like a Usenet group - are not like having a whiteboard > on your wall. If you ask questions that are topical to the group, or > make comments or replies that are topical to the group, that's great. > When you ramble with wild ideas, post after post, that's just wasting > everyone's time. People don't give any feedback, and mostly skip them. > > So please, write your ramblings on a bit of paper or a whiteboard. When > you have something worth sharing with other people, and you want > feedback or help, post them to an appropriate group. If it is actually > about C, that's comp.lang.c. If it is about a weird new language with > lots of Unicode signs and a very different syntax, comp.lang.misc is a > better choice. > > This is surely not difficult to understand. > what you say is shallow looking on C so i cant agree... you try to impose you shallow view (just some way like keith thompson want to impose his rigid rukles here that this group is only for standard freaks) i may partially agree that some investigation in possible c syntax/skin are somewhat intermediate - but those are intermediate results kinda needed to obtain final conclusions i dont much can do something with fact that some post dont interest you - belive many posts who many wrote here not interest me also (like things keith writes, or trigraph topic and many more) (regular c stuff is also not so much interesting, its ok, but some deeper c ideas much more interesting)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-11 14:13 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1180r8t$2sfj3$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401937 |
fir pisze: > David Brown pisze: >> On 10/09/2026 19:17, fir wrote: >>> David Brown pisze: >>>> On 10/09/2026 18:21, fir wrote: >>>>> David Brown pisze: >>>> >>>> >>>> Either this is just a waste of time (and the fact that most of your >>>> posts are replies to your own posts suggest that this is the case), >>>> or you are really interested in making a new language - and >>>> comp.lang.misc would be a better place to discuss it. >>>> >>> >>> >>> how it suggest that? note thise are 'replies' maybe in some technical >>> sense of a usenet reader..but on thought /write level they are just >>> continuation of thoughts/topic..its rather quite artificall to write >>> ll you got to say in one post and assume you have nothing to add ..i >>> often have things to add >>> >> >> Public forums - like a Usenet group - are not like having a whiteboard >> on your wall. If you ask questions that are topical to the group, or >> make comments or replies that are topical to the group, that's great. >> When you ramble with wild ideas, post after post, that's just wasting >> everyone's time. People don't give any feedback, and mostly skip them. >> >> So please, write your ramblings on a bit of paper or a whiteboard. >> When you have something worth sharing with other people, and you want >> feedback or help, post them to an appropriate group. If it is >> actually about C, that's comp.lang.c. If it is about a weird new >> language with lots of Unicode signs and a very different syntax, >> comp.lang.misc is a better choice. >> >> This is surely not difficult to understand. >> > > what you say is shallow looking on C so i cant agree... you try to > impose you shallow view (just some way like keith thompson want to > impose his rigid rukles here that this group is only for standard freaks) > > i may partially agree that some investigation in possible c syntax/skin > are somewhat intermediate - but those are intermediate results kinda > needed to obtain final conclusions > > i dont much can do something with fact that some post dont interest you > - belive many posts who many wrote here not interest me also (like > things keith writes, or trigraph topic and many more) > (regular c stuff is also not so much interesting, its ok, but some > deeper c ideas much more interesting) > > speaking about this whiteboard or blackboard : also not this group has some historical value and people may be interested how this great new language by fir was born (great new B or great new C or great new D or even more like great new E or ψ or φ still problems with tha name if i took a way to use unicode maybe i should take unicode sign? it will make all this printers to print unicode in papers so that would be kinda new impact )
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-11 13:41 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <1180sun$2t3ms$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401945 |
On 11/09/2026 13:13, fir wrote: > speaking about this whiteboard or blackboard : also not this group has > some historical value and people may be interested how this great new > language by fir was born (great new B or great new C or great new D > or even more like great new E or ψ or φ still problems with tha name If you're looking for a name for your new language ... ... might I suggest 💩
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-11 14:55 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1180to7$2tbj4$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401948 |
Richard Harnden pisze: > On 11/09/2026 13:13, fir wrote: >> speaking about this whiteboard or blackboard : also not this group has >> some historical value and people may be interested how this great new >> language by fir was born (great new B or great new C or great new D >> or even more like great new E or ψ or φ still problems with tha name > > If you're looking for a name for your new language ... > ... might I suggest 💩 > > assuming that im right and youre part of history - youre get known for this - and its not so much glorious legacy
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-11 15:01 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1180u40$2tbj4$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401950 |
fir pisze: > Richard Harnden pisze: >> On 11/09/2026 13:13, fir wrote: >>> speaking about this whiteboard or blackboard : also not this group >>> has some historical value and people may be interested how this great >>> new language by fir was born (great new B or great new C or great new D >>> or even more like great new E or ψ or φ still problems with tha name >> >> If you're looking for a name for your new language ... >> ... might I suggest 💩 >> >> > assuming that im right and youre part of history - youre get known for > this - and its not so much glorious legacy im a bit joking here but note 'joking' is giving to know thet what some say is in some way not to 'stright' understanding but not exactly precisiszing whet is not 'strict' and what not i hjust now wana go frome one banal to another (and one strict view on thing turned into quite another different strict view may become turnin banal into banal and the progres is for me from somewhat banal or not balal into less banal
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-11 15:04 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1180u8l$2tbj4$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401950 |
fir pisze: > Richard Harnden pisze: >> On 11/09/2026 13:13, fir wrote: >>> speaking about this whiteboard or blackboard : also not this group >>> has some historical value and people may be interested how this great >>> new language by fir was born (great new B or great new C or great new D >>> or even more like great new E or ψ or φ still problems with tha name >> >> If you're looking for a name for your new language ... >> ... might I suggest 💩 >> >> > assuming that im right and youre part of history - youre get known for > this - and its not so much glorious legacy i hope though history will not remember it too much becouse it would spoil its mood to remember such ultra banal and low outcomes (even not so much representative fortunatelly)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-11 15:08 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1180ugi$2tncf$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401945 |
fir pisze: > fir pisze: >> David Brown pisze: >>> On 10/09/2026 19:17, fir wrote: >>>> David Brown pisze: >>>>> On 10/09/2026 18:21, fir wrote: >>>>>> David Brown pisze: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Either this is just a waste of time (and the fact that most of your >>>>> posts are replies to your own posts suggest that this is the case), >>>>> or you are really interested in making a new language - and >>>>> comp.lang.misc would be a better place to discuss it. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> how it suggest that? note thise are 'replies' maybe in some >>>> technical sense of a usenet reader..but on thought /write level they >>>> are just continuation of thoughts/topic..its rather quite artificall >>>> to write ll you got to say in one post and assume you have nothing >>>> to add ..i often have things to add >>>> >>> >>> Public forums - like a Usenet group - are not like having a >>> whiteboard on your wall. If you ask questions that are topical to >>> the group, or make comments or replies that are topical to the group, >>> that's great. When you ramble with wild ideas, post after post, >>> that's just wasting everyone's time. People don't give any feedback, >>> and mostly skip them. >>> >>> So please, write your ramblings on a bit of paper or a whiteboard. >>> When you have something worth sharing with other people, and you want >>> feedback or help, post them to an appropriate group. If it is >>> actually about C, that's comp.lang.c. If it is about a weird new >>> language with lots of Unicode signs and a very different syntax, >>> comp.lang.misc is a better choice. >>> >>> This is surely not difficult to understand. >>> >> >> what you say is shallow looking on C so i cant agree... you try to >> impose you shallow view (just some way like keith thompson want to >> impose his rigid rukles here that this group is only for standard >> freaks) >> >> i may partially agree that some investigation in possible c syntax/skin >> are somewhat intermediate - but those are intermediate results kinda >> needed to obtain final conclusions >> >> i dont much can do something with fact that some post dont interest >> you - belive many posts who many wrote here not interest me also (like >> things keith writes, or trigraph topic and many more) >> (regular c stuff is also not so much interesting, its ok, but some >> deeper c ideas much more interesting) >> >> > > speaking about this whiteboard or blackboard : also not this group has > some historical value and people may be interested how this great new > language by fir was born (great new B or great new C or great new D > or even more like great new E or ψ or φ still problems with tha name > there is also an option of Ↄ to consider > if i took a way to use unicode maybe i should take unicode sign? > it will make all this printers to print unicode in papers so that would > be kinda new impact )
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-11 15:13 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1180uqd$2tquc$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401953 |
fir pisze: > fir pisze: >> fir pisze: >>> David Brown pisze: >>>> On 10/09/2026 19:17, fir wrote: >>>>> David Brown pisze: >>>>>> On 10/09/2026 18:21, fir wrote: >>>>>>> David Brown pisze: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Either this is just a waste of time (and the fact that most of >>>>>> your posts are replies to your own posts suggest that this is the >>>>>> case), or you are really interested in making a new language - and >>>>>> comp.lang.misc would be a better place to discuss it. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> how it suggest that? note thise are 'replies' maybe in some >>>>> technical sense of a usenet reader..but on thought /write level >>>>> they are just continuation of thoughts/topic..its rather quite >>>>> artificall to write ll you got to say in one post and assume you >>>>> have nothing to add ..i often have things to add >>>>> >>>> >>>> Public forums - like a Usenet group - are not like having a >>>> whiteboard on your wall. If you ask questions that are topical to >>>> the group, or make comments or replies that are topical to the >>>> group, that's great. When you ramble with wild ideas, post after >>>> post, that's just wasting everyone's time. People don't give any >>>> feedback, and mostly skip them. >>>> >>>> So please, write your ramblings on a bit of paper or a whiteboard. >>>> When you have something worth sharing with other people, and you >>>> want feedback or help, post them to an appropriate group. If it is >>>> actually about C, that's comp.lang.c. If it is about a weird new >>>> language with lots of Unicode signs and a very different syntax, >>>> comp.lang.misc is a better choice. >>>> >>>> This is surely not difficult to understand. >>>> >>> >>> what you say is shallow looking on C so i cant agree... you try to >>> impose you shallow view (just some way like keith thompson want to >>> impose his rigid rukles here that this group is only for standard >>> freaks) >>> >>> i may partially agree that some investigation in possible c syntax/skin >>> are somewhat intermediate - but those are intermediate results kinda >>> needed to obtain final conclusions >>> >>> i dont much can do something with fact that some post dont interest >>> you - belive many posts who many wrote here not interest me also >>> (like things keith writes, or trigraph topic and many more) >>> (regular c stuff is also not so much interesting, its ok, but some >>> deeper c ideas much more interesting) >>> >>> >> >> speaking about this whiteboard or blackboard : also not this group has >> some historical value and people may be interested how this great new >> language by fir was born (great new B or great new C or great new D >> or even more like great new E or ψ or φ still problems with tha name >> > > there is also an option of Ↄ to consider this one may be clever as you may treat C as a mooon shape it suggest that C might enetered a new mooon (black moon) and after this is Ↄ phase - C rising again..assuming C and Ↄ are both parts of O it is some kind of pleasing, but enough to take it? > >> if i took a way to use unicode maybe i should take unicode sign? >> it will make all this printers to print unicode in papers so that >> would be kinda new impact ) >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-11 15:17 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <1180v0m$2tquc$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401954 |
fir pisze: > fir pisze: >> fir pisze: >>> fir pisze: >>>> David Brown pisze: >>>>> On 10/09/2026 19:17, fir wrote: >>>>>> David Brown pisze: >>>>>>> On 10/09/2026 18:21, fir wrote: >>>>>>>> David Brown pisze: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Either this is just a waste of time (and the fact that most of >>>>>>> your posts are replies to your own posts suggest that this is the >>>>>>> case), or you are really interested in making a new language - >>>>>>> and comp.lang.misc would be a better place to discuss it. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> how it suggest that? note thise are 'replies' maybe in some >>>>>> technical sense of a usenet reader..but on thought /write level >>>>>> they are just continuation of thoughts/topic..its rather quite >>>>>> artificall to write ll you got to say in one post and assume you >>>>>> have nothing to add ..i often have things to add >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Public forums - like a Usenet group - are not like having a >>>>> whiteboard on your wall. If you ask questions that are topical to >>>>> the group, or make comments or replies that are topical to the >>>>> group, that's great. When you ramble with wild ideas, post after >>>>> post, that's just wasting everyone's time. People don't give any >>>>> feedback, and mostly skip them. >>>>> >>>>> So please, write your ramblings on a bit of paper or a whiteboard. >>>>> When you have something worth sharing with other people, and you >>>>> want feedback or help, post them to an appropriate group. If it is >>>>> actually about C, that's comp.lang.c. If it is about a weird new >>>>> language with lots of Unicode signs and a very different syntax, >>>>> comp.lang.misc is a better choice. >>>>> >>>>> This is surely not difficult to understand. >>>>> >>>> >>>> what you say is shallow looking on C so i cant agree... you try to >>>> impose you shallow view (just some way like keith thompson want to >>>> impose his rigid rukles here that this group is only for standard >>>> freaks) >>>> >>>> i may partially agree that some investigation in possible c syntax/skin >>>> are somewhat intermediate - but those are intermediate results kinda >>>> needed to obtain final conclusions >>>> >>>> i dont much can do something with fact that some post dont interest >>>> you - belive many posts who many wrote here not interest me also >>>> (like things keith writes, or trigraph topic and many more) >>>> (regular c stuff is also not so much interesting, its ok, but some >>>> deeper c ideas much more interesting) >>>> >>>> >>> >>> speaking about this whiteboard or blackboard : also not this group >>> has some historical value and people may be interested how this great >>> new language by fir was born (great new B or great new C or great new D >>> or even more like great new E or ψ or φ still problems with tha name >>> >> >> there is also an option of Ↄ to consider > > > this one may be clever as you may treat C as a mooon shape it suggest > that C might enetered a new mooon (black moon) and after this is Ↄ > phase - C rising again..assuming C and Ↄ are both parts of O > > it is some kind of pleasing, but enough to take it? > okay for now its somewhat pleasing , so i take it for now, (takin in considaretion my words on barbarians, Ↄ fits in that story ) but no guarantee i dont chamge it (bit for now its reserved) > >> >>> if i took a way to use unicode maybe i should take unicode sign? >>> it will make all this printers to print unicode in papers so that >>> would be kinda new impact ) >> >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-10 21:02 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <117uus5$28t8r$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401887 |
fir pisze:
>
> so if you got a s d (g d f b) j k
>
> it is faa(faaa)aa and so on
>
>
so here it is simple as i said if firs thing is function
then all that things are "faa(fa)aa(faa)aaa" type
buy i also consider more powerfull
"aafaaa" thing
like
"ala" cat "bala"
//cat("ala", "bala")
this makes more problems but it has more power
would be harder to reed for exampla
foo a b cat d e g
but whwn using meaningfull names it should probably be ok, may also use
conventions like naming functions big case and variables lowcase, also
anyone can use ()
Foo a b Cat d e g
still doder need what args of Cat are
Foo a (b Cat d) e g
yet there is also a problem of return values
x_ Foo a (z_ b Cat d) e u_ g
//same as above but also makes 3 assigns
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-10 21:59 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <117v271$2a204$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401904 |
fir pisze:
> fir pisze:
>
>>
>> so if you got a s d (g d f b) j k
> >
>> it is faa(faaa)aa and so on
>>
>>
>
> so here it is simple as i said if firs thing is function
> then all that things are "faa(fa)aa(faa)aaa" type
>
> buy i also consider more powerfull
>
> "aafaaa" thing
>
> like
>
> "ala" cat "bala"
>
> //cat("ala", "bala")
>
> this makes more problems but it has more power
>
> would be harder to reed for exampla
>
> foo a b cat d e g
>
> but whwn using meaningfull names it should probably be ok, may also use
> conventions like naming functions big case and variables lowcase, also
> anyone can use ()
>
>
> Foo a b Cat d e g
>
> still doder need what args of Cat are
>
> Foo a (b Cat d) e g
>
> yet there is also a problem of return values
>
> x_ Foo a (z_ b Cat d) e u_ g
>
> //same as above but also makes 3 assigns
>
>
>
>
>
> i got also havy problem with function definitions header
(in more general case) now i consider something like
_average _delta y ▫avg x
{
average_ (x+y)/2, delta_ abs(y-average)
}
▫ is soem sign denoting definition
its for
int average, int delta (int y) avg (int x)
{
average = (x+y)/2; delta =abs(y-average)
}
not sure if it is good though, seems standable but if its good?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-09-10 16:41 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <117ufjp$22qm7$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #401882 |
fir pisze:
> bart pisze:
>> Further, if this is a function all:
>>
>> F G H I J
>>
>> Then you don't know if this means F(G, H, I, J), or F (G, H(I), J) etc.
>
> this is not a problem in my bare-naked forms tuday as
>
> it would be
>
> F G (H I) J
>
> then you see F is function all that takes 3 args and H is a function
> call that takes one
>
> so this seem totally no problem, but types in headers what you mention
> earlier is a problem..but for now as i sait i only work on "new B"
>
> who knows mayne i should call this language as B i know there is a
> language b but maybe it is lowercase ba and i could use bigcase B ;c
so on summery such type codes
def main { a k g (j 3 3 ), h n 23 , t , G , d f gg u }
are totally clear
you may put expressions (but no hypothesis) and assigments here i guess
by expressions i mean things like a*b/3-h by hypothesis a<4*7 i mean
expressions give arithmetic values and hypthesis logical
amd yet initialisations
_k _j _y _e _gg _u
def main{a k_7 g (j 3*y v_3*9 ),h _n 23,t,G,d(_f 6) gg u}
[it is like c
int k,j,y,e,gg,u;
main{a(k=7,g,j(3*y,v=3*9),h(int n=23),t(),G(),d(int f=6,gg,u);}
its allso is probbaly totally clear (looks like mes but those unicode
signs for initialisation _f and assigment f_ could be added, it seem
that they maybe should be shorter)
in fact i probably add also hypothesis branches but im not yet quite
sure as them and has also not yet else syntax
if taking ! as else sign may add yet
like G>9 H!s
which is G>9?H:s or G()<9? H():s(); if G H s are functions
_k _j _y _e _gg _u
def main{a k_7 g (j 3*y v_3*9 ),h _n 23,t,G<9 H!s ,d(_f 6) gg u}
with some other unicode operator
ₒk ₒj ₒy ₒe ₒgg ₒu
def main{a kₒ7 g (j 3*y vₒ3*9 ),h ₒn 23,t,G<9 H!s ,d(ₒf 6) gg u}
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 7 of 25 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 25 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web