Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #55447 > unrolled thread
| Started by | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-12-26 04:39 -0800 |
| Last post | 2015-01-05 15:21 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 258 — 38 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2014-12-26 04:39 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2014-12-26 05:33 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2014-12-26 06:18 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Xcott Craver <xcottcraver@gmail.com> - 2014-12-26 10:07 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Xavier Roche <xroche@free.fr.NOSPAM.invalid> - 2014-12-26 15:18 +0100
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2014-12-26 09:54 -0600
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Jens Stuckelberger <Jens_Stuckelberger@nowhere.net> - 2014-12-26 17:42 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2014-12-26 10:00 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2014-12-30 09:12 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2014-12-30 09:41 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2014-12-30 10:25 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2014-12-30 12:07 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2014-12-30 13:45 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2014-12-30 16:55 -0500
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2014-12-30 15:28 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> - 2014-12-31 15:21 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-12-31 16:06 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> - 2014-12-31 17:12 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-12-31 18:46 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Xcott Craver <xcottcraver@gmail.com> - 2015-01-01 06:23 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-01-01 14:41 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-01-01 23:32 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-01-01 16:10 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> - 2015-01-02 01:42 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-02 03:55 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> - 2015-01-02 16:22 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-02 09:00 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-01-02 17:13 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-02 09:39 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> - 2015-01-02 18:24 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-01-02 21:56 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-01-02 22:16 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-01-02 14:38 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-02 11:33 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-02 14:20 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Xcott Craver <xcottcraver@gmail.com> - 2015-01-04 15:54 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Xcott Craver <xcottcraver@gmail.com> - 2015-01-04 16:45 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-06 06:05 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-01-03 07:12 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Siri Crews <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-03 10:29 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2014-12-30 21:58 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? christian.bau@cbau.wanadoo.co.uk - 2015-01-04 06:32 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2015-01-05 00:15 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2014-12-31 01:07 -0600
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2014-12-31 03:41 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2014-12-31 08:33 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-01-01 08:38 +1300
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-01-02 12:38 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-02 10:29 -0600
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-01-02 09:51 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-02 12:55 -0600
Programming and people (was Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'?) Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-01-03 05:56 +0000
Re: Programming and people (was Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'?) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-01-03 00:03 -0800
Re: Programming and people (was Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'?) Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-01-03 13:30 +0000
Re: Programming and people (was Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'?) "Chris M. Thomasson" <no@spam.invalid> - 2015-01-04 17:37 -0800
Re: Programming and people (was Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'?) "Chris M. Thomasson" <no@spam.invalid> - 2015-01-04 17:40 -0800
Re: Programming and people (was Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'?) Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2015-01-05 01:48 +0000
Re: Programming and people (was Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'?) "Chris M. Thomasson" <no@spam.invalid> - 2015-01-04 17:52 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2014-12-31 03:37 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-12-30 23:58 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2014-12-31 08:37 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2014-12-31 09:24 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2014-12-30 19:35 -0600
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2014-12-30 20:10 -0600
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-01-03 06:30 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> - 2015-01-03 18:00 +0200
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2015-01-04 22:47 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2014-12-31 04:31 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? "Chris M. Thomasson" <no@spam.invalid> - 2014-12-30 20:19 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-01-01 20:49 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-01-01 23:14 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-01-02 12:38 +1300
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-01-01 23:45 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-01-02 12:51 +1300
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-01-02 14:17 +1300
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-01-02 00:43 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-01-02 23:56 +1300
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-01-02 11:48 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-01-02 04:37 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-01-03 09:39 +1300
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-01-02 13:11 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-01-03 13:46 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-01-03 07:03 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-01-03 18:32 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-01-04 08:09 +1300
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-01-03 12:13 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-01-03 14:13 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-01-03 14:45 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-01-05 15:14 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-01-04 11:52 +1300
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-01-03 15:25 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-02 06:41 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-01-02 14:58 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-02 07:31 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-01-02 16:47 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-01-02 08:31 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-01-03 14:03 +0100
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-01-03 13:16 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-01-03 09:11 -0500
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-01-03 15:07 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-01-04 10:43 -0500
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2015-01-04 14:50 -0600
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-01-04 22:38 +0100
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-01-06 00:49 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-01-06 01:59 +0100
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-01-03 19:13 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-03 15:42 -0600
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-01-03 22:23 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-01-04 22:43 +0100
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-04 14:23 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-01-04 19:38 -0500
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-05 01:08 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-05 01:28 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-01-04 10:54 -0500
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2015-01-04 14:58 -0600
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-01-05 09:59 -0500
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? David Harmon <source@netcom.com> - 2015-01-04 20:50 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-01-05 10:00 -0500
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-01-05 15:29 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-05 10:01 -0600
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2015-01-05 16:11 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-01-05 16:29 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2015-01-05 16:54 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-01-05 17:28 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2015-01-05 18:34 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-01-05 10:56 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2015-01-05 19:05 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-01-05 11:52 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-01-08 21:53 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-01-05 11:07 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-01-05 20:50 +0100
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2015-01-05 20:10 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-01-06 01:10 +0100
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-01-05 08:59 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-05 10:17 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-01-05 18:57 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-05 11:14 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-05 11:27 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-01-05 19:40 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-01-05 19:58 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-05 15:09 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-05 12:29 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-01-05 21:04 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-05 13:38 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-05 13:44 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-05 13:54 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-01-05 12:04 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-01-05 20:54 +0100
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-05 12:02 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-01-05 19:56 +0100
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2015-01-05 19:04 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-01-05 21:02 +0100
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2015-01-05 20:15 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-01-05 12:00 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-01-06 01:17 +0100
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-01-08 21:56 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> - 2015-01-14 22:03 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-01-14 17:54 -0500
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-01-15 09:53 +0100
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2015-01-15 09:06 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-01-15 14:41 +0100
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2015-01-15 14:15 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-01-15 06:30 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2015-01-15 16:15 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fmassei@gmail.com - 2015-01-15 08:35 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-01-15 12:01 -0500
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-01-15 23:08 +0100
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-01-18 16:25 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-01-19 09:01 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-01-15 09:08 -0500
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-01-15 09:08 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fmassei@gmail.com - 2015-01-15 11:49 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-01-15 14:55 -0500
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fmassei@gmail.com - 2015-01-15 12:05 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-01-15 12:22 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fmassei@gmail.com - 2015-01-15 12:27 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-01-15 15:58 -0500
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fmassei@gmail.com - 2015-01-15 13:23 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2015-01-15 13:32 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2015-01-15 13:43 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-01-15 15:49 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2015-01-15 20:34 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fmassei@gmail.com - 2015-01-15 23:50 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2015-01-16 01:12 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2015-01-16 01:30 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fmassei@gmail.com - 2015-01-16 01:43 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-01-16 10:42 -0600
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2015-01-16 17:37 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fmassei@gmail.com - 2015-01-16 10:09 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2015-01-16 02:27 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-01-15 17:25 -0500
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fmassei@gmail.com - 2015-01-15 14:44 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-01-16 10:47 -0600
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-01-16 10:36 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2015-01-15 04:55 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> - 2015-01-15 15:12 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-01-05 13:44 -0500
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-01-04 22:22 +0100
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-01-04 22:29 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-01-05 12:58 +0100
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-01-05 15:14 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-01-05 16:16 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Richard Heathfield <invalid@see.sig.invalid> - 2015-01-05 16:23 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-05 15:38 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-01-05 21:07 +0100
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-01-02 08:13 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-01-05 15:03 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-01-06 08:48 +1300
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-02 10:18 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-01-02 20:16 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-01-02 21:44 -0500
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? A Lurker <none@example.com> - 2015-01-03 09:27 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-01-03 11:54 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-01-03 15:04 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-01-04 10:25 +1300
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-03 15:44 -0600
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-01-04 10:59 +1300
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-01-04 10:56 +1300
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Sjouke Burry <burrynulnulfour@ppllaanneett.nnll> - 2015-01-03 22:30 +0100
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-01-03 14:22 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-01-03 13:58 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-01-03 22:12 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-01-04 11:00 -0500
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? "D. Aaron Sawyer" <aaron@110.net> - 2015-01-04 15:07 -0400
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-04 11:38 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-04 11:41 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-01-05 13:01 +0100
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-05 04:46 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-03-24 12:27 -0700
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-01-04 22:48 +0100
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-03 01:46 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-03 02:17 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-03 04:18 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-03 07:32 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-03 07:42 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-03 07:57 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-03 09:39 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-03 09:43 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-04 01:45 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-11 08:35 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-01-03 11:36 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> - 2015-01-03 18:05 +0200
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-01-03 21:18 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> - 2015-01-03 17:01 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-01-03 09:11 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-01-03 14:39 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-01-03 15:07 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-01-03 13:47 -0500
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-01-03 21:53 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-01-03 14:09 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-01-04 08:16 +1300
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-01-04 15:11 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-01-03 07:08 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Dr Nick <nospam-4@temporary-address.org.uk> - 2015-01-03 15:14 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-01-03 12:22 -0800
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2015-01-12 15:55 -0500
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-01-12 22:18 +0000
Re: do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-01-05 15:21 +0000
Page 1 of 13 [1] 2 3 … 13 Next page →
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-26 04:39 -0800 |
| Subject | do c coders consider themselves as an 'elite'? |
| Message-ID | <6158c4f5-10e4-4bce-8a8f-ca838b4c878f@googlegroups.com> |
i wonder, personally i extremmally praise c language as the best of all languages (not only jus the 'first on the list' but really a language with some deeply inteligent spirit) thus i feel they shoul ;o, but i am not sure how people see this things, If they only treat c as a 'more poor' c++ ;/ or just "plain language, nothing special", or maybe "good for low level and small systems but for bigger system dynamic languagge ere better" ;/or maybe some more complex attitudes to it (my own attitude i already said, it is quite 'elitisctic' for me nearly anything i want to do is to best do it in c, if there is thing not suitable to do in c then it is not much valuable ;/ (a little joking, but not quite, from all teh other languages i sympathisize a bit with javascript though i got not to much time to learn it more] so, are the coders in c superior, normal, inferior?
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-26 05:33 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <7543a3eb-4e97-4be9-99bc-ba6699e86911@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #55447 |
On Friday, December 26, 2014 12:39:14 PM UTC, fir wrote: > > so, are the coders in c superior, normal, inferior? > Far superior.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-26 06:18 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <7b89c76b-6db0-4c70-9204-95bc25c2a11e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #55449 |
W dniu piątek, 26 grudnia 2014 14:33:32 UTC+1 użytkownik Malcolm McLean napisał: > On Friday, December 26, 2014 12:39:14 PM UTC, fir wrote: > > > > so, are the coders in c superior, normal, inferior? > > > Far superior. I also think this way - c world is so elitistic ;\ I almost sorry thet c world is touched by the other programming worlds (yuck, c should be maybe more closed, )
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Xcott Craver <xcottcraver@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-26 10:07 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <fd5339e0-b765-4b12-9219-de7dc9d512e7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #55449 |
On Friday, December 26, 2014 8:33:32 AM UTC-5, Malcolm McLean wrote: > On Friday, December 26, 2014 12:39:14 PM UTC, fir wrote: > > > > so, are the coders in c superior, normal, inferior? > > > Far superior. Well, not counting the C coders that created all those buffer overrun vulnerabilities. --S
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Xavier Roche <xroche@free.fr.NOSPAM.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-26 15:18 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <m7jqmu$iak$1@news.httrack.net> |
| In reply to | #55447 |
Le 26/12/2014 13:39, fir a écrit : > so, are the coders in c superior, normal, inferior? Far superiors. Because C is insanely more complex to master than any other language :) (end of troll)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-26 09:54 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <m7k0bt$dtf$2@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #55447 |
On 12/26/14 6:39 AM, fir wrote: > i wonder, personally i extremmally praise c language as the best of > all languages (not only jus the 'first on the list' but really a > language with some deeply inteligent spirit) thus i feel they shoul > ;o, but i am not sure how people see this things, If they only treat > c as a 'more poor' c++ ;/ or just "plain language, nothing special", > or maybe "good for low level and small systems but for bigger system > dynamic languagge ere better" ;/or maybe some more complex attitudes > to it > > (my own attitude i already said, it is quite 'elitisctic' for me > nearly anything i want to do is to best do it in c, if there is thing > not suitable to do in c then it is not much valuable ;/ (a little > joking, but not quite, from all teh other languages i sympathisize a > bit with javascript though i got not to much time to learn it more] > > so, are the coders in c superior, normal, inferior? Yes, of course. -- Morris Dovey http://www.iedu.com/Solar
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jens Stuckelberger <Jens_Stuckelberger@nowhere.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-26 17:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <m7k6ms$p8q$1@news.albasani.net> |
| In reply to | #55447 |
On Fri, 26 Dec 2014 04:39:06 -0800, fir wrote: > so, are the coders in c superior, normal, inferior? Those C programmers who are assholes think that they are superior. The C community is no different from any other community: In my experience, in a group of at least about 20 people you are almost guaranteed to find at least one individual who is a complete asshole.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-26 10:00 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <a73817ea-57e7-4ee9-b00f-30d21f94f5e7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #55456 |
W dniu piątek, 26 grudnia 2014 18:43:01 UTC+1 użytkownik Jens Stuckelberger napisał: > On Fri, 26 Dec 2014 04:39:06 -0800, fir wrote: > > > so, are the coders in c superior, normal, inferior? > > Those C programmers who are assholes think that they are > superior. The C community is no different from any other community: In my > experience, in a group of at least about 20 people you are almost > guaranteed to find at least one individual who is a complete asshole. well, life sometimes brings sad situations when someone is acting on others this way that the other is a subject of harm etc.. some people just share stupidity (i for example dislike troll-naming simpletons, as i call them, or some other insulters that "insult" you in so common way that they somewhat cheat thet they realy not do this ;/ just like they like to dive themeselves in satisfactoring stupidity of theirs).. but i think i was not talking on this, more on some legend of c programing if it is still alive
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-30 09:12 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <8980df90-f20d-49c0-afb8-3c52f1d22c3f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #55447 |
On Friday, December 26, 2014 6:39:14 AM UTC-6, fir wrote:
> i wonder,
> personally i extremmally praise c language as the best of all languages
No such animal. C is the best language *for certain tasks*, such as
system-level programming and device drivers. It is a *horrible* language
for other tasks (graphical desktop clients, online transaction processing,
anything that requires any level of security). A wrench isn't a hammer
and a chisel isn't a screwdriver; no one tool does *everything* well, and
C is no exception to that rule. It's to your benefit to learn as many
different (and different *kinds*) of languages as possible.
In an earlier age, Real Programmers preferred Fortran, which is an awesome
language for engineering and serious number-crunching. It sucks for
just about anything else.
I once had a classmate who believed anything worth doing was only
worth doing in assembler. He looked down on C the way most C programmers
look down on Visual Basic.
I wish I had the time to really dig into Haskell; it *looks* beautiful,
and can express some solutions in just a few lines that would take
considerably more code in C, such as this Quicksort example (taken from
the Haskell web site):
quicksort :: Ord a => [a] -> [a]
quicksort [] = []
quicksort (p:xs) = (quicksort lesser) ++ [p] ++ (quicksort greater)
where
lesser = filter (< p) xs
greater = filter (>= p) xs
The downside is that this isn't a true Quicksort. The list isn't sorted
in-place; instead, temporary lists are created for each stage of the
process, which is slow and memory-intensive, and the above program can't
deal with very large lists (a version that behaves more like the C version
of Quicksort is also as long, if not longer, than the C version, since
you have to jump through hoops to alter lists in-place).
Haskell isn't a good choice when run-time performance is an issue. However,
its function nature makes it possible to *prove* that a program is correct,
something that's nearly impossible for a C program of any complexity.
> (not only jus the 'first on the list' but really a language with some
> deeply inteligent spirit)
> thus i feel they shoul ;o, but i am not sure how people see this things,
> If they only treat c as a 'more poor' c++ ;/ or just "plain language,
> nothing special", or maybe "good for low level and small systems but
> for bigger system dynamic languagge ere better" ;/or maybe some more
> complex attitudes to it
>
C's just another programming language. It has its uses.
It has also enabled entire classes of malware exploits such as buffer
overruns; this, coupled with its use in building much of the foundation
of the Internet has led to everything from the Morris worm to the
Heartbleed bug. C's very design makes those kinds of hacks ridiculously
easy to pull off.
The usual response to that point is that "if C programmers were just a bit
more careful when writing their code, you wouldn't have these problems."
My response to that response is that if you're counting on the *human* to
be the strong link in the chain, you are well and truly *screwed*.
> (my own attitude i already said, it is quite 'elitisctic' for me nearly
> anything i want to do is to best do it in c, if there is thing not
> suitable to do in c then it is not much valuable ;/ (a little joking, but
> not quite, from all teh other languages i sympathisize a bit with
> javascript though i got not to much time to learn it more]
>
> so, are the coders in c superior, normal, inferior?
There's an old joke:
Q: What do you call someone who graduated from Medical School at the
bottom of his class?
A: Doctor.
The majority of C programmers are *average*, no better or worse on the whole
than their peers who use Javascript or C# or Go or Fortran. Look at the
mess that was OpenSSL - those guys may have been smart, but they weren't
the greatest C programmers on the block.
Actually, the majority of C programmers are probably below average, because
they received below-average educations. It's kind of scary how many people
are *taught* that expressions like "*(a + 2) = *(a--)" have well-defined
behavior (to pull a recent example from Stack Overflow).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-30 09:41 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <c72743b6-6c04-4a32-ae56-575401cb0bcc@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #55587 |
W dniu wtorek, 30 grudnia 2014 18:12:32 UTC+1 użytkownik John Bode napisał: > > I once had a classmate who believed anything worth doing was only > worth doing in assembler. He looked down on C the way most C programmers > look down on Visual Basic. > He might be right, c is coupling with very high generalities (something that assembly do not bother) good learning of c is a matter of many years of day bay day learning (imo) - i wonder what dould i build if i would spend this hard time just on coding in asm (those things are hard to compara and asm seem inpractical in some way but the true is that mastering the generalities of c is longer work that it may seem for some) anyway this is not quite on the topic i got on my mind, now i think that c can be considered elitistic if you can puth some 'strength' or 'strengths' in the source
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-30 10:25 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <1adfd854-daf1-44b2-a7fe-ab42d47b3102@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #55587 |
On Tuesday, December 30, 2014 11:50:55 AM UTC-6, Stefan Ram wrote: > John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> writes: > >C's just another programming language. > > C is number 1 (most popular) on both TIOBE and sourceforge. > C was already number 1 in the 1980s and is still today. > > C is the fastest language on the »language shootout« site. > > Most major operating systems, language implementations and > productivity suites are written in C. > > All other languages that are among the most successful > today have a syntax (curly braces) that is based on C, > often even their names derive from C (C++, C#, Objective-C). > > The ABI of most operating systems is defined to be callable > from C. > > Many microcontrollers only come with an implementation of > one higher language: C. > > »Just another programming language«? Yes.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-30 12:07 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <3084bf42-2ecc-4ee4-8177-c9b7f3eb6b31@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #55587 |
On Tuesday, December 30, 2014 5:12:32 PM UTC, John Bode wrote: > > Actually, the majority of C programmers are probably below average, because > they received below-average educations. It's kind of scary how many people > are *taught* that expressions like "*(a + 2) = *(a--)" have well-defined > behavior (to pull a recent example from Stack Overflow). > There are some really super C programmers like Linus Torvalds. That puts the majority below the arithmetical mean.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-30 13:45 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <7ecdbabb-140f-4358-a6ee-08315a5d0994@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #55598 |
On Tuesday, December 30, 2014 2:07:45 PM UTC-6, Malcolm McLean wrote: > On Tuesday, December 30, 2014 5:12:32 PM UTC, John Bode wrote: > > > > Actually, the majority of C programmers are probably below average, because > > they received below-average educations. It's kind of scary how many people > > are *taught* that expressions like "*(a + 2) = *(a--)" have well-defined > > behavior (to pull a recent example from Stack Overflow). > > > There are some really super C programmers like Linus Torvalds. That puts the majority > below the arithmetical mean. I admit to mixing up my populations; if we limit the population to all C programmers, then yes, half fall below the mean. If we consider the population of *all* programmers, then I think most C programmers fall below the mean, because most C programmers are taught poorly. The SO example I posted above is, I think, representative of the problem. There are professors out there who are telling their students that expressions like *(a + 2) = *(a--) should have well-defined and expected results. I had professors and TAs who made similar pronouncements, and I had the same mistaken perception of how the language worked until I came here and got beaten over the head by Dan Pop and Kaz and Keith and a few others. There are a lot of people out there who think they know the language really, really well, and I am willing to bet real money that more than half of them are really, really wrong. There's that lovely Geek Interview website that we all pointed and laughed at several years ago. It's still going strong. The C-specific forum is full of people telling each other, in all seriousness, that char * types are always 2 bytes wide, that i++ * i++ * i++ should always yield value X, that an array identifier stores a pointer value, etc., etc., etc. These people are getting jobs. There's a lot of bad mythology that's built up around the C language and C programmers. Yeah, C became very popular. Yes, a lot of our current computing infrastructure has been built on it (God help us all). Yeah, it's fast. Yeah, it has some clever ideas that make it fun to work with. That doesn't make it *special*. That doesn't make it the "lingua fraca" of Computer Science. It really is *just another goddamned programming language* in a long list of programming languages, some of which were just as important as C (Fortran, Cobol). It doesn't make C programmers any more hot shit than old school Fortran (read: Real) programmers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-30 16:55 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <54A31F35.6090708@verizon.net> |
| In reply to | #55604 |
On 12/30/2014 04:45 PM, John Bode wrote: > On Tuesday, December 30, 2014 2:07:45 PM UTC-6, Malcolm McLean wrote: >> On Tuesday, December 30, 2014 5:12:32 PM UTC, John Bode wrote: >>> >>> Actually, the majority of C programmers are probably below average, because >>> they received below-average educations. It's kind of scary how many people >>> are *taught* that expressions like "*(a + 2) = *(a--)" have well-defined >>> behavior (to pull a recent example from Stack Overflow). >>> >> There are some really super C programmers like Linus Torvalds. That puts the majority >> below the arithmetical mean. > > I admit to mixing up my populations; if we limit the population to all > C programmers, then yes, half fall below the mean. If we consider the > population of *all* programmers, then I think most C programmers fall > below the mean, because most C programmers are taught poorly. To make your point, it's not sufficient to show that C is taught poorly - in order to justify a claim that C programmers fall below the mean, you also have to prove that other languages are NOT taught poorly. I doubt that there's any language which is comparable to C in power, for which you'd have any trouble collecting similar anecdotes.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-30 15:28 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <13801829-c52b-4876-a67b-0c62adefdad9@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #55607 |
On Tuesday, December 30, 2014 3:55:11 PM UTC-6, James Kuyper wrote: > On 12/30/2014 04:45 PM, John Bode wrote: > > On Tuesday, December 30, 2014 2:07:45 PM UTC-6, Malcolm McLean wrote: > >> On Tuesday, December 30, 2014 5:12:32 PM UTC, John Bode wrote: > >>> > >>> Actually, the majority of C programmers are probably below average, because > >>> they received below-average educations. It's kind of scary how many people > >>> are *taught* that expressions like "*(a + 2) = *(a--)" have well-defined > >>> behavior (to pull a recent example from Stack Overflow). > >>> > >> There are some really super C programmers like Linus Torvalds. That puts the majority > >> below the arithmetical mean. > > > > I admit to mixing up my populations; if we limit the population to all > > C programmers, then yes, half fall below the mean. If we consider the > > population of *all* programmers, then I think most C programmers fall > > below the mean, because most C programmers are taught poorly. > > To make your point, it's not sufficient to show that C is taught poorly > - in order to justify a claim that C programmers fall below the mean, > you also have to prove that other languages are NOT taught poorly. I > doubt that there's any language which is comparable to C in power, for > which you'd have any trouble collecting similar anecdotes. Obviously you're correct, but the point I'm trying to get across (poorly, I admit) is that C lends itself to being taught badly in ways that Python and Java don't. There's more to get wrong. Java forces a well-defined order of evaluation; it doesn't expose operations on raw memory addresses; it doesn't allow you to wander through memory you don't own. It doesn't set you up for failure the way C does.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-31 15:21 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <VvUow.1051217$412.536557@fx30.iad> |
| In reply to | #55615 |
On 2014-12-30, John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tuesday, December 30, 2014 3:55:11 PM UTC-6, James Kuyper wrote: >> On 12/30/2014 04:45 PM, John Bode wrote: >> > On Tuesday, December 30, 2014 2:07:45 PM UTC-6, Malcolm McLean wrote: >> >> On Tuesday, December 30, 2014 5:12:32 PM UTC, John Bode wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Actually, the majority of C programmers are probably below average, >> >>> because >> >>> they received below-average educations. It's kind of scary how many >> >>> people >> >>> are *taught* that expressions like "*(a + 2) = *(a--)" have >> >>> well-defined >> >>> behavior (to pull a recent example from Stack Overflow). >> >>> >> >> There are some really super C programmers like Linus Torvalds. That >>> >> puts the majority >> >> below the arithmetical mean. >> > >> > I admit to mixing up my populations; if we limit the population to all >> > C programmers, then yes, half fall below the mean. If we consider the >> > population of *all* programmers, then I think most C programmers fall >> > below the mean, because most C programmers are taught poorly. >> >> To make your point, it's not sufficient to show that C is taught poorly >> - in order to justify a claim that C programmers fall below the mean, >> you also have to prove that other languages are NOT taught poorly. I >> doubt that there's any language which is comparable to C in power, for >> which you'd have any trouble collecting similar anecdotes. > > Obviously you're correct, but the point I'm trying to get across (poorly, > I admit) is that C lends itself to being taught badly in ways that Python > and Java don't. There's more to get wrong. Java forces a well-defined > order of evaluation; it doesn't expose operations on raw memory addresses; > it doesn't allow you to wander through memory you don't own. It doesn't > set you up for failure the way C does. I understand your point but have noticed that in many cases programmers in many different languages may understand the usage of their language but not how it relates to computing in general. There is this idea that programmers are rockstars who grind out code vs. craftsmen with a skill and knowledge that can elevate craft to art. They write poorly because they can in the world of web apps, and when they come to write for a more demanding forum they are ill prepared. I believe there is a trend to teach computer science in Python because of a, supposed, ease of learning that allows the student to focus on the principles of computer science. Perhaps this is the dichotomy of view between the lambda calculas and turing machine but since the hardware programs run on are turing in nature it strikes me that programmers should have a clear understanding of that model in computer science. In my opinion C requires that where some other languages benefit from it but don't require it. -- http://www.softsprocket.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-31 16:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <877fx7yfbo.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #55634 |
Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> writes: <snip> > I believe there is a trend to teach computer science in Python because > of a, supposed, ease of learning that allows the student to focus on the > principles of computer science. Perhaps this is the dichotomy of view > between the lambda calculas and turing machine but since the hardware > programs run on are turing in nature it strikes me that programmers > should have a clear understanding of that model in computer science. That's an odd use of the term "Turing". All the things that make Turing machines interesting* are not embodied in real machines. I think you are simply referring to the fact that real machines have a writable store. I.e. the dichotomy is between the functional and the assignment- based style. * I.e. the trivial number of "instructions", the lack of any pre-determined data representation, and the unbounded storage. -- Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-31 17:12 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <t8Wow.145492$wG7.22090@fx11.iad> |
| In reply to | #55635 |
On 2014-12-31, Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote: > Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> writes: ><snip> >> I believe there is a trend to teach computer science in Python because >> of a, supposed, ease of learning that allows the student to focus on the >> principles of computer science. Perhaps this is the dichotomy of view >> between the lambda calculas and turing machine but since the hardware >> programs run on are turing in nature it strikes me that programmers >> should have a clear understanding of that model in computer science. > > That's an odd use of the term "Turing". All the things that make Turing > machines interesting* are not embodied in real machines. I think you > are simply referring to the fact that real machines have a writable > store. I.e. the dichotomy is between the functional and the assignment- > based style. > I was referring to what is perhaps overly obvious; computers are machines and while programming languages can abstract that away there is still an effect. C reminds me that that the architecture of the machine impacts the running of a program even if other programmers have attempted to hide the details from me. > * I.e. the trivial number of "instructions", the lack of any > pre-determined data representation, and the unbounded storage. > Those things could be said of lambda calculus as well. There is no machine in lambda calculus. -- http://www.softsprocket.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-12-31 18:46 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <871tnfy7w8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #55639 |
Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> writes: > On 2014-12-31, Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote: >> Greg Martin <greg.at.softsprocket@dot.com> writes: >><snip> >>> I believe there is a trend to teach computer science in Python because >>> of a, supposed, ease of learning that allows the student to focus on the >>> principles of computer science. Perhaps this is the dichotomy of view >>> between the lambda calculas and turing machine but since the hardware >>> programs run on are turing in nature it strikes me that programmers >>> should have a clear understanding of that model in computer science. >> >> That's an odd use of the term "Turing". All the things that make Turing >> machines interesting* are not embodied in real machines. I think you >> are simply referring to the fact that real machines have a writable >> store. I.e. the dichotomy is between the functional and the assignment- >> based style. > > I was referring to what is perhaps overly obvious; computers are > machines and while programming languages can abstract that away there > is still an effect. C reminds me that that the architecture of the > machine impacts the running of a program even if other programmers > have attempted to hide the details from me. I see. It was the "machineness", not the fact that TMs alter their storage, that you were referencing. I think it's still an odd use of the term because TM are,m to me very abstract things. I don't think of them as machine-like, at least not any more that think of lambda calculus reduction as machine-like, but I see what you mean now. <snip> -- Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Xcott Craver <xcottcraver@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-01 06:23 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <f2af8132-cbcf-488e-a5b3-1cff4194b27b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #55634 |
On Wednesday, December 31, 2014 10:21:38 AM UTC-5, Greg Martin wrote: > > I believe there is a trend to teach computer science in Python because > of a, supposed, ease of learning that allows the student to focus on the > principles of computer science. I also see this trend, but I don't think it's because it allows the student to "focus on the principles of computer science"---I don't see that focus at all. I think a lot of those courses use Python for the opposite reason, that it's easy enough for students to write a few programs without having to learn any CS principles or grapple with anything really complicated. We see transfer students every year with credit for some some computing class entirely in Python, and we just don't accept Python courses as transfer credit for our school anymore. When we did, those students would fail pretty hard in subsequent courses. I'm sure there are decent Python-based courses out there, but there are too many that are just super-watered down "programming for dummies" courses. It's a bit like the situation with Javascript: not a bad language at all, plenty of advanced features, but when someone tells you that his or her sole programming background is in Javascript, there's a pretty good chance that person will fail an algorithms course. --S
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 13 [1] 2 3 … 13 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web