Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c > #101543 > unrolled thread

Naming convention for structs and types

Started by"Fernando D. Bozzo" <fdbozzo@gmail.com>
First post2017-01-12 11:48 -0800
Last post2017-01-13 23:46 +0800
Articles 20 on this page of 190 — 24 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c

Contents

  Naming convention for structs and types "Fernando D. Bozzo" <fdbozzo@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 11:48 -0800
    Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 11:58 -0800
      Re: Naming convention for structs and types Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-01-13 01:35 +0000
        Re: Naming convention for structs and types Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-01-12 17:43 -0800
        Re: Naming convention for structs and types Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-01-13 02:19 +0000
        Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 19:26 -0800
          Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Fernando D. Bozzo" <fdbozzo@gmail.com> - 2017-01-13 00:28 -0800
          Re: Naming convention for structs and types Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-01-13 10:56 +0000
            Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-01-16 12:23 -0800
          Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-13 12:49 +0100
            Re: Naming convention for structs and types Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-01-13 05:03 -0800
              Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-13 16:00 +0100
                Re: Naming convention for structs and types Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-01-13 18:28 -0800
                  Re: Naming convention for structs and types supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-01-13 18:58 -0800
                  Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-14 14:07 +0100
                  Re: Naming convention for structs and types Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-01-14 14:31 -0800
            Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-01-13 09:20 -0800
              Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-13 18:47 +0100
                Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-01-13 10:02 -0800
                  Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-13 21:42 +0100
                    Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-01-13 12:55 -0800
                    Re: Naming convention for structs and types supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-01-13 13:09 -0800
                      Re: Naming convention for structs and types Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2017-01-15 21:01 -0800
      Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2017-01-12 17:48 -0800
        Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 19:35 -0800
          Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2017-01-12 19:45 -0800
            Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 19:51 -0800
              Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2017-01-12 21:12 -0800
              Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-13 12:53 +0100
                Re: Naming convention for structs and types Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-01-13 08:59 -0800
                  Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-13 18:48 +0100
                  Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2017-01-13 18:03 -0800
                  Re: Naming convention for structs and types raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2017-01-18 12:05 +0000
      Re: Naming convention for structs and types Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-13 19:30 +1300
        Re: Naming convention for structs and types Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-01-13 13:00 +0000
          Re: Naming convention for structs and types Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2017-01-13 10:43 -0800
            Re: Naming convention for structs and types Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-01-13 18:52 +0000
              Re: Naming convention for structs and types Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2017-01-13 12:56 -0800
                Re: Naming convention for structs and types Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-14 10:54 +1300
                  Re: Naming convention for structs and types BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-01-13 22:00 +0000
                    Re: Naming convention for structs and types Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-14 11:18 +1300
                      Re: Naming convention for structs and types BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-01-14 00:59 +0000
                        Re: Naming convention for structs and types Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2017-01-13 17:12 -0800
                          Re: Naming convention for structs and types Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-14 14:47 +1300
                        Re: Naming convention for structs and types Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-01-14 01:36 +0000
                          Re: Naming convention for structs and types BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-01-14 11:26 +0000
                            Re: Naming convention for structs and types Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-01-14 14:11 +0000
                            Re: Naming convention for structs and types Parity Error <kgf@quiscurat.net> - 2017-01-15 08:33 +0000
                              Re: Naming convention for structs and types Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-01-15 02:52 -0800
                                Re: Naming convention for structs and types Jean-Marc Bourguet <jm@bourguet.org> - 2017-01-15 14:48 +0100
                          Re: Naming convention for structs and types raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2017-01-18 12:07 +0000
                        Re: Naming convention for structs and types Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-14 14:40 +1300
                        Re: Naming convention for structs and types Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-01-14 11:28 +0000
                          Re: Naming convention for structs and types BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-01-14 11:48 +0000
                            Re: Naming convention for structs and types Jean-Marc Bourguet <jm@bourguet.org> - 2017-01-14 13:17 +0100
                            Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-14 14:21 +0100
                              Re: Naming convention for structs and types Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-01-14 13:27 +0000
                                Re: Naming convention for structs and types BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-01-14 14:00 +0000
                                  Re: Naming convention for structs and types Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-01-14 14:11 +0000
                                  Re: Naming convention for structs and types Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-01-14 14:12 +0000
                                  Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-14 16:18 +0100
                                    Re: Naming convention for structs and types BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-01-14 16:31 +0000
                                      Re: Naming convention for structs and types Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-01-14 18:50 +0000
                                        Re: Naming convention for structs and types BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-01-14 19:48 +0000
                                          Re: Naming convention for structs and types Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-15 10:15 +1300
                                        Re: Naming convention for structs and types Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-01-14 20:12 +0000
                                      Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-14 23:31 +0100
                                    Re: Naming convention for structs and types Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2017-01-14 10:28 -0800
                                      Re: Naming convention for structs and types Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-01-14 18:52 +0000
                                        Re: Naming convention for structs and types Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-01-14 14:49 -0800
                                  Re: Naming convention for structs and types Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-01-14 14:41 -0800
                                    Re: Naming convention for structs and types BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-01-14 23:03 +0000
                                      Re: Naming convention for structs and types Parity Error <kgf@quiscurat.net> - 2017-01-15 08:41 +0000
                                        Re: Naming convention for structs and types BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-01-16 20:01 +0000
                                          Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-17 00:19 +0100
                                            Re: Naming convention for structs and types BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-01-17 00:29 +0000
                                              Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-17 09:12 +0100
                                                Re: Naming convention for structs and types BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-01-17 11:59 +0000
                                                  Re: Naming convention for structs and types BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-01-17 13:16 +0000
                                                  OT: Bash tab completion (was: Naming convention for structs and types) Andreas Perstinger <andipersti@gmail.com> - 2017-01-17 13:27 +0000
                                                    Re: OT: Bash tab completion BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-01-17 13:59 +0000
                                                      Re: OT: Bash tab completion David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-17 15:49 +0100
                                                      Re: OT: Bash tab completion fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2017-01-17 07:06 -0800
                                                        Re: OT: Bash tab completion fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2017-01-17 07:43 -0800
                                                  Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-17 15:18 +0100
                                                    Re: Naming convention for structs and types BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-01-17 19:26 +0000
                                                      Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-17 21:53 +0100
                                                        Re: Naming convention for structs and types Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-01-17 20:56 +0000
                                                          Re: Naming convention for structs and types BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-01-17 21:38 +0000
                                                            Re: Naming convention for structs and types fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2017-01-17 14:22 -0800
                                                            Re: Naming convention for structs and types Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-01-17 23:43 +0000
                                                              Re: Naming convention for structs and types BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-01-18 00:33 +0000
                                                                Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-18 11:03 +0100
                                                                  Re: Naming convention for structs and types BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-01-18 12:15 +0000
                                                                    Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-18 13:59 +0100
                                                                      Re: Naming convention for structs and types BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-01-18 15:45 +0000
                                                                        Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-18 17:28 +0100
                                                                        Re: Naming convention for structs and types supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-01-18 09:30 -0800
                                                                Re: Naming convention for structs and types Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-18 23:18 +1300
                                                        Re: Naming convention for structs and types BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-01-17 21:22 +0000
                                                          Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-18 12:47 +0100
                                                            Re: Naming convention for structs and types fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2017-01-18 08:11 -0800
                                                            Re: Naming convention for structs and types raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2017-01-18 17:17 +0000
                                                              Re: Naming convention for structs and types fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2017-01-18 09:47 -0800
                                                              Re: Naming convention for structs and types Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-01-18 21:20 +0000
                                                                Re: Naming convention for structs and types BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-01-18 22:26 +0000
                                                                  Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-19 00:31 +0100
                                                                    Re: Naming convention for structs and types Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-01-18 15:41 -0800
                                                                    Re: Naming convention for structs and types BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-01-18 23:58 +0000
                                                    Re: Naming convention for structs and types Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-01-17 11:49 -0800
                                                      Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-17 21:56 +0100
                                                        Re: Naming convention for structs and types Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-01-17 13:18 -0800
                                                          Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-18 12:50 +0100
                                                  Re: Naming convention for structs and types Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-18 07:51 +1300
                                                    Re: Naming convention for structs and types BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-01-17 19:50 +0000
                                                      Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-17 21:59 +0100
                                                        Re: Naming convention for structs and types Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-18 17:51 +1300
                                                    Re: Naming convention for structs and types raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2017-01-18 12:15 +0000
                                                      Re: Naming convention for structs and types Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-19 07:52 +1300
                                    Re: Naming convention for structs and types raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2017-01-18 12:09 +0000
                            Re: Naming convention for structs and types Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-01-14 13:26 +0000
                            Re: Naming convention for structs and types Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-15 08:10 +1300
                              Re: Naming convention for structs and types Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2017-01-14 12:28 -0800
                                Re: Naming convention for structs and types Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-15 10:17 +1300
                    Re: Naming convention for structs and types Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2017-01-13 15:12 -0800
                      Re: Naming convention for structs and types Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-14 12:31 +1300
                        Re: Naming convention for structs and types Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2017-01-13 16:03 -0800
            Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2017-01-13 15:57 -0800
              Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2017-01-14 13:29 -0800
          Re: Naming convention for structs and types Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-14 10:45 +1300
        Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-01-16 12:19 -0800
          Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2017-01-16 15:22 -0800
            Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-01-16 16:35 -0800
              Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2017-01-17 17:02 -0800
          Re: Naming convention for structs and types Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-17 20:57 +1300
            Re: Naming convention for structs and types Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-01-17 08:47 +0000
              Re: Naming convention for structs and types Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-18 08:03 +1300
            Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-01-17 07:04 -0800
              Re: Naming convention for structs and types Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-18 08:01 +1300
                Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-01-17 11:47 -0800
                  Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-17 22:16 +0100
                    Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-01-17 15:44 -0800
                      Re: Naming convention for structs and types Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-18 17:59 +1300
                        Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-01-18 04:42 -0800
                          Re: Naming convention for structs and types Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-19 07:57 +1300
                            Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-01-18 11:22 -0800
                      Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-18 13:36 +0100
                        Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-01-18 05:07 -0800
                          Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-18 16:09 +0100
                            Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-01-18 07:36 -0800
                              Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-18 17:32 +0100
                  Re: Naming convention for structs and types Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-18 17:55 +1300
              Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2017-01-19 22:28 -0800
                Re: Naming convention for structs and types Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-01-20 08:36 +0000
                Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2017-01-20 04:27 -0800
    Re: Naming convention for structs and types luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 12:01 -0800
      Re: Naming convention for structs and types Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-01-12 20:11 +0000
        Re: Naming convention for structs and types Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-01-12 12:50 -0800
          Re: Naming convention for structs and types Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-01-12 21:02 +0000
            Re: Naming convention for structs and types Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-01-12 13:26 -0800
              Re: Naming convention for structs and types Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-01-12 21:35 +0000
        Re: Naming convention for structs and types luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 16:37 -0800
        Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-13 12:57 +0100
          Re: Naming convention for structs and types Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2017-01-13 16:38 +0000
            Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-13 17:52 +0100
    Re: Naming convention for structs and types Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-01-12 20:07 +0000
    Re: Naming convention for structs and types Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 12:45 -0800
    Re: Naming convention for structs and types Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-01-12 13:01 -0800
    Re: Naming convention for structs and types jadill33@gmail.com - 2017-01-12 13:57 -0800
    Re: Naming convention for structs and types John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2017-01-12 13:59 -0800
      Re: Naming convention for structs and types Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-01-12 15:08 -0800
      Re: Naming convention for structs and types Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2017-01-14 10:33 -0800
        Re: Naming convention for structs and types Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-01-14 15:20 -0800
          Re: Naming convention for structs and types Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2017-01-15 21:31 -0800
    Re: Naming convention for structs and types Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-13 19:43 +1300
      Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Fernando D. Bozzo" <fdbozzo@gmail.com> - 2017-01-13 01:00 -0800
        Re: Naming convention for structs and types James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-01-13 13:03 -0500
          Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Fernando D. Bozzo" <fdbozzo@gmail.com> - 2017-01-13 16:02 -0800
          Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-14 13:36 +0100
            Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Fernando D. Bozzo" <fdbozzo@gmail.com> - 2017-01-14 05:22 -0800
              Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-14 17:27 +0100
            Re: Naming convention for structs and types raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2017-01-18 21:05 +0000
              Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-19 09:48 +0100
                Re: Naming convention for structs and types James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-01-19 13:31 -0500
                  Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-19 21:18 +0100
                Re: Naming convention for structs and types raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2017-01-22 17:10 +0000
                  Re: Naming convention for structs and types David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-01-22 18:27 +0100
      Re: Naming convention for structs and types James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-01-13 12:49 -0500
        Re: Naming convention for structs and types supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-01-13 09:55 -0800
    Re: Naming convention for structs and types "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2017-01-13 23:46 +0800

Page 3 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 10  Next page →

#101676

FromIan Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com>
Date2017-01-14 11:18 +1300
Message-ID<edt21cF4adeU4@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#101673
On 01/14/17 11:00 AM, BartC wrote:
> On 13/01/2017 21:54, Ian Collins wrote:
>> On 01/14/17 09:56 AM, Malcolm McLean wrote:
>>> On Friday, January 13, 2017 at 6:52:14 PM UTC, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>>> On 13/01/17 18:43, Malcolm McLean wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Also, some C++ compilers seem to throw wobblies when asked to
>>>>> link with C.
>>>>
>>>> Not when you ask nice.
>>>>
>>> The problem is that modern compilers have a whole massive list of
>>> options,
>>> If the options are not set up correctly, it fails with confusing
>>> messages (currently my XCode compiler is reporting a fail because
>>> some post-processing script doesn't find the right file, but in fact
>>> produces a workable plug-in).
>>> Then half the time the options are not set directly but via CMake,
>>> which is effectively a programming language for building IDE files.
>>>
>>> When things go wrong, as they frequently do, it is very time-consuming.
>>
>> In a word, bollocks.  If C++ compilers "throw wobblies when asked to
>> link with C", no hosted C++ program would ever link.  What do you think
>> system libraries are written in, Martian?
>
> He didn't say it can't be done, but that it can give problems.
>
> Of course, if your entire job is spent day in and day out using and
> configuring all these different tools, then you're going to think it's easy.
>
> To a more casual user, the problems may be insurmountable.

In a word, more bollocks.  Just writing a simple C++ hello world program 
and then doing

CC helloWorld.cc

will be linking C and C++ libraries.  There are no "massive list of 
options", it just works.

-- 
Ian

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#101700

FromBartC <bc@freeuk.com>
Date2017-01-14 00:59 +0000
Message-ID<o5bt2d$ul1$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#101676
On 13/01/2017 22:18, Ian Collins wrote:
> On 01/14/17 11:00 AM, BartC wrote:

>> To a more casual user, the problems may be insurmountable.
>
> In a word, more bollocks.  Just writing a simple C++ hello world program
> and then doing
>
> CC helloWorld.cc
>
> will be linking C and C++ libraries.  There are no "massive list of
> options", it just works.

If I try this program, which I believe is C++:

$ cat hello.cc
#include <iostream>

int main(void) {
std::cout << "HELLO WORLD" << "\n";
}

And then use your suggestion (but with "cc" as "CC" is not found), I get 
this:

$ cc hello.cc
/tmp/ccXxAgos.o: In function `main':
hello.cc:(.text+0xe): undefined reference to `std::cout'
hello.cc:(.text+0x13): undefined reference to `std::basic_ostream<char, 
std::char_traits<char> >& std::operator<< <std::char_traits<char> 
 >(std::basic_ostream<char, std::char_traits<char> >&, char const*)'
hello.cc:(.text+0x22): undefined reference to `std::basic_ostream<char, 
std::char_traits<char> >& std::operator<< <std::char_traits<char> 
 >(std::basic_ostream<char, std::char_traits<char> >&, char const*)'
/tmp/ccXxAgos.o: In function 
`__static_initialization_and_destruction_0(int, int)':
hello.cc:(.text+0x52): undefined reference to `std::ios_base::Init::Init()'
hello.cc:(.text+0x67): undefined reference to `std::ios_base::Init::~Init()'
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status

What is CC or cc? I don't even know. But if I try:

  g++ hello.cc

then it works.

I'm sorry, but things *do* go wrong, even if you clearly don't believe me.

-- 
Bartc

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#101702

FromMalcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com>
Date2017-01-13 17:12 -0800
Message-ID<6b889a23-1052-4d54-99e4-91d893b928c6@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#101700
On Saturday, January 14, 2017 at 12:59:30 AM UTC, Bart wrote:
> On 13/01/2017 22:18, Ian Collins wrote:
> > On 01/14/17 11:00 AM, BartC wrote:
> 
> >> To a more casual user, the problems may be insurmountable.
> >
> > In a word, more bollocks.  Just writing a simple C++ hello world program
> > and then doing
> >
> > CC helloWorld.cc
> >
> > will be linking C and C++ libraries.  There are no "massive list of
> > options", it just works.
> 
> If I try this program, which I believe is C++:
> 
> $ cat hello.cc
> #include <iostream>
> 
> int main(void) {
> std::cout << "HELLO WORLD" << "\n";
> }
> 
> And then use your suggestion (but with "cc" as "CC" is not found), I get 
> this:
> 
> $ cc hello.cc
>
> hello.cc:(.text+0x13): undefined reference to `std::basic_ostream<char, 
> std::char_traits<char> >& std::operator<< <std::char_traits<char> 
>
> I'm sorry, but things *do* go wrong, even if you clearly don't believe me.
> 
That's the sort of thing that makes trouble shooting difficult.

A pure C compiler would simply report std as an unidentified symbol 
and :: as a syntax error. Because the compiler is not C++ naive
it throws that at you.  char_traits<char> is a red herring, but how
are you to know unless you've got bitter experience?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#101709

FromIan Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com>
Date2017-01-14 14:47 +1300
Message-ID<edtea5Ftl8kU2@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#101702
On 01/14/17 02:12 PM, Malcolm McLean wrote:
> On Saturday, January 14, 2017 at 12:59:30 AM UTC, Bart wrote:
>> On 13/01/2017 22:18, Ian Collins wrote:
>>> On 01/14/17 11:00 AM, BartC wrote:
>>
>>>> To a more casual user, the problems may be insurmountable.
>>>
>>> In a word, more bollocks.  Just writing a simple C++ hello world program
>>> and then doing
>>>
>>> CC helloWorld.cc
>>>
>>> will be linking C and C++ libraries.  There are no "massive list of
>>> options", it just works.
>>
>> If I try this program, which I believe is C++:
>>
>> $ cat hello.cc
>> #include <iostream>
>>
>> int main(void) {
>> std::cout << "HELLO WORLD" << "\n";
>> }
>>
>> And then use your suggestion (but with "cc" as "CC" is not found), I get
>> this:
>>
>> $ cc hello.cc
>>
>> hello.cc:(.text+0x13): undefined reference to `std::basic_ostream<char,
>> std::char_traits<char> >& std::operator<< <std::char_traits<char>
>>
>> I'm sorry, but things *do* go wrong, even if you clearly don't believe me.
>>
> That's the sort of thing that makes trouble shooting difficult.

Utter nonsense.  It's the sort off thing that happens when someone 
without a clue uses the wrong tool.

-- 
Ian

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#101704

FromBen Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk>
Date2017-01-14 01:36 +0000
Message-ID<87o9zao22f.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
In reply to#101700
BartC <bc@freeuk.com> writes:

> On 13/01/2017 22:18, Ian Collins wrote:
>> On 01/14/17 11:00 AM, BartC wrote:
>
>>> To a more casual user, the problems may be insurmountable.
>>
>> In a word, more bollocks.  Just writing a simple C++ hello world program
>> and then doing
>>
>> CC helloWorld.cc
>>
>> will be linking C and C++ libraries.  There are no "massive list of
>> options", it just works.
>
> If I try this program, which I believe is C++:
>
> $ cat hello.cc
> #include <iostream>
>
> int main(void) {
> std::cout << "HELLO WORLD" << "\n";
> }
>
> And then use your suggestion (but with "cc" as "CC" is not found), I
> get this:
>
> $ cc hello.cc
> /tmp/ccXxAgos.o: In function `main':
> hello.cc:(.text+0xe): undefined reference to `std::cout'
> hello.cc:(.text+0x13): undefined reference to
> `std::basic_ostream<char, std::char_traits<char> >& std::operator<<
> <std::char_traits<char> 
>>(std::basic_ostream<char, std::char_traits<char> >&, char const*)'
> hello.cc:(.text+0x22): undefined reference to
> `std::basic_ostream<char, std::char_traits<char> >& std::operator<<
> <std::char_traits<char> 
>>(std::basic_ostream<char, std::char_traits<char> >&, char const*)'
> /tmp/ccXxAgos.o: In function
> `__static_initialization_and_destruction_0(int, int)':
> hello.cc:(.text+0x52): undefined reference to `std::ios_base::Init::Init()'
> hello.cc:(.text+0x67): undefined reference to `std::ios_base::Init::~Init()'
> collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
>
> What is CC or cc? I don't even know.

Do you not know how to find out?  My system has a manual system for
explaining commands.

> But if I try:
>
>  g++ hello.cc
>
> then it works.
>
> I'm sorry, but things *do* go wrong, even if you clearly don't believe
> me.

Ian was calling your claim of insurmountable problems linking C and C++
bollocks and yet here you are, surmounting them with ease.  Surely even
the most casual user would eventually find out the name of the
compiler.

-- 
Ben.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#101732

FromBartC <bc@freeuk.com>
Date2017-01-14 11:26 +0000
Message-ID<o5d1qb$idu$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#101704
On 14/01/2017 01:36, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> BartC <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>
>> On 13/01/2017 22:18, Ian Collins wrote:

>>> In a word, more bollocks.  Just writing a simple C++ hello world program
>>> and then doing
>>>
>>> CC helloWorld.cc

>> I'm sorry, but things *do* go wrong, even if you clearly don't believe
>> me.
>
> Ian was calling your claim of insurmountable problems linking C and C++
> bollocks and yet here you are, surmounting them with ease.  Surely even
> the most casual user would eventually find out the name of the
> compiler.

This was the simplest of all possible tasks, yet Ian dished out the 
wrong advice, or advice that that didn't work. Suggesting CC when cc 
doesn't exist, and cc is apparently a synonym for gcc. Yet this was 
supposed to be a C++ program.

man CC and man cc say nothing about CC or cc but show info about gcc.

Now imagine this advice was buried inside a makefile for hidden in a 
script behind variables.

-- 
Bartc

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#101756

FromBen Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk>
Date2017-01-14 14:11 +0000
Message-ID<877f5xohoo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
In reply to#101732
BartC <bc@freeuk.com> writes:

> On 14/01/2017 01:36, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>> BartC <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 13/01/2017 22:18, Ian Collins wrote:
>
>>>> In a word, more bollocks.  Just writing a simple C++ hello world program
>>>> and then doing
>>>>
>>>> CC helloWorld.cc
>
>>> I'm sorry, but things *do* go wrong, even if you clearly don't believe
>>> me.
>>
>> Ian was calling your claim of insurmountable problems linking C and C++
>> bollocks and yet here you are, surmounting them with ease.  Surely even
>> the most casual user would eventually find out the name of the
>> compiler.
>
> This was the simplest of all possible tasks, yet Ian dished out the
> wrong advice, or advice that that didn't work.

No he didn't.  You are in full-blown politician mode.  We both know he
was giving a counter-example, not "dishing out advice".

<snip>
-- 
Ben.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#101834

FromParity Error <kgf@quiscurat.net>
Date2017-01-15 08:33 +0000
Message-ID<QtGeA.904292$WF4.698484@fx39.am4>
In reply to#101732
On 14/01/17 11:26, BartC wrote:
> On 14/01/2017 01:36, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>> BartC <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 13/01/2017 22:18, Ian Collins wrote:
>
>>>> In a word, more bollocks.  Just writing a simple C++ hello world
>>>> program
>>>> and then doing
>>>>
>>>> CC helloWorld.cc
>
>>> I'm sorry, but things *do* go wrong, even if you clearly don't believe
>>> me.
>>
>> Ian was calling your claim of insurmountable problems linking C and C++
>> bollocks and yet here you are, surmounting them with ease.  Surely even
>> the most casual user would eventually find out the name of the
>> compiler.
>
> This was the simplest of all possible tasks, yet Ian dished out the
> wrong advice, or advice that that didn't work. Suggesting CC when cc
> doesn't exist

CC is makefile-speak for compiler of your choice; at the top of many 
makefiles you'll see something like

CC=bcc32

or

CC=cl

or

CC=gcc

all of which will compile either C or C++; CC is a variable

it's not reasonable for a C programmer not to know this already, so why 
don't you?

there is more to c programming than printf and stdio.h, you might want 
to read up on makefiles

>, and cc is apparently a synonym for gcc.

you mean you thought he maent CC helloworld.gcc ? why would you think 
that? Or do you think he meant gcc helloworld.cc ? if so, why would you 
write cc when he wrote CC?

> Yet this was
> supposed to be a C++ program.
>
> man CC and man cc say nothing about CC or cc but show info about gcc.
>
> Now imagine this advice was buried inside a makefile for hidden in a
> script behind variables.

why does it need to be hidden anywhere? it's bleedin obvious

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#101839

FromKeith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org>
Date2017-01-15 02:52 -0800
Message-ID<lnvatgh9x2.fsf@kst-u.example.com>
In reply to#101834
Parity Error <kgf@quiscurat.net> writes:
> On 14/01/17 11:26, BartC wrote:
>> On 14/01/2017 01:36, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>> BartC <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 13/01/2017 22:18, Ian Collins wrote:
>>
>>>>> In a word, more bollocks.  Just writing a simple C++ hello world
>>>>> program
>>>>> and then doing
>>>>>
>>>>> CC helloWorld.cc
[...]
> CC is makefile-speak for compiler of your choice; at the top of many 
> makefiles you'll see something like
> CC=bcc32
> or
> CC=cl
> or
> CC=gcc
> all of which will compile either C or C++; CC is a variable

That's not what Ian was referring to.  Even in a Makefile,
    CC helloWorld.cc
will invoke a command named "CC".  To explicitly invoked the command
named by the CC variable, you'd use
    $(CC) helloWorld.cc

But that wouldn't make sense either.  CC in a Makefile is conventionally
the name of the C compiler; CXX refers to the C++ compiler.  And even
though the "gcc" command is able to compile either C or C++, it's
traditional to use "gcc" when compiling C and "g++" when compiling C++
(it matters if you compile and link in a single command).

On the Solaris system Ian users, "CC is literally the name of the
command that invokes the C++ compiler.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#101844

FromJean-Marc Bourguet <jm@bourguet.org>
Date2017-01-15 14:48 +0100
Message-ID<8760lge8nx.fsf@news.bourguet.org>
In reply to#101839
Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> writes:

> On the Solaris system Ian users, "CC is literally the name of the
> command that invokes the C++ compiler.

CC was also the name of the driver of CFront, the first C++ Compiler.  (CC
was a script which called the executable cfront to generate c source and
then the C compiler).

Yours,

-- 
Jean-Marc

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#102113

Fromraltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos)
Date2017-01-18 12:07 +0000
Message-ID<587f5a56.3933875@news.xs4all.nl>
In reply to#101704
Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote:

> BartC <bc@freeuk.com> writes:

> > What is CC or cc? I don't even know.
> 
> Do you not know how to find out?  My system has a manual system for
> explaining commands.

Of course he does, but that wouldn't allow him to troll you and Ian.

Richard

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#101707

FromIan Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com>
Date2017-01-14 14:40 +1300
Message-ID<edtdriFtl8kU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#101700
On 01/14/17 01:59 PM, BartC wrote:
> On 13/01/2017 22:18, Ian Collins wrote:
>> On 01/14/17 11:00 AM, BartC wrote:
>
>>> To a more casual user, the problems may be insurmountable.
>>
>> In a word, more bollocks.  Just writing a simple C++ hello world program
>> and then doing
>>
>> CC helloWorld.cc
>>
>> will be linking C and C++ libraries.  There are no "massive list of
>> options", it just works.
>
> If I try this program, which I believe is C++:
>
> $ cat hello.cc
> #include <iostream>
>
> int main(void) {
> std::cout << "HELLO WORLD" << "\n";
> }
>
> And then use your suggestion (but with "cc" as "CC" is not found), I get
> this:
>
> $ cc hello.cc
> /tmp/ccXxAgos.o: In function `main':
> hello.cc:(.text+0xe): undefined reference to `std::cout'
> hello.cc:(.text+0x13): undefined reference to `std::basic_ostream<char,
> std::char_traits<char> >& std::operator<< <std::char_traits<char>
>   >(std::basic_ostream<char, std::char_traits<char> >&, char const*)'
> hello.cc:(.text+0x22): undefined reference to `std::basic_ostream<char,
> std::char_traits<char> >& std::operator<< <std::char_traits<char>
>   >(std::basic_ostream<char, std::char_traits<char> >&, char const*)'
> /tmp/ccXxAgos.o: In function
> `__static_initialization_and_destruction_0(int, int)':
> hello.cc:(.text+0x52): undefined reference to `std::ios_base::Init::Init()'
> hello.cc:(.text+0x67): undefined reference to `std::ios_base::Init::~Init()'
> collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
>
> What is CC or cc? I don't even know. But if I try:

Well if you don't know the names of the compilers on your system, why 
bother?

-- 
Ian

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#101733

FromGareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com>
Date2017-01-14 11:28 +0000
Message-ID<87fuklq3rz.fsf@gmail.com>
In reply to#101700
BartC <bc@freeuk.com> writes:

> On 13/01/2017 22:18, Ian Collins wrote:
 >> On 01/14/17 11:00 AM, BartC wrote:
>
> $ cc hello.cc
> What is CC or cc? I don't even know. But if I try:
>
>  g++ hello.cc
>
> I'm sorry, but things *do* go wrong, even if you clearly don't believe me.

Really???
Your complaint is "If I want my C++ code to link I have to know the name
of my C++ compiler and call it"?  Why not point out that

python hello.cc

doesn't work either?

Even by your standards, that's embarrassing.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#101734

FromBartC <bc@freeuk.com>
Date2017-01-14 11:48 +0000
Message-ID<o5d33p$ma6$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#101733
On 14/01/2017 11:28, Gareth Owen wrote:
> BartC <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>
>> On 13/01/2017 22:18, Ian Collins wrote:
>  >> On 01/14/17 11:00 AM, BartC wrote:
>>
>> $ cc hello.cc
>> What is CC or cc? I don't even know. But if I try:
>>
>>  g++ hello.cc
>>
>> I'm sorry, but things *do* go wrong, even if you clearly don't believe me.
>
> Really???
> Your complaint is "If I want my C++ code to link I have to know the name
> of my C++ compiler and call it"?  Why not point out that
>
> python hello.cc
>
> doesn't work either?
>
> Even by your standards, that's embarrassing.
>
Ian said this:

 >Just writing a simple C++ hello world program
 > and then doing
 >
 > CC helloWorld.cc

 >will be linking C and C++ libraries. ... it just works.

Obviously it didn't.

I tried it out because I was puzzled by the use of the .cc extension, 
and was wondering why he would use what looks like a C compiler (even I 
can vaguely recall cc from Unix) on what he said was C++ code.

And even if somehow CC had worked and managed to produce an executable, 
I still don't see how this is linking a C library, as the program makes 
use of std::cout.

In short, there were half a dozen points of confusion in about as many 
lines, and people are making out that it's /me/ talking bollocks!

-- 
Bartc

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#101739

FromJean-Marc Bourguet <jm@bourguet.org>
Date2017-01-14 13:17 +0100
Message-ID<8737glq1j3.fsf@news.bourguet.org>
In reply to#101734
BartC <bc@freeuk.com> writes:

> I tried it out because I was puzzled by the use of the .cc extension, and
> was wondering why he would use what looks like a C compiler (even I can
> vaguely recall cc from Unix) on what he said was C++ code.

CC (as opposed to cc, Unix is case sensitive) is the traditional name of
the C++ compiler on Unix.  It was used for instance by CFront (cfront was
the executable generated C, CC was the driver calling cfront and then the C
compiler) and Sun's compiler.  I've seen other compilers installing a
compatibility link for CC to their true name.

Numerous extensions have been used for C++ source, I've met .c, .C, .c++,
.cc, .cxx, .cpp.  And for headers: .h, .H, .h++, .hh, .hxx, .hpp, .inc
(often for a special purpose); some are using specialized headers for
inlines: .inl, .ixx, .ipp; and specialized headers for templates: .txx,
.tpp.  And obviously the standard headers have no extension, and some have
followed the example (Qt for instance).

Yours,

-- 
Jean-Marc

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#101749

FromDavid Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>
Date2017-01-14 14:21 +0100
Message-ID<o5d8if$781$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#101734
On 14/01/17 12:48, BartC wrote:
> On 14/01/2017 11:28, Gareth Owen wrote:
>> BartC <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 13/01/2017 22:18, Ian Collins wrote:
>>  >> On 01/14/17 11:00 AM, BartC wrote:
>>>
>>> $ cc hello.cc
>>> What is CC or cc? I don't even know. But if I try:
>>>
>>>  g++ hello.cc
>>>
>>> I'm sorry, but things *do* go wrong, even if you clearly don't
>>> believe me.
>>
>> Really???
>> Your complaint is "If I want my C++ code to link I have to know the name
>> of my C++ compiler and call it"?  Why not point out that
>>
>> python hello.cc
>>
>> doesn't work either?
>>
>> Even by your standards, that's embarrassing.
>>
> Ian said this:
>
>>Just writing a simple C++ hello world program
>> and then doing
>>
>> CC helloWorld.cc
>
>>will be linking C and C++ libraries. ... it just works.
>
> Obviously it didn't.
>
> I tried it out because I was puzzled by the use of the .cc extension,
> and was wondering why he would use what looks like a C compiler (even I
> can vaguely recall cc from Unix) on what he said was C++ code.

You are using a different OS than Ian, who works in Solaris.  Perhaps it 
is standard in the Solaris world to make CC a symbolic link to the basic 
system C++ compiler.  On Linux, c++ is the common choice.  (Symbolic 
links are used because it could point to different versions of the 
compiler, or different compilers.)

I don't think it is unreasonable to expect someone to know how to invoke 
/their/ C++ compiler on /their/ system, if they want to program in C++.

And .cc is a common choice of extension for C++ files, along with .cpp, 
.cxx, .c++ and .C


>
> And even if somehow CC had worked and managed to produce an executable,
> I still don't see how this is linking a C library, as the program makes
> use of std::cout.

There are many libraries involved in the final executable here - both 
static libraries and dynamic libraries.  Many of them will be in C.

>
> In short, there were half a dozen points of confusion in about as many
> lines, and people are making out that it's /me/ talking bollocks!
>

The confusion is only in your mind - because you work so hard to create it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#101752

FromGareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com>
Date2017-01-14 13:27 +0000
Message-ID<877f5xpy9h.fsf@gmail.com>
In reply to#101749
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes:

>> In short, there were half a dozen points of confusion in about as many
>> lines, and people are making out that it's /me/ talking bollocks!
>>
>
> The confusion is only in your mind - because you work so hard to create it.

I no longer think he's working hard to create it.  I think his state of
perpetual bafflement comes to him naturally.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#101754

FromBartC <bc@freeuk.com>
Date2017-01-14 14:00 +0000
Message-ID<o5daqr$ehj$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#101752
On 14/01/2017 13:27, Gareth Owen wrote:
> David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes:
>
>>> In short, there were half a dozen points of confusion in about as many
>>> lines, and people are making out that it's /me/ talking bollocks!
>>>
>>
>> The confusion is only in your mind - because you work so hard to create it.
>
> I no longer think he's working hard to create it.  I think his state of
> perpetual bafflement comes to him naturally.

I used to do a lot of customer support. I know the sort of things people 
have difficulty with, and used to write user and reference manuals with 
that in mind.

Now, in all the years I've been frequenting this group, I don't recall 
the name 'CC' ever coming up. Compared with 'gcc' which might be almost 
every other post.

Nor have I have ever comes across the file extension '.cc'.

This is exactly the sort of thing I would have added notes about if I 
was doing the posting.

(Nice touch BTW of having .cc meaning a C++ source file, and cc meaning 
a C compiler. You don't want to make this stuff too obvious!)

-- 
Bartc

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#101757

FromGareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com>
Date2017-01-14 14:11 +0000
Message-ID<87wpdxafze.fsf@gmail.com>
In reply to#101754
BartC <bc@freeuk.com> writes:

> I used to do a lot of customer support.

That chimes with my experience of customer support.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#101758

FromGareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com>
Date2017-01-14 14:12 +0000
Message-ID<87sholafx0.fsf@gmail.com>
In reply to#101754
BartC <bc@freeuk.com> writes:

> (Nice touch BTW of having .cc meaning a C++ source file, and cc
> meaning a C compiler. You don't want to make this stuff too obvious!)

I use .cpp exclusively.
Nevertheless .cc meaning C++ is incredibly common.

That you've never seen it before is ... unremarkable.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 10  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c

csiph-web