Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #60841 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-04-23 08:09 +0100 |
| Last post | 2015-04-25 04:01 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 432 — 38 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-23 08:09 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-04-23 10:56 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-04-23 21:13 +1200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-04-23 11:25 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-23 10:36 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-04-23 11:54 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-23 11:06 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-04-23 12:35 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-23 11:44 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-04-23 12:56 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-23 12:16 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-04-23 12:09 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-04-24 07:52 +1200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-04-23 16:15 -0400
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-04-24 08:21 +1200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-04-23 16:44 -0400
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-04-24 13:01 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2015-04-23 04:16 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-23 12:19 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robbie Hatley <see.my.sig@for.my.address> - 2015-04-24 04:42 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-24 16:07 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robbie Hatley <see.my.sig@for.my.address> - 2015-04-25 22:08 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-26 14:29 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-04-26 15:45 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.lists@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-04-23 11:43 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-04-23 09:29 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-04-23 11:52 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-04-25 03:03 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-23 10:53 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.lists@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-04-23 11:37 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-23 12:12 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-04-23 12:46 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-04-23 08:47 -0400
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Fred K <fred.l.kleinschmidt@gmail.com> - 2015-04-23 07:39 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-23 16:20 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-04-23 12:43 -0400
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Dow Allen <jdallen2000@yahoo.com> - 2015-04-24 01:40 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-24 11:14 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Dow Allen <jdallen2000@yahoo.com> - 2015-04-24 10:02 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-24 18:20 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Dow Allen <jdallen2000@yahoo.com> - 2015-04-24 13:27 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-04-25 10:25 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-04-24 23:02 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.lists@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-04-24 11:30 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-04-26 08:09 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-04-26 12:26 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-04-28 09:52 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-04-28 11:27 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-28 20:09 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-04-30 07:11 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> - 2015-05-09 13:14 +0300
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-10 08:23 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-10 11:06 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-11 21:52 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-10 12:20 -0400
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-05-10 13:22 -0400
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-05-10 18:44 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-10 11:12 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-11 21:46 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-12 10:11 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-05-12 18:26 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-12 11:29 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-13 09:14 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-05-13 11:55 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-13 14:55 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-05-13 14:35 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-13 08:24 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-13 18:47 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-13 21:15 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-13 19:40 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-13 21:08 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-13 20:52 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-05-13 21:06 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-13 23:28 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-05-14 00:19 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-14 04:29 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-14 09:57 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-14 04:56 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-05-14 11:34 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-14 17:24 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-16 01:21 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-05-17 10:00 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2015-06-21 12:46 -0400
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-06-21 13:20 -0400
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-14 17:22 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-16 01:59 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-16 09:51 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-16 05:36 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-16 19:32 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-14 17:13 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-05-17 10:13 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-13 18:54 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-14 01:31 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-13 21:05 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-14 00:48 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-14 17:27 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-16 02:00 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-14 09:41 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-14 05:02 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-14 13:44 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-14 17:32 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-14 20:18 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2015-05-15 05:32 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-15 13:47 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2015-05-16 02:51 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-16 17:13 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2015-05-17 22:34 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-20 08:47 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-05-17 10:36 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-05-17 12:26 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-17 14:13 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-05-17 13:45 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-17 15:02 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-05-17 14:20 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-17 15:51 +0100
I'm starting a new thread (Was: Spurious diagnostic messages) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-05-17 15:00 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-17 07:58 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-17 15:36 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-17 22:28 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-20 08:59 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2015-05-20 11:58 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages bart4858@gmail.com - 2015-05-20 14:00 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2015-05-20 18:10 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages bart4858@gmail.com - 2015-05-21 00:57 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2015-05-21 12:40 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages bart4858@gmail.com - 2015-05-21 13:25 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-21 14:33 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-22 09:11 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-22 08:15 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-22 11:47 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-22 12:11 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-05-23 07:26 +1200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-22 14:14 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-05-23 09:28 +1200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2015-05-22 21:36 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> - 2015-05-25 11:36 +0300
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-22 14:16 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-22 08:38 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-22 18:06 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-22 13:56 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-22 23:38 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-22 18:28 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-22 16:44 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-24 07:44 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-24 16:52 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-24 22:19 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-05-24 22:28 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-25 00:00 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-10 10:12 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-24 23:13 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-25 11:30 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2015-05-25 07:41 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-25 17:10 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-05-25 17:42 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-25 12:20 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-10 10:07 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-10 20:09 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-11 11:19 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-11 20:25 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-16 08:48 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-07-16 14:21 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-20 08:52 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-20 21:21 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-23 02:49 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-23 21:35 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-27 07:30 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-07-24 15:35 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-27 08:13 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-27 18:14 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-01 09:06 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages "Bartc" <bartc@freeuk.com> - 2015-08-01 18:26 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-09 08:45 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-23 11:48 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-27 08:50 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-17 11:49 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-20 09:06 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-20 18:18 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-20 11:52 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2015-07-20 20:09 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-20 13:18 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-20 16:24 -0400
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2015-07-21 07:59 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-07-21 21:07 -0400
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2015-07-21 07:52 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-20 23:17 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-20 15:51 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-24 13:50 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-24 22:45 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-07-25 18:59 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-25 20:49 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-07-31 13:22 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-27 08:48 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-25 12:04 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-05-26 09:11 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-26 11:26 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-05-26 22:02 +1200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-26 14:59 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-26 16:58 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-26 16:19 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-27 08:45 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2015-06-21 12:46 -0400
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-21 20:41 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-21 13:27 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-10 10:19 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-11 08:47 +1200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-11 13:40 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-07-21 13:49 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-25 20:17 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-26 16:54 +1200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-31 01:25 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-31 17:46 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-02 06:00 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-08-02 16:31 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-24 13:13 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-25 08:36 +1200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-31 09:01 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-01 08:13 +1200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-02 01:08 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-02 14:29 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-03 09:15 +1200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-03 08:22 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> - 2015-08-22 08:24 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-22 19:24 +1200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-24 11:02 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-08-24 20:13 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-08-30 13:30 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-25 08:12 +1200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-02 16:56 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-03 08:36 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-08-03 17:32 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-03 18:41 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-24 11:04 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-26 11:08 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-26 15:35 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-27 00:17 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-27 00:53 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-27 08:19 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-01 10:10 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-01 13:43 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-08-02 00:04 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-02 01:16 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-08-02 12:21 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-08-02 19:42 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-24 09:58 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-08-24 22:22 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-08-01 20:20 -0400
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-02 18:57 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-02 08:21 +1200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-01 14:31 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tonton Th <tTh@nowhere.invalid> - 2015-08-01 22:26 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-02 01:10 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-08-02 09:02 -0400
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-08-02 14:23 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-02 15:31 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-02 09:01 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-02 16:56 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-03 10:18 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-03 12:10 +1200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-24 10:52 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-08-24 20:01 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-25 08:16 +1200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-08-03 14:11 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-08-04 10:56 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-08-01 16:52 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-08-02 12:59 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-09 13:39 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-08-02 13:37 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-08-02 13:17 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-08-02 19:45 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-02 15:52 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-08-03 09:34 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-08-04 11:04 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-04 09:07 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-08-09 13:28 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-02 14:00 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-09-05 11:31 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-06 10:47 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-09-06 13:27 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-02 15:53 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-02 15:45 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-08-03 09:40 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-24 11:41 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-08-04 11:23 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-04 09:12 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-08-09 13:33 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-09-06 10:59 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-09-06 22:21 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-07 13:44 +1200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-20 10:44 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages bart4858@gmail.com - 2015-05-20 13:42 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-20 14:17 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-05-20 21:25 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-05-23 10:17 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-05-23 10:15 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-23 11:46 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-23 17:22 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> - 2015-05-25 11:49 +0300
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-25 10:50 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-23 15:57 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-23 22:51 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-23 19:01 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-23 22:50 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-05-23 23:41 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-24 00:40 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2015-05-24 02:57 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-05-24 07:40 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-24 14:24 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-05-24 09:23 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-05-24 15:36 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-24 13:10 -0400
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-24 07:44 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-24 19:26 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-05-25 00:51 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-25 15:48 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-05-26 02:36 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-05-26 13:23 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-27 00:55 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-05-29 12:28 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-29 13:44 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-05-29 15:55 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-29 18:17 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-29 10:52 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-26 13:27 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-05-26 21:09 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-27 00:03 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-27 00:59 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-05-27 01:15 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-27 13:34 -0400
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-27 14:07 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-27 19:53 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-05-27 21:21 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2015-05-27 21:45 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-28 17:36 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-27 10:36 -0400
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-27 16:54 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-27 16:08 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2015-05-27 12:18 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-27 18:39 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-27 22:04 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-27 21:38 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-27 19:54 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-27 19:58 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-28 14:24 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-27 13:51 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-10 11:08 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-10 11:05 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-07-10 18:08 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-11 07:55 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-07-11 15:02 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-07-21 14:08 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-21 13:27 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-07-21 15:30 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-07-22 15:04 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-25 10:27 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-07-21 13:55 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-25 14:18 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-08-02 20:16 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-09-06 09:49 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-05-27 22:20 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-28 10:28 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-05-28 06:00 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-27 10:22 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-05-27 10:32 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-05-27 17:08 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Thomas Jahns <jahns@idontlikespam.dkrz.de> - 2015-05-28 15:49 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-05-28 15:03 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-28 14:35 -0400
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-28 16:54 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages jadill33@gmail.com - 2015-05-28 10:32 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Thomas Jahns <jahns@idontlikespam.dkrz.de> - 2015-05-29 10:17 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-27 10:40 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-27 19:56 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-27 13:46 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-27 21:16 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-05-27 15:47 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-27 14:08 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-05-27 22:11 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-27 20:10 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-05-28 02:21 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-28 03:21 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2015-05-27 22:17 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-27 22:22 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-28 14:52 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-27 18:55 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-05-27 15:31 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> - 2015-05-25 12:11 +0300
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-25 11:04 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-25 12:30 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-25 15:41 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-25 15:20 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-24 10:57 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-25 14:31 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-25 22:30 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-25 17:56 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-05-29 12:34 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-29 14:04 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Alain Ketterlin <alain@universite-de-strasbourg.fr.invalid> - 2015-05-29 15:28 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-06-05 15:18 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-29 15:31 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-17 15:35 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-17 07:56 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-17 16:14 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-17 12:57 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-17 15:46 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-18 11:10 -0400
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-18 08:56 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-18 18:09 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-18 18:03 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-18 14:41 -0400
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-17 15:39 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-17 13:58 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-13 19:17 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Nathan Wagner <nw@hydaspes.if.org> - 2015-05-14 09:54 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2015-05-14 08:57 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-14 08:31 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-14 08:33 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-05-14 14:37 +1200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-14 13:13 +0200
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-15 16:26 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-05-13 18:44 -0500
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2015-06-21 12:46 -0400
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-22 07:37 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-12 11:23 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-12 13:08 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-22 06:32 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-04-28 12:30 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages James Dow Allen <gmail@jamesdowallen.nospam> - 2015-04-29 04:07 +0000
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-04-30 07:48 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-04-25 03:32 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-04-26 09:33 +0100
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-04-26 07:37 -0700
Re: Spurious diagnostic messages Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-04-25 04:01 -0700
Page 6 of 22 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 22 Next page →
| From | glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-14 17:32 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mj2m6q$fqp$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #61995 |
Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: (snip) > The 26-letter A-Z range is special. Residents of many other countries might disagree. > While many languages (without even > getting into other alphabets) can have extra letters, with a coding > outside the ASCII range, and others have fewer letters (Italian used to > get by with only 21 letters), the 26-letter A-Z (and a-z) range remains > important enough to be given special treatment. > (For example, they are the only letters that C allows in identifiers. In > fact, on the first web page I looked at on the subject, it says that > identifiers consist of a-z and A-Z (as well as 0-9 and underscore). It > doesn't go into details as to what letters a-z or A-Z might include. > Presumably it's obvious! Which is my point.) Note that Java doesn't have that restriction. All unicode letter and digits are allowed in Java identifiers. That is especially interesting as many look almost the same as Roman alphabet letters. (Notice that I didn't say English alphabet.) Also, note that C is now an ISO standard. -- glen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-14 20:18 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mj2sce$j1m$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #62008 |
On 14/05/2015 18:32, glen herrmannsfeldt wrote: > Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: > > (snip) > >> The 26-letter A-Z range is special. > > Residents of many other countries might disagree. No. But that doesn't change the facts. That particular set of letters is fully supported and can be represented in: - Baudot code - Morse code - Semaphore - Sign Language (BSL for sure) - Radix 50 - 'Sixbit' - ASCII - Even EBCDIC That's just off the top of my head. There's also been plenty of hardware and software in the past which, if it was restricted in the characters it could deal with, would at least have supported upper case A to Z. >> (For example, they are the only letters that C allows in identifiers. In >> fact, on the first web page I looked at on the subject, it says that >> identifiers consist of a-z and A-Z (as well as 0-9 and underscore). It >> doesn't go into details as to what letters a-z or A-Z might include. >> Presumably it's obvious! Which is my point.) > > Note that Java doesn't have that restriction. All unicode letter > and digits are allowed in Java identifiers. That is especially > interesting as many look almost the same as Roman alphabet letters. > (Notice that I didn't say English alphabet.) Languages are usually more restrictive in the character set that is used to express source code. But one thing they will invariably have in common is to allow A to Z. (Oddball languages excluded.) Or perhaps you have another candidate for an alphabet that has been of similar significance and ubiquity? -- Bartc
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-15 05:32 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5d188440-445d-435a-a289-f9f9ba9401ef@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #62008 |
On Thursday, 14 May 2015 20:32:20 UTC+3, glen herrmannsfeldt wrote: > > Note that Java doesn't have that restriction. All unicode letter > and digits are allowed in Java identifiers. That is especially > interesting as many look almost the same as Roman alphabet letters. > (Notice that I didn't say English alphabet.) What is the significance or trick about that notice? My (possibly wrong) knowledge is that English uses classical Roman alphabet to what letters J, U and W were added. There are other characters in Unicode that look very similar to characters J, U, W, j, u and w.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-15 13:47 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <mj5et5$980$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #62042 |
On 15-May-15 07:32, Öö Tiib wrote: > On Thursday, 14 May 2015 20:32:20 UTC+3, glen herrmannsfeldt wrote: >> Note that Java doesn't have that restriction. All unicode letter >> and digits are allowed in Java identifiers. That is especially >> interesting as many look almost the same as Roman alphabet >> letters. (Notice that I didn't say English alphabet.) > > What is the significance or trick about that notice? My (possibly > wrong) knowledge is that English uses classical Roman alphabet to > what letters J, U and W were added. It's the Latin, not Roman, alphabet. English uses the "modern" Latin alphabet, which adds some letters, e.g. J, U and W, and excludes some others, e.g. Æ, Þ, Œ. Note that most Latin texts used in schools have been transformed into the "modern" alphabet, rather than being studied in the original form. Most other languages using the Latin alphabet have diacritical marks, which aren't in ASCII either; English had some too, until the advent of the typewriter, when they were dropped as "unnecessary". > There are other characters in Unicode that look very similar to > characters J, U, W, j, u and w. Several letters in the Greek and/or Cyrillic alphabets look the same as ones in the Latin alphabet, but they all have distinct code points: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/84/Venn_diagram_showing_Greek,_Latin_and_Cyrillic_letters.svg S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-16 02:51 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <166b11d7-8745-4d44-9be6-ffd93d44b60d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #62063 |
On Friday, 15 May 2015 21:47:21 UTC+3, Stephen Sprunk wrote: > On 15-May-15 07:32, Öö Tiib wrote: > > On Thursday, 14 May 2015 20:32:20 UTC+3, glen herrmannsfeldt wrote: > >> Note that Java doesn't have that restriction. All unicode letter > >> and digits are allowed in Java identifiers. That is especially > >> interesting as many look almost the same as Roman alphabet > >> letters. (Notice that I didn't say English alphabet.) > > > > What is the significance or trick about that notice? My (possibly > > wrong) knowledge is that English uses classical Roman alphabet to > > what letters J, U and W were added. > > It's the Latin, not Roman, alphabet. Aren't those same? At least Wikipedia says "Latin alphabet", AKA "Roman alphabet". > English uses the "modern" Latin alphabet, which adds some letters, e.g. > J, U and W, and excludes some others, e.g. Æ, Þ, OE. Thanks for more accurate description of differences. I'm still unsure why Glen emphasised the difference between Latin and English alphabets in context of similar-looking code points in Unicode.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-16 17:13 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <mj8fco$6kj$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #62107 |
On 16-May-15 04:51, Öö Tiib wrote: > On Friday, 15 May 2015 21:47:21 UTC+3, Stephen Sprunk wrote: >> On 15-May-15 07:32, Öö Tiib wrote: >>> What is the significance or trick about that notice? My >>> (possibly wrong) knowledge is that English uses classical Roman >>> alphabet to what letters J, U and W were added. >> >> It's the Latin, not Roman, alphabet. > > Aren't those same? At least Wikipedia says "Latin alphabet", AKA > "Roman alphabet". "Roman" could be misinterpreted as one of several other alphabets that have been used in Rome, before and after Latin was king. That, and Unicode officially calls them "Latin" characters. Also, "Roman" has a specific meaning in the font world, so it's best not to use the same term for something different in a related field. >> English uses the "modern" Latin alphabet, which adds some letters, >> e.g. J, U and W, and excludes some others, e.g. Æ, Þ, OE. It's interesting that your reply has "OE" rather than the "Œ" of my original post. I've never seen a reply decompose a glyph like that; either it comes through correctly or it's completely garbled. > Thanks for more accurate description of differences. I'm still > unsure why Glen emphasised the difference between Latin and English > alphabets in context of similar-looking code points in Unicode. I assumed that he was pointing out that English isn't the only user, much less originator, of that alphabet, but that's not relevant to the issue of lookalike glyphs, so maybe not. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-17 22:34 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a4c6f506-9763-41ff-9eca-ce9ab0798c11@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #62133 |
On Sunday, 17 May 2015 01:13:55 UTC+3, Stephen Sprunk wrote: > >> English uses the "modern" Latin alphabet, which adds some letters, > >> e.g. J, U and W, and excludes some others, e.g. Æ, Þ, OE. > > It's interesting that your reply has "OE" rather than the "OE" of my > original post. I've never seen a reply decompose a glyph like that; > either it comes through correctly or it's completely garbled. Interesting indeed; I used Google Groups to reply. Lets see if it does that again above. I observe both in quoted text above.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-20 08:47 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <mjia93$pfj$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #62212 |
On 17-May-15 22:34, Öö Tiib wrote: > On Sunday, 17 May 2015 01:13:55 UTC+3, Stephen Sprunk wrote: >>>> English uses the "modern" Latin alphabet, which adds some letters, >>>> e.g. J, U and W, and excludes some others, e.g. Æ, Þ, OE. >> >> It's interesting that your reply has "OE" rather than the "OE" of my >> original post. I've never seen a reply decompose a glyph like that; >> either it comes through correctly or it's completely garbled. > > Interesting indeed; I used Google Groups to reply. Lets see if it does > that again above. I observe both in quoted text above. Decomposed again. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-17 10:36 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <55586ec4.5718781@news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #61977 |
Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: > I agree it would cause problems if people were to write: c>='A' && > c<='Z', but that's another matter. That would break under EBCDIC but > that's what warnings are for. Indeed, and it would be _more_ difficult to write an acceptable exception for conditional expressions than it would be to write one for an extended case. Which means that your argument that the existence of EBCDIC is the crucial thing that means we don't have an extended case in C is foundered by your own argument. Richard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-17 12:26 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mja1ds$b1u$1@news.xmission.com> |
| In reply to | #62145 |
In article <55586ec4.5718781@news.xs4all.nl>,
Richard Bos <rlbos@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
>
>> I agree it would cause problems if people were to write: c>='A' &&
>> c<='Z', but that's another matter. That would break under EBCDIC but
>> that's what warnings are for.
>
>Indeed, and it would be _more_ difficult to write an acceptable
>exception for conditional expressions than it would be to write one for
>an extended case.
>Which means that your argument that the existence of EBCDIC is the
>crucial thing that means we don't have an extended case in C is
>foundered by your own argument.
I think you are talking in circles here. I heard a great quote the other
day, that seems somehow appropriate: Speaking of one or another of the
Republican clown car guys, the line was "He sounds like what dumb people
think smart people sound like".
But, having said that, let's be clear that it was I, not Bart, who
suggested that it was because of EBCDIC that we couldn't have nice things.
And, further, I actually think that:
case 'A'..'Z':
*should* mean (if it were legal C syntax, which it, of course, is not [yet])
the same thing as "isupper" - i.e. the upper case letters. Bart & I
disagree here, as he thinks it should mean the same thing as:
c>='A' && c<='Z'
As has been pointed out ad nauseum in this thread, this has equivalent
functionality in ASCII, but not so in EBCDIC.
--
Windows 95 n. (Win-doze): A 32 bit extension to a 16 bit user interface for
an 8 bit operating system based on a 4 bit architecture from a 2 bit company
that can't stand 1 bit of competition.
Modern day upgrade --> Windows XP Professional x64: Windows is now a 64 bit
tweak of a 32 bit extension to a 16 bit user interface for an 8 bit
operating system based on a 4 bit architecture from a 2 bit company that
can't stand 1 bit of competition.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-17 14:13 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mja44d$n5p$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #62145 |
On 17/05/2015 11:36, Richard Bos wrote: > Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: > >> I agree it would cause problems if people were to write: c>='A' && >> c<='Z', but that's another matter. That would break under EBCDIC but >> that's what warnings are for. > > Indeed, and it would be _more_ difficult to write an acceptable > exception for conditional expressions than it would be to write one for > an extended case. > Which means that your argument that the existence of EBCDIC is the > crucial thing that means we don't have an extended case in C is > foundered by your own argument. Not at all. C allows c>='A' && c<'Z' even though what is probably intended would only work with ASCII and not EBCDIC. But it doesn't allow case 'A'..'Z' even though exactly the same is true. Part of the reason it doesn't allow is because of this problem (it's also easier to isolate the ".." or whatever construction is used to signify a set of consecutive values. Most of us don't care that our code might not run on EBCDISC. And those that did, can continue writing out all the values individually. (BTW would you have any objection to being able to write case 'A','B','C': or does it absolutely have to be case ''A': case 'B': case 'C': ? What about case "ABC": where the characters of the string are separated out into 'A', 'B', 'C'?) -- Bartc
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-17 13:45 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mja62k$df6$2@news.xmission.com> |
| In reply to | #62154 |
In article <mja44d$n5p$1@dont-email.me>, Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
...
>Most of us don't care that our code might not run on EBCDISC. And those
>that did, can continue writing out all the values individually.
True, 'dat! But the point is that the standard has to continue to support
these weird (and by "weird", yes, I mean, "Other than ASCII") character sets.
That is, until such time, as it (i.e., the committee) decides not to
support them any more. Something that *will* happen, at some future time...
>(BTW would you have any objection to being able to write case
>'A','B','C': or does it absolutely have to be case ''A': case 'B': case
>'C': ? What about case "ABC": where the characters of the string are
>separated out into 'A', 'B', 'C'?)
The *right* solution to all of this (i.e., this specific problem as well as
a whole bunch more) is to allow expression in the case labels, like certain
other "C-like" languages, such as PHP, do.
That is, to allow:
switch (1) {
case !!isupper(c):
...
}
This form of switch exists in several "scripting type" languages, PHP
probably being the best known example.
P.S. Yes, I can hear the caterwauling already about how inefficient this
would be - how it would prevent the compiler from using so-called "jump
tables" and so on. Well, I'm not listening to said caterwauling...
--
"Unattended children will be given an espresso and a free kitten."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-17 15:02 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mja6uv$10b$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #62155 |
On 17/05/2015 14:45, Kenny McCormack wrote:
> In article <mja44d$n5p$1@dont-email.me>, Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
> ...
>> Most of us don't care that our code might not run on EBCDISC. And those
>> that did, can continue writing out all the values individually.
>
> True, 'dat! But the point is that the standard has to continue to support
> these weird (and by "weird", yes, I mean, "Other than ASCII") character sets.
>
> That is, until such time, as it (i.e., the committee) decides not to
> support them any more. Something that *will* happen, at some future time...
>
>> (BTW would you have any objection to being able to write case
>> 'A','B','C': or does it absolutely have to be case ''A': case 'B': case
>> 'C': ? What about case "ABC": where the characters of the string are
>> separated out into 'A', 'B', 'C'?)
>
> The *right* solution to all of this (i.e., this specific problem as well as
> a whole bunch more) is to allow expression in the case labels, like certain
> other "C-like" languages, such as PHP, do.
>
> That is, to allow:
>
> switch (1) {
> case !!isupper(c):
> ...
> }
>
> This form of switch exists in several "scripting type" languages, PHP
> probably being the best known example.
>
> P.S. Yes, I can hear the caterwauling already about how inefficient this
> would be - how it would prevent the compiler from using so-called "jump
> tables" and so on. Well, I'm not listening to said caterwauling...
That's already allowed, but you have to write it like this:
if (!!isupper) ...
But sometimes you do need a proper jump-table switch for speed, for
which I suppose you can write:
#define UPPER \
'A': case 'B': case 'C': case 'D': case 'E': \
case 'F': case 'G': case 'H': case 'I': case 'J': \
case 'K': case 'M': case 'N': case 'O': case 'P': \
case 'Q': case 'R': case 'S': case 'T': case 'U': \
case 'V': case 'W': case 'X': case 'Y': case 'Z'
then use:
switch (c) {
case UPPER:
But, you still have write that lot in the first place, with the same
potential for mistakes, which will now be propagated everywhere.
It still doesn't seem right that the programmer has to take care of this
stuff because the language is unwilling to.
--
Bartc
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-17 14:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mja840$etr$1@news.xmission.com> |
| In reply to | #62157 |
In article <mja6uv$10b$1@dont-email.me>, Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
...
>> switch (1) {
>> case !!isupper(c):
>> ...
>> }
>>
...
>That's already allowed, but you have to write it like this:
>
>if (!!isupper) ...
No, that's not the same thing. Think more carefully.
You might want to read the Wikipedia page about switch statements (which
was referenced somewhere upthread) and read specifically what it has to say
about the PHP style "switch" statement.
Besides, if you use an 'if' statement, then you don't need the '!!'.
--
"I heard somebody say, 'Where's Nelson Mandela?' Well,
Mandela's dead. Because Saddam killed all the Mandelas."
George W. Bush, on the former South African president who
is still very much alive, Sept. 20, 2007
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-17 15:51 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mja9rb$b72$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #62158 |
On 17/05/2015 15:20, Kenny McCormack wrote:
> In article <mja6uv$10b$1@dont-email.me>, Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
> ...
>>> switch (1) {
>>> case !!isupper(c):
>>> ...
>>> }
>>>
> ...
>> That's already allowed, but you have to write it like this:
>>
>> if (isupper(c)) ... [fixed]
>
> No, that's not the same thing. Think more carefully.
> You might want to read the Wikipedia page about switch statements (which
> was referenced somewhere upthread) and read specifically what it has to say
> about the PHP style "switch" statement.
>
> Besides, if you use an 'if' statement, then you don't need the '!!'.
Sorry, I can't see the difference. In both cases some code gets executed
when c is a capital letter. (I understand that form of switch won't work
in C.)
--
Bartc
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-17 15:00 +0000 |
| Subject | I'm starting a new thread (Was: Spurious diagnostic messages) |
| Message-ID | <mjaaeo$etr$2@news.xmission.com> |
| In reply to | #62161 |
In article <mja9rb$b72$1@dont-email.me>, Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: ... >Sorry, I can't see the difference. In both cases some code gets executed >when c is a capital letter. (I understand that form of switch won't work >in C.) You need to think beyond what's directly in front of you. This is a high bar for most CLCers. That's what makes CLC CLC. But I think you are capable of it - although too much time spent in CLC tends to make one's brain rot. Anyway, I'm starting a new thread about the new form of switch() (Yes, the one that C doesn't have [yet]). -- "Unattended children will be given an espresso and a free kitten."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-17 07:58 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87k2w79ro6.fsf@kst-u.example.com> |
| In reply to | #62157 |
Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
[...]
> if (!!isupper) ...
[...]
I don't know what this is in response to, but I presume you didn't
mean that literally. The expression `!!isupper` simply yields 1,
since isupper is of function pointer type and is non-null.
You can certainly use the result of isupper() in an if statement, but
there's no need to apply `!!` to it.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-17 15:36 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <mjau2p$ott$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #62157 |
On 17-May-15 09:02, Bartc wrote:
> But sometimes you do need a proper jump-table switch for speed, for
> which I suppose you can write:
>
> #define UPPER \ 'A': case 'B': case 'C': case 'D': case 'E': \ case
> 'F': case 'G': case 'H': case 'I': case 'J': \ case 'K': case 'M':
> case 'N': case 'O': case 'P': \ case 'Q': case 'R': case 'S': case
> 'T': case 'U': \ case 'V': case 'W': case 'X': case 'Y': case 'Z'
>
> then use:
>
> switch (c) { case UPPER:
>
> But, you still have write that lot in the first place, with the same
> potential for mistakes, which will now be propagated everywhere.
Worse, now your lack of support for non-ASCII letters is hidden in some
header file, rather than in the code where it belongs.
That's part of why we have isupper() et al.
S
--
Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-17 22:28 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mjb141$40l$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #62199 |
On 17/05/2015 21:36, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> On 17-May-15 09:02, Bartc wrote:
>> But sometimes you do need a proper jump-table switch for speed, for
>> which I suppose you can write:
>>
>> #define UPPER \ 'A': case 'B': case 'C': case 'D': case 'E': \ case
>> 'F': case 'G': case 'H': case 'I': case 'J': \ case 'K': case 'M':
>> case 'N': case 'O': case 'P': \ case 'Q': case 'R': case 'S': case
>> 'T': case 'U': \ case 'V': case 'W': case 'X': case 'Y': case 'Z'
>>
>> then use:
>>
>> switch (c) { case UPPER:
>>
>> But, you still have write that lot in the first place, with the same
>> potential for mistakes, which will now be propagated everywhere.
>
> Worse, now your lack of support for non-ASCII letters is hidden in some
> header file, rather than in the code where it belongs.
So how would you code a single switch case to detect all 26 letters of
the alphabet? (And if you say use something other than a switch, then
that's side-stepping the issue.)
Anyway using a macro such as UPPER is one approach that can work
provided it's reliably defined, if there is no way to avoid enumerating
every single character. (Maybe you've noticed there's a letter missing.)
However this obviously needs to be done; it would be better if it was
built-in.
>That's part of why we have isupper() et al.
What does it do with character codes 128 to 255? This is an unknown. If
I'm parsing some input and specifically need to detect A-Z, a-z, 0-9 and
a few extra, then it's not so useful.
--
Bartc
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-05-20 08:59 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <mjiaum$vcu$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #62204 |
On 17-May-15 14:28, Bartc wrote:
> On 17/05/2015 21:36, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>> On 17-May-15 09:02, Bartc wrote:
>>> switch (c) { case UPPER:
>>>
>>> But, you still have write that lot in the first place, with the
>>> same potential for mistakes, which will now be propagated
>>> everywhere.
>>
>> Worse, now your lack of support for non-ASCII letters is hidden in
>> some header file, rather than in the code where it belongs.
>
> So how would you code a single switch case to detect all 26 letters
> of the alphabet? (And if you say use something other than a switch,
> then that's side-stepping the issue.)
Who says the user's alphabet has 26 letters--or that the user's script
is an alphabet at all, or that the concept of "upper case" applies?
> Anyway using a macro such as UPPER is one approach that can work
> provided it's reliably defined, if there is no way to avoid
> enumerating every single character. (Maybe you've noticed there's a
> letter missing.) However this obviously needs to be done; it would be
> better if it was built-in.
It doesn't seem to be so "obvious" to those who work with languages
other than English, i.e. the majority of humanity.
>> That's part of why we have isupper() et al.
>
> What does it do with character codes 128 to 255? This is an unknown.
> If I'm parsing some input and specifically need to detect A-Z, a-z,
> 0-9 and a few extra, then it's not so useful.
If you need to detect those _specific_ characters, and you can safely
ignore the million or so other characters, then you can spend a minute
or two writing the cases out--but I agree that "case 'A','B':" would be
a nice syntactic shortcut for such code. We've already demonstrated why
we can't have "case 'A'..'Z':", which I know is what you really want.
OTOH, if what you really want is to detect letters and numbers in
general, then there are various is*() functions that are far better for
that purpose than anything the average programmer will come up with, and
IMHO we shouldn't tempt him away from the correct solution by offering a
better way to do the incorrect solution.
S
--
Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 22 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 22 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web