Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #64979 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-07-09 12:49 +0200 |
| Last post | 2015-07-16 09:41 +1200 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 292 — 25 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-09 12:49 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-09 12:03 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-09 14:15 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-09 13:49 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-09 15:15 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-09 14:25 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-09 15:36 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-09 14:51 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-09 16:02 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-09 20:48 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-09 09:54 -0400
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-09 15:08 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-09 16:16 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-09 15:18 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-09 16:24 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-09 20:31 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-09 21:42 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-10 00:57 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-09 20:39 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-09 21:44 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-09 22:50 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-09 13:49 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-09 13:52 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-09 15:26 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-09 14:28 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-09 05:28 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-09 15:09 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-07-09 09:25 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-09 18:41 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-10 11:52 -0400
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-10 18:44 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-10 18:52 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-10 20:34 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-10 11:50 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-10 20:56 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-10 13:30 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2015-07-11 10:51 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-11 16:07 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2015-07-12 00:20 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions gordonb.j93iw@burditt.org (Gordon Burditt) - 2015-07-11 21:26 -0500
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-09 10:08 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-09 19:19 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-09 19:11 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-09 21:28 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-09 13:41 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-09 15:22 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-09 18:45 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-09 18:05 +0000
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-11 07:06 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-11 15:51 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-15 09:36 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-15 10:49 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-07-15 13:05 -0500
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-20 10:28 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-20 12:41 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-20 21:37 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-24 13:05 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-24 15:07 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-30 12:42 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-07-24 15:38 -0500
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-30 12:39 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-30 22:35 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-02 07:09 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-02 14:43 -0500
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-03 09:48 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-09 21:23 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Andrew Cooper <amc96@cam.ac.uk> - 2015-07-10 00:52 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-10 01:28 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> - 2015-07-12 13:20 +0300
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-12 11:39 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-12 10:28 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-13 08:17 +1200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-07-21 14:46 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-25 19:27 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-07-13 21:16 +0000
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-10 08:34 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-10 00:46 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-10 12:35 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-10 12:47 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-10 14:29 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-11 06:36 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-11 07:16 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-15 14:23 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-15 15:27 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-20 19:27 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-11 15:27 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-11 08:00 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-11 15:46 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-11 16:01 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-12 00:36 +0000
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-15 13:55 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-15 14:12 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-20 19:45 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-15 14:34 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-15 15:37 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-16 10:07 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-16 10:18 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-16 13:35 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-16 21:10 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-17 13:55 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-17 11:16 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-17 11:25 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-17 20:51 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-17 13:48 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-07-21 15:12 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-21 10:56 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-21 19:43 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-21 12:52 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-21 21:17 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-07-21 23:58 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-22 20:39 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-07-24 00:54 -0400
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-24 09:06 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-07-24 08:04 -0400
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-24 13:48 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-07-25 14:02 -0400
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-30 13:41 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-08-02 15:41 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-08-02 21:51 +0000
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-08-03 01:20 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-08-04 10:54 +0000
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-04 06:02 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-08-04 14:03 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-04 11:36 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-04 11:21 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-08-04 12:18 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-08-04 13:19 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-08-04 13:35 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-08-04 21:40 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-08-04 13:51 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-08-04 22:57 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-08-05 08:45 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-08-04 14:19 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-08-04 23:22 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-08-04 14:28 -0700
Language (was: Re: Recursion or loop, design questions) "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-08-04 23:35 +0200
Re: Language (was: Re: Recursion or loop, design questions) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-04 14:45 -0700
Re: Language "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-08-04 23:55 +0200
Re: Language (was: Re: Recursion or loop, design questions) fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-08-04 16:44 -0700
Re: Language (was: Re: Recursion or loop, design questions) fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-08-04 17:18 -0700
Re: Language (was: Re: Recursion or loop, design questions) fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-08-05 01:32 -0700
Re: Language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-08-05 09:51 +0100
Re: Language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-08-05 12:55 +0100
Re: Language Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2015-08-05 19:12 +0100
Re: Language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-08-06 17:09 +0100
Re: Language luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2015-08-06 15:10 -0700
Re: Language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-08-07 09:48 +0100
Re: Language luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2015-08-07 13:37 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-08-06 10:54 +0000
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-08-06 13:32 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-08-06 11:06 -0400
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-08-06 11:52 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-08-06 21:19 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-08-06 17:59 -0400
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-08-06 15:54 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-08-06 12:56 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-08-07 23:45 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-08-08 09:27 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-08-08 01:09 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-08-08 01:34 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-08 13:00 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-08-08 14:22 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-08-08 16:12 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-08 17:31 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-08-09 13:34 +0000
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-08-09 08:38 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-08-09 09:31 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-08-09 01:52 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-08-06 04:40 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-25 20:19 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-25 23:59 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-30 15:53 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-25 19:43 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-25 20:05 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-27 23:53 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-08-03 01:51 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-03 10:04 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-17 21:34 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-17 13:52 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-17 21:57 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-18 10:44 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-18 11:00 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-07-18 05:25 -0500
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-18 14:26 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-18 17:38 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-18 10:05 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-18 21:31 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-18 14:28 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-18 15:01 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-18 15:39 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-18 15:44 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-18 15:55 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-19 10:58 +1200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-18 16:26 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-18 17:23 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-18 18:04 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-19 00:03 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-19 13:30 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-19 08:45 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-19 20:59 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-19 21:19 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2015-07-20 07:23 -0500
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-07-19 21:11 +0000
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-20 15:37 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-08-09 13:55 +0000
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-09-05 11:22 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2015-07-19 17:22 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-19 10:25 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-07-19 03:15 -0500
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-19 10:36 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2015-07-19 12:45 -0400
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2015-07-19 13:05 -0400
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2015-07-19 13:09 -0400
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-19 10:40 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-19 22:31 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-08-09 14:05 +0000
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-08-09 21:22 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-09 16:14 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-08-10 05:39 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-10 01:40 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-10 21:03 +1200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-10 03:16 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-08-10 12:16 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-10 03:36 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-08-10 12:45 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-08-22 14:07 +0000
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-08-22 14:07 +0000
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-19 02:47 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-19 22:23 +1200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-19 05:01 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-20 09:55 +1200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-19 23:13 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-20 10:19 +1200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-07-19 17:21 -0500
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-20 00:25 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-20 11:45 +1200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-07-20 02:34 -0500
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-20 10:52 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-20 05:31 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-19 22:16 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-20 17:24 +1200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-19 22:36 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-20 21:07 +1200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-20 02:51 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2015-07-19 10:12 -0500
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-07-19 16:54 -0500
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2015-07-20 12:34 -0500
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-23 07:28 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-27 11:08 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-30 15:45 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-08-02 14:59 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-04 08:40 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-08-04 23:05 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-19 12:46 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-19 12:57 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2015-07-19 21:16 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-20 15:50 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-18 09:13 -0400
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-18 15:04 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-18 12:40 -0400
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-20 16:27 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-18 14:26 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-18 09:58 -0400
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-18 15:24 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-07-18 10:29 -0400
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-18 17:32 +0000
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-20 15:28 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-20 22:58 +0000
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-23 03:13 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-18 21:49 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-20 15:12 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-07-20 15:21 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-07-20 15:23 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-23 03:46 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-23 03:31 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-21 04:08 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-11 08:50 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-11 18:43 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-11 18:54 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-11 13:06 -0400
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-12 23:45 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-12 17:48 -0400
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-07-13 01:27 +0200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-11 19:39 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-11 14:51 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-11 23:51 +0100
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-15 08:04 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-16 09:36 +1200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-20 10:37 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-21 20:55 +1200
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-23 07:39 -0700
Re: Recursion or loop, design questions Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-16 09:41 +1200
Page 8 of 15 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 … 15 Next page →
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-05 01:32 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Language (was: Re: Recursion or loop, design questions) |
| Message-ID | <e1b9b71c-41b4-450d-9455-413db48a837b@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #66893 |
overall it seems that it is better not to build a theories but increase understanding
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-05 09:51 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Language |
| Message-ID | <mpsinv$s7u$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #66906 |
On 05/08/15 09:32, fir wrote:
> overall it seems that it is better not to build a theories but increase understanding
>
Clarity increases understanding. A program (or a Usenet article) that is
difficult to read cannot be understood as clearly as a program (or a
Usenet article) that is easy to read. That is why readability is even
more important than correctness. An unreadable program (or an unreadable
Usenet article) might be correct, but how will anyone know if they can't
read it? Unless we know something to be correct, why should we trust it?
And if we can't read it, how do we know it to be correct?
Let me give you an example. Is this program correct?
#define M 002354l
#define A 000644l
#define G 000132l
#define I 000322l
#define C 000374l
#define a ;
#define b for
#define c ++
#define d %
#define e int
#define f ,
#define g -
#define h 011
#define i =
#define j {
#define k )
#define l '\n'
#define m main
#define n <
#define o }
#define p >
#define q &&
#define r (
#define s ||
#define t ?
#define u putchar
#define v void
#define w '*'
#define x :
#define y ' '
#define _ /
#define C_O_O_L return
e u r e k a
e
m r
v k j
j j j j
j j j j j
j j j j j j
j j j j j j j
j e z a b r z i
M _ A _ G _ I _ C
a z n G a u r z d h
+ z _ h p M _ A q z d
h + z _ h n M _ G q z _
h n z d h + M _ I q z _ h
p z d h g M _ C t w x y k f
z d h g h + 1 s u r l k f z c
k a u r l k a j j j j j j j j j
j j C_O_O_L M _ A _ G _ I _ C a o
o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
o o o o
o o o o
o o o o
o o o o
Most people will just nod and smile and not bother to check it. If you
/have/ to check it because it's your job, you won't thank the author for
writing it in this way. And if you have to /change/ it because of
changing requirements, you'll probably decide that it's quicker to write
the program from scratch than to work out what's going on in the
existing code.
This is why it's important to make our programs readable *first*. The
task of making them correct then becomes so much easier.
--
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-05 12:55 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Language |
| Message-ID | <mpstg1$6mq$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #66907 |
[Addendum] On 05/08/15 09:51, Richard Heathfield wrote: > > Let me give you an example. Is this program correct? > > #define M 002354l > #define A 000644l > #define G 000132l > #define I 000322l > #define C 000374l etc etc. (See parent article for full source.) Changing the subject somewhat: yes, the program I posted one article upthread is of course obfuscated, but there is rather more to it than just a load of #defines. If you're stuck for something to do in your lunch hour, you might find it diverting to attempt to de-obfuscate the program and work out how it does what it does. The obvious first step is to run it through the preprocessor (and then, perhaps, a pretty-printer, to sort out some of the whitespace). Once you've done that, however, you will discover that your problems are far from over... -- Richard Heathfield Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999 Sig line 4 vacant - apply within
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-05 19:12 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Language |
| Message-ID | <87lhdpa9kv.fsf@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #66908 |
Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes: > The obvious first step is to run it through the preprocessor (and > then, perhaps, a pretty-printer, to sort out some of the > whitespace). Once you've done that, however, you will discover that > your problems are far from over... A couple of emacs keyboard macros (suck it VC++) and it mostly falls apart, though I confess the hfr bs 1 naq y va gur bpgny ahzoref jnf arng
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-06 17:09 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Language |
| Message-ID | <mq00or$cpu$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #66925 |
On 05/08/15 19:12, Gareth Owen wrote:
> Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes:
>
>> The obvious first step is to run it through the preprocessor (and
>> then, perhaps, a pretty-printer, to sort out some of the
>> whitespace). Once you've done that, however, you will discover that
>> your problems are far from over...
>
> A couple of emacs keyboard macros (suck it VC++) and it mostly falls
> apart, though I confess the hfr bs 1 naq y va gur bpgny ahzoref jnf arng
I originally wrote the program as an answer to what used to be a common
question in comp.lang.c - how would you write a C program to produce a
diamond made up of '*' characters? This sort of shape:
*
***
*****
***
*
only a bit bigger.
The way I reasoned was this: if they can figure out how to strip out the
#defines, remove the padding (braces and so on), deal with the trick
that you ROT-13d, and figure out how to normalise the constants, then
they'll still be left with a flat (not nested) loop that pushes the
for() syntax a little further than is common. If they can figure out how
/that/ works, too, then they've earned the right to have the program for
free. And if they can't, how could they hand it in to their tutor with a
straight face?
--
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-06 15:10 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Language |
| Message-ID | <4f63e841-2662-45d3-b726-6ba1d2a4b728@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #66942 |
On Thursday, August 6, 2015 at 11:09:44 AM UTC-5, Richard Heathfield wrote: > On 05/08/15 19:12, Gareth Owen wrote: > > Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes: > > > >> The obvious first step is to run it through the preprocessor (and > >> then, perhaps, a pretty-printer, to sort out some of the > >> whitespace). Once you've done that, however, you will discover that > >> your problems are far from over... > > > > A couple of emacs keyboard macros (suck it VC++) and it mostly falls > > apart, though I confess the hfr bs 1 naq y va gur bpgny ahzoref jnf arng > > I originally wrote the program as an answer to what used to be a common > question in comp.lang.c - how would you write a C program to produce a > diamond made up of '*' characters? This sort of shape: > > * > *** > ***** > *** > * > > only a bit bigger. > > The way I reasoned was this: if they can figure out how to strip out the > #defines, remove the padding (braces and so on), deal with the trick > that you ROT-13d, and figure out how to normalise the constants, then > they'll still be left with a flat (not nested) loop that pushes the > for() syntax a little further than is common. If they can figure out how > /that/ works, too, then they've earned the right to have the program for > free. And if they can't, how could they hand it in to their tutor with a > straight face? > A few years ago on codegolf.stackexchange.com we tried to make this into a new challenge type called code-trolling. But it proved it proved impossible (for us) to specify the criteria precisely enough. It just became a free-for-all and nearly took down popularity-contest with it. It became our first "burninated" tag. sigh. I did simplify the program down to for..for...if... structure. But I won't share it so as not to spoil the fun. I almost pm-ed it, but then I thought "why"? Who'm I trying to impress? I got fooled by the long suffixes for a while, but then my results were only off by one! Great exercise! Thanks. How do you go about composing the numbers like that? Say, if one wanted to encode the Lost numbers 2 4 8 15 16 23 42 into a set of ratios, maybe with the hex of DEAD and BEEF?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-07 09:48 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Language |
| Message-ID | <mq1r9k$bea$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #66959 |
On 06/08/15 23:10, luser droog wrote: <snip> > I did simplify the program down to for..for...if... structure. And, having done so (as long as you derived the for/for/if from the program, rather than from the spec, which it seems you did), you've effectively solved the puzzle. (The rest is reasonably trivial). > Great exercise! Thanks. How do you go about composing the numbers > like that? It pains me to say it, but I really don't have the faintest idea how I did it. Such techniques are *only* useful in obfuscated programs, and I don't write very many of those, so I have no reason to remember the technique, and that code was written (probably) about a decade ago. If I had to do it again, I'd do it a different way, not because the old way was bad but because it's easier to come up with something different than to work out how I did it the first time. I wouldn't generally lock myself down into specific constants such as 0xdead and 0xbeef, though - I'd let the constants emerge. Having said that, 0xdead and 0xbeef are tempting, aren't they? So if you're going to do that, the first steps are to divide the larger integer by the smaller to get 1, and the smaller by the larger to get 0. With 0, 1, and C's rich set of operators, you can do *anything*. -- Richard Heathfield Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999 Sig line 4 vacant - apply within
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-07 13:37 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Language |
| Message-ID | <13ef0e88-d12d-43eb-aad9-6d2d778f48d9@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #66964 |
On Friday, August 7, 2015 at 3:48:32 AM UTC-5, Richard Heathfield wrote: > I wouldn't generally lock myself down into specific constants such as > 0xdead and 0xbeef, though - I'd let the constants emerge. Having said > that, 0xdead and 0xbeef are tempting, aren't they? So if you're going to > do that, the first steps are to divide the larger integer by the smaller > to get 1, and the smaller by the larger to get 0. With 0, 1, and C's > rich set of operators, you can do *anything*. Especially tempting if you remember the myth of Orpheus as related in Virgil's Georgics, the moral of which is that you can repopulate an apiary with a side of beef, wherefrom a new colony will spawn by spontaneous generation. -- Don't get your science facts from poetry, rather the reverse.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-06 10:54 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <55c33c82.1203218@news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #66886 |
"Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> wrote: > On 04.08.2015 23:19, fir wrote: > > W dniu wtorek, 4 sierpnia 2015 22:51:30 UTC+2 użytkownik fir napisał: > >> and correctnes stays far far behind > > > > well at least those "readable" "correct" "speed/optimised" categories were correctly pointed.. unlike those false reliances 3; > > (weeping a bit) ((yawn)) > > From your email date handling, it looks like you're polish. I see a lot > of your words are incorrect and the way you write is difficult to > comprehend.. > > If you work a little more on your English it would probably help you in > a lot of different areas if you work with IT. He doesn't have dyslexia, he has cannotbearsedia. Trying to tell him that it would be better for him not to mangle his own communications into illegibility is like trying to tell a moth it would be better for it not to keep flying into the lightbulb: theoretically correct, but utterly futile. It _wants_ to behave like an idiot. Richard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-06 13:32 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <mpvgkm$ui3$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #66932 |
On 06.08.2015 12:54, Richard Bos wrote: > "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 04.08.2015 23:19, fir wrote: >>> W dniu wtorek, 4 sierpnia 2015 22:51:30 UTC+2 użytkownik fir napisał: >>>> and correctnes stays far far behind >>> >>> well at least those "readable" "correct" "speed/optimised" categories were correctly pointed.. unlike those false reliances 3; >>> (weeping a bit) ((yawn)) >> >> From your email date handling, it looks like you're polish. I see a lot >> of your words are incorrect and the way you write is difficult to >> comprehend.. >> >> If you work a little more on your English it would probably help you in >> a lot of different areas if you work with IT. > > He doesn't have dyslexia, he has cannotbearsedia. Trying to tell him > that it would be better for him not to mangle his own communications > into illegibility is like trying to tell a moth it would be better for > it not to keep flying into the lightbulb: theoretically correct, but > utterly futile. It _wants_ to behave like an idiot. Well I don't know, if it is just for fun then it can be annoying, but it could also be an illness, biologically and/or mentally.. Not that it's any of my business, but it might be an idea to talk to the doctor about this behavior, this discussion and see what he/she says about it. -Morten
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-06 11:06 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mpvt2o$tup$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #66933 |
On 08/06/2015 07:32 AM, Morten W. Petersen wrote: > On 06.08.2015 12:54, Richard Bos wrote: ... >> He doesn't have dyslexia, he has cannotbearsedia. Trying to tell him >> that it would be better for him not to mangle his own communications >> into illegibility is like trying to tell a moth it would be better for >> it not to keep flying into the lightbulb: theoretically correct, but >> utterly futile. It _wants_ to behave like an idiot. > > Well I don't know, if it is just for fun then it can be annoying, but > it could also be an illness, biologically and/or mentally.. > > Not that it's any of my business, but it might be an idea to talk to the > doctor about this behavior, this discussion and see what he/she says > about it. In order for fir to decide to speak with a doctor, he would first have to accept that there's something wrong with his behavior. That doesn't seem particularly likely. Of course, I don't read his messages any more, I only see the parts quoted in other people's messages. I normally read so fast that I often don't even realize that I don't want to read a given paragraph until after I've already read the entire thing. However, the weird structure of fir's sentences slows my reading down enough that I've usually successfully skipped over most of the quoted material from fir. Of course, based upon previous experience, even if I'd read the material, I wouldn't have gained much of a clue as to what (if anything) he was thinking. Therefore, I have no idea of the answer to the following question, but maybe you do: has fir said anything lately to suggest that he might be becoming aware of the disadvantages of his deliberate obfuscation? -- James Kuyper
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-06 11:52 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5e3d6197-eb39-4012-a3ae-a250e517194d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #66940 |
W dniu czwartek, 6 sierpnia 2015 17:06:42 UTC+2 użytkownik James Kuyper napisał: > On 08/06/2015 07:32 AM, Morten W. Petersen wrote: > > On 06.08.2015 12:54, Richard Bos wrote: > ... > >> He doesn't have dyslexia, he has cannotbearsedia. Trying to tell him > >> that it would be better for him not to mangle his own communications > >> into illegibility is like trying to tell a moth it would be better for > >> it not to keep flying into the lightbulb: theoretically correct, but > >> utterly futile. It _wants_ to behave like an idiot. > > > > Well I don't know, if it is just for fun then it can be annoying, but > > it could also be an illness, biologically and/or mentally.. > > > > Not that it's any of my business, but it might be an idea to talk to the > > doctor about this behavior, this discussion and see what he/she says > > about it. > > In order for fir to decide to speak with a doctor, he would first have > to accept that there's something wrong with his behavior. That doesn't > seem particularly likely. > Of course, I don't read his messages any more, I only see the parts > quoted in other people's messages. I normally read so fast that I often > don't even realize that I don't want to read a given paragraph until > after I've already read the entire thing. However, the weird structure > of fir's sentences slows my reading down enough that I've usually > successfully skipped over most of the quoted material from fir. Of > course, based upon previous experience, even if I'd read the material, I > wouldn't have gained much of a clue as to what (if anything) he was > thinking. > Therefore, I have no idea of the answer to the following question, but > maybe you do: has fir said anything lately to suggest that he might be > becoming aware of the disadvantages of his deliberate obfuscation? changing my style is outa question.. if you feel sorry you cannot understand me, im sorry but i will not help
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-06 21:19 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <mq0bsl$qe0$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #66944 |
On 06/08/15 20:52, fir wrote: > W dniu czwartek, 6 sierpnia 2015 17:06:42 UTC+2 użytkownik James Kuyper napisał: >> On 08/06/2015 07:32 AM, Morten W. Petersen wrote: >>> On 06.08.2015 12:54, Richard Bos wrote: >> ... >>>> He doesn't have dyslexia, he has cannotbearsedia. Trying to tell him >>>> that it would be better for him not to mangle his own communications >>>> into illegibility is like trying to tell a moth it would be better for >>>> it not to keep flying into the lightbulb: theoretically correct, but >>>> utterly futile. It _wants_ to behave like an idiot. >>> >>> Well I don't know, if it is just for fun then it can be annoying, but >>> it could also be an illness, biologically and/or mentally.. >>> >>> Not that it's any of my business, but it might be an idea to talk to the >>> doctor about this behavior, this discussion and see what he/she says >>> about it. >> >> In order for fir to decide to speak with a doctor, he would first have >> to accept that there's something wrong with his behavior. That doesn't >> seem particularly likely. >> Of course, I don't read his messages any more, I only see the parts >> quoted in other people's messages. I normally read so fast that I often >> don't even realize that I don't want to read a given paragraph until >> after I've already read the entire thing. However, the weird structure >> of fir's sentences slows my reading down enough that I've usually >> successfully skipped over most of the quoted material from fir. Of >> course, based upon previous experience, even if I'd read the material, I >> wouldn't have gained much of a clue as to what (if anything) he was >> thinking. >> Therefore, I have no idea of the answer to the following question, but >> maybe you do: has fir said anything lately to suggest that he might be >> becoming aware of the disadvantages of his deliberate obfuscation? > > changing my style is outa question.. > if you feel sorry you cannot understand me, > im sorry but i will not help > (I'm replying so that James can see this.) Fir believes his deliberate obfuscation is an advantage, not a disadvantage. We primitive commonist insulters don't deserve to understand his wisdom.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-06 17:59 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mq0la0$ub2$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #66947 |
On 08/06/2015 03:19 PM, David Brown wrote: > On 06/08/15 20:52, fir wrote: ... >> changing my style is outa question.. >> if you feel sorry you cannot understand me, You misunderstand - I'm not sorry that I cannot understand you; the parts of your messages that I have understood provide no evidence to suggest that I'm missing anything of value by not understanding the rest. I'm sorry only that you're wasting the admittedly minor amount of my time that I spend skipping over the messages of people who respond to your messages. I also think you're wasting their time - but that's not my decision to make, and they apparently disagree. >> im sorry but i will not help >> > > (I'm replying so that James can see this.) I have his messages filtered in order to avoid having to waste time ignoring things like that. However, since you seemed interested in how I would respond to him, for your sake, I've provided that response. -- James Kuyper
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-06 15:54 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8184ca39-a833-4a9f-8400-bd1e90ae590a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #66956 |
W dniu piątek, 7 sierpnia 2015 00:00:11 UTC+2 użytkownik James Kuyper napisał: > On 08/06/2015 03:19 PM, David Brown wrote: > > On 06/08/15 20:52, fir wrote: > ... > >> changing my style is outa question.. > >> if you feel sorry you cannot understand me, > > You misunderstand - I'm not sorry that I cannot understand you; the > parts of your messages that I have understood provide no evidence to > suggest that I'm missing anything of value by not understanding the rest. > > I'm sorry only that you're wasting the admittedly minor amount of my > time that I spend skipping over the messages of people who respond to > your messages. I also think you're wasting their time - but that's not > my decision to make, and they apparently disagree. > > >> im sorry but i will not help > >> > > > > (I'm replying so that James can see this.) > > I have his messages filtered in order to avoid having to waste time > ignoring things like that. However, since you seemed interested in how I > would respond to him, for your sake, I've provided that response. dont be afraid you will have good time reading RH and DB, KT or RB clearly written revelations (blink) for me for your own protection youre just _disallowed_ to read my texts (by me) - so dont blame ME for yourtime waste of reading text whose i dont even want 'allow' you to read (my posts are intended for more bright people ONLY) - see how i care for you
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-06 12:56 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <af836dd9-b780-4e13-87bd-e71de9e34b4d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #66940 |
W dniu czwartek, 6 sierpnia 2015 17:06:42 UTC+2 użytkownik James Kuyper napisał: > However, the weird structure of fir's sentences slows wonder which are the weirdest ;, (as i said i personaly find this weirdess as an added value - my weak english allow me to combine words in unusual way, in polish i had no such fun... effect is fine but discussing it is rather pointles, i really had no time for more such low-grade discussion as some before (those with RH and DB) (and i really would like them to stay out and doing its own business, instead of wasting my time over and over (partially its my fault I should be wiser and not answer timewasting topics at all, but well eh im to kind ) (but really if some want to continue this timewaste you will most likely do it alone)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-07 23:45 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c4c611b7-2128-41bf-985a-d71b80b98b79@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #66950 |
besides timewaste question and plain insulters, maybe it is worth to mention i feel also just insulted by some users stupidity even if it shows more mildly (thats why it is better for stupidity to stay out)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-08 09:27 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <mq4b1e$rbk$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #66993 |
On 08/08/2015 08:45 AM, fir wrote: > besides timewaste question and plain insulters, > maybe it is worth to mention i feel also just > insulted by some users stupidity even if it shows more mildly (thats why it is better for stupidity to stay out) Well this is interesting. :) I'd like to think that everyone starts out life as an idiot, and then on the way learn different useful things, some learn more in given areas than others. Wouldn't you agree that the it is more the attitude towards learning that is important, more than what a person knows? In other words, nobody knows something before they've learned it, and it is the ability to learn and the attitude towards the people that can teach you something is important.. -Morten
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-08 01:09 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <900b9c33-16b3-4367-8321-45e19c961087@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #66994 |
W dniu sobota, 8 sierpnia 2015 09:27:54 UTC+2 użytkownik Morten W. Petersen napisał: > On 08/08/2015 08:45 AM, fir wrote: > > besides timewaste question and plain insulters, > > maybe it is worth to mention i feel also just > > insulted by some users stupidity even if it shows more mildly (thats why it is better for stupidity to stay out) > > Well this is interesting. :) > > I'd like to think that everyone starts out life as an idiot, and then > on the way learn different useful things, some learn more in given > areas than others. > > Wouldn't you agree that the it is more the attitude towards learning > that is important, more than what a person knows? > > In other words, nobody knows something before they've learned it, and > it is the ability to learn and the attitude towards the people that can > teach you something is important.. > > -Morten stupidity is more than being unlerned it is releted to hurtingly shallow thinking; (at least hurtingly for the truth) so in short is related to shalowness and deepness
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-08 01:34 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <81379798-4522-4591-9eef-1d565fe23bc5@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #66996 |
W dniu sobota, 8 sierpnia 2015 10:09:54 UTC+2 użytkownik fir napisał: > so in short is related to shalowness and deepness of the truth 'scanning' (or how to call it) allright i must go to work
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 8 of 15 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 … 15 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web