Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #70600 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-09-16 06:18 +0200 |
| Last post | 2015-09-17 17:06 +0200 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 138 — 21 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 06:18 +0200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-16 17:06 +1200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-16 08:00 +0200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-16 09:00 +0200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-16 02:03 -0700
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-16 11:20 +0200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 13:08 +0200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-16 13:26 +0200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 17:47 +0200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-16 09:37 -0700
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 15:41 +0200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-17 07:06 -0700
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 16:22 +0200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-16 23:13 +0200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 15:35 +0200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2015-09-16 18:12 +0200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-16 13:18 +0200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-09-16 08:47 -0700
Re: Quoting Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-16 20:30 +0200
Re: Quoting Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-09-16 11:41 -0700
Re: Quoting Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-16 20:53 +0200
Re: Quoting Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-09-16 12:19 -0700
Re: Quoting Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-16 21:49 +0200
Re: Quoting Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-09-16 13:24 -0700
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2015-09-16 18:14 +0200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 18:22 +0200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2015-09-16 18:29 +0200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 18:31 +0200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-09-16 12:48 -0400
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 18:56 +0200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-09-16 13:09 -0400
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 23:41 +0200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-09-16 18:05 -0400
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Martin Shobe <martin.shobe@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-16 12:13 -0500
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-16 10:13 -0700
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 14:01 -0700
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-16 10:02 -0700
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 13:53 -0700
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 14:10 -0700
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-09-16 10:33 -0700
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 19:40 +0200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Martin Shobe <martin.shobe@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-16 12:50 -0500
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 19:55 +0200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-09-16 13:57 -0400
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-09-16 11:02 -0700
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-16 20:50 +0200
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-09-16 12:20 -0700
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 23:33 +0200
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-09-16 17:52 -0400
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 00:03 +0200
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-09-16 15:21 -0700
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 00:30 +0200
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-09-17 00:26 +0100
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-09-16 21:24 -0700
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-09-17 05:48 +0100
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-09-17 07:16 -0700
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-09-17 17:00 +0100
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-09-17 11:23 -0700
MSVC deprecation (was Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet) Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-09-16 23:31 -0700
Re: MSVC deprecation (was Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet) Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-09-17 07:33 -0700
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-17 11:46 +0200
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 22:26 +1200
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-09-17 11:17 +0000
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-17 13:33 +0200
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 13:56 +0200
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-17 14:20 +0200
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-09-17 13:28 +0100
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-17 15:18 +0200
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-09-17 13:34 +0000
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-09-17 12:29 +0000
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-17 05:34 -0700
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 14:48 +0200
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-09-17 08:52 -0400
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-09-17 08:50 -0400
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-09-17 12:57 +0000
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-09-17 13:52 +0100
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 07:13 -0700
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 07:42 -0700
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 07:55 -0700
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-09-18 05:51 -0700
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-09-16 16:27 -0400
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-16 23:35 +0200
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-09-17 00:36 +0100
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 08:09 +0200
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-09-17 07:59 +0100
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-17 01:13 -0700
Re: Hidden agendas on Usenet "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> - 2015-09-17 13:08 +0200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-16 23:22 +0200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-09-17 08:57 -0400
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-17 15:28 +0200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-09-17 09:45 -0400
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-09-17 22:56 -0400
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-18 10:19 +0200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-17 23:01 -0500
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-18 10:20 +0200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-09-18 09:23 +0100
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-18 14:08 +0200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-09-18 08:48 -0700
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Lowell Gilbert <lgusenet@be-well.ilk.org> - 2015-09-18 16:44 -0400
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-09-18 17:33 -0400
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Lowell Gilbert <lgusenet@be-well.ilk.org> - 2015-09-19 21:12 -0400
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-09-21 09:10 +0000
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-09-21 09:16 +0000
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-09-16 08:34 -0700
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-16 09:33 -0700
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-09-16 10:43 -0700
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-16 12:29 -0700
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-09-16 13:10 -0700
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-16 13:42 -0700
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-09-16 14:04 -0700
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-16 14:34 -0700
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-09-16 15:01 -0700
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-09-16 22:26 -0400
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2015-09-17 13:46 +0200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-09-17 12:48 +0100
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2015-09-19 12:40 -0700
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-09-21 09:14 +0000
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-09-21 06:13 -0700
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-09-21 17:39 +0100
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-10-02 13:21 +0000
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-02 13:25 -0700
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-10-04 13:51 +0000
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-04 15:45 -0700
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-09-16 21:39 -0700
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-09-17 00:42 +0100
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarnason@gmail.com> - 2015-09-24 07:34 -0700
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-16 23:55 -0500
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-16 13:03 -0500
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-16 19:31 +1200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-16 11:06 +0200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-16 21:17 +1200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-16 11:56 +0200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-09-16 08:59 -0700
Re: "gcc" on OS X Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-16 21:43 +0200
Re: "gcc" on OS X Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-09-16 13:20 -0700
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-17 08:25 +1200
Re: Compiling C project for Windows and Mac OS X (GCC for Linux) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-09-17 11:21 +0000
Re: gcc not a symlink on Mac OS X Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-09-17 17:06 +0200
Page 2 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 Next page →
| From | Noob <root@127.0.0.1> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 20:53 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Quoting |
| Message-ID | <mtcdnv$8rb$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #70673 |
On 16/09/2015 20:41, Keith Thompson wrote: > The point is that I didn't read your article closely enough. OK, but you considered it important to point out that the article was 2 years old. Does that mean that 1) the features should now be widely available? 2) MS didn't implement the features they promised? 3) something else?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 12:19 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Quoting |
| Message-ID | <ln4miujhoz.fsf@kst-u.example.com> |
| In reply to | #70676 |
Noob <root@127.0.0.1> writes:
> On 16/09/2015 20:41, Keith Thompson wrote:
>> The point is that I didn't read your article closely enough.
>
> OK, but you considered it important to point out that the article
> was 2 years old. Does that mean that
>
> 1) the features should now be widely available?
> 2) MS didn't implement the features they promised?
> 3) something else?
It indicates that the article is 2 years old.
If you're looking for some hidden agenda on my part, you're not going to
find it.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Noob <root@127.0.0.1> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 21:49 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Quoting |
| Message-ID | <mtch08$mmb$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #70679 |
On 16/09/2015 21:19, Keith Thompson wrote: > Noob writes: >> On 16/09/2015 20:41, Keith Thompson wrote: >>> The point is that I didn't read your article closely enough. >> >> OK, but you considered it important to point out that the article >> was 2 years old. Does that mean that >> >> 1) the features should now be widely available? >> 2) MS didn't implement the features they promised? >> 3) something else? > > It indicates that the article is 2 years old. Why is it relevant to you that the article is not from last week? What if it had been written 2 months ago, would that be worth pointing out? (Why?)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 13:24 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Quoting |
| Message-ID | <lna8smi02u.fsf@kst-u.example.com> |
| In reply to | #70689 |
Noob <root@127.0.0.1> writes:
> On 16/09/2015 21:19, Keith Thompson wrote:
>> Noob writes:
>>> On 16/09/2015 20:41, Keith Thompson wrote:
>>>> The point is that I didn't read your article closely enough.
>>>
>>> OK, but you considered it important to point out that the article
>>> was 2 years old. Does that mean that
>>>
>>> 1) the features should now be widely available?
>>> 2) MS didn't implement the features they promised?
>>> 3) something else?
>>
>> It indicates that the article is 2 years old.
>
> Why is it relevant to you that the article is not from last week?
> What if it had been written 2 months ago, would that be worth
> pointing out? (Why?)
For trivial reasons that I don't feel like spending my time explaining.
--
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 | jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 18:14 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <mtc4dm$38q$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #70619 |
Le 16/09/2015 11:20, David Brown a écrit : > or > has declared to be "unsafe" and therefore not immediately available. Please just keep the facts clear and do not spread FUD... All functions of C89 are available under MSVC as always. You will get a warning (that can be avoided by adding a #define) if you use them, that is all.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 18:22 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <mtc4vs$705$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #70643 |
On 16.09.2015 18:14, jacobnavia wrote: > Le 16/09/2015 11:20, David Brown a écrit : >> or >> has declared to be "unsafe" and therefore not immediately available. > > Please just keep the facts clear and do not spread FUD... > > All functions of C89 are available under MSVC as always. You will get a > warning (that can be avoided by adding a #define) if you use them, that > is all. Just out of curiosity, who pays your bills? -Morten
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 18:29 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <mtc595$6s1$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #70644 |
Le 16/09/2015 18:22, Morten W. Petersen a écrit : > On 16.09.2015 18:14, jacobnavia wrote: >> Le 16/09/2015 11:20, David Brown a écrit : >>> or >>> has declared to be "unsafe" and therefore not immediately available. >> >> Please just keep the facts clear and do not spread FUD... >> >> All functions of C89 are available under MSVC as always. You will get a >> warning (that can be avoided by adding a #define) if you use them, that >> is all. > > Just out of curiosity, who pays your bills? > > -Morten > I receive a daily paycheck from Bill Gates. I told you some FACTS, so I am bound to be payed by the GREAT MASTER OF THE UNIVERSE Bill Gates himself. So, you ask questions here, but if somebody tells you some factual answers you have no other business than to insult them? Go to hell moron
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 18:31 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <mtc5hj$8pr$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #70646 |
On 16.09.2015 18:29, jacobnavia wrote: > Le 16/09/2015 18:22, Morten W. Petersen a écrit : >> On 16.09.2015 18:14, jacobnavia wrote: >>> Le 16/09/2015 11:20, David Brown a écrit : >>>> or >>>> has declared to be "unsafe" and therefore not immediately available. >>> >>> Please just keep the facts clear and do not spread FUD... >>> >>> All functions of C89 are available under MSVC as always. You will get a >>> warning (that can be avoided by adding a #define) if you use them, that >>> is all. >> >> Just out of curiosity, who pays your bills? >> >> -Morten >> > > I receive a daily paycheck from Bill Gates. > > I told you some FACTS, so I am bound to be payed by the GREAT MASTER OF > THE UNIVERSE Bill Gates himself. > > So, you ask questions here, but if somebody tells you some factual > answers you have no other business than to insult them? > > Go to hell moron So you resort to aggression when I ask you a perfectly simple question.. :) -Morten
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 12:48 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <55F99D73.8020903@verizon.net> |
| In reply to | #70647 |
On 09/16/2015 12:31 PM, Morten W. Petersen wrote: > On 16.09.2015 18:29, jacobnavia wrote: >> Le 16/09/2015 18:22, Morten W. Petersen a écrit : >>> On 16.09.2015 18:14, jacobnavia wrote: >>>> Le 16/09/2015 11:20, David Brown a écrit : >>>>> or >>>>> has declared to be "unsafe" and therefore not immediately available. >>>> >>>> Please just keep the facts clear and do not spread FUD... >>>> >>>> All functions of C89 are available under MSVC as always. You will get a >>>> warning (that can be avoided by adding a #define) if you use them, that >>>> is all. >>> >>> Just out of curiosity, who pays your bills? >>> >>> -Morten >>> >> >> I receive a daily paycheck from Bill Gates. >> >> I told you some FACTS, so I am bound to be payed by the GREAT MASTER OF >> THE UNIVERSE Bill Gates himself. >> >> So, you ask questions here, but if somebody tells you some factual >> answers you have no other business than to insult them? >> >> Go to hell moron > > So you resort to aggression when I ask you a perfectly simple question.. There was nothing simple about it - I'm not sure what you were going for with that question, but I can't see any relevance to the question unless it was intended to support a claim of bias. His biases are irrelevant when he's making statements about facts. If those statements are false, then all you have to address is the evidence that they are false, there's no need to question his motives. Do you in fact claim that one or more of his facts are incorrect? If so, identify which ones, and provide supporting evidence (I don't use Windows, so I have no idea whether he's right or not). Claims of bias are more relevant when matters of judgment are involved - but I didn't see any matters of judgment being discussed in his message. He provides a compiler targeting Windows platforms (and therefore in competition with Microsoft's compiler) that is free except for commercial users. He's said that he doesn't sell anything, so apparently no commercial users have bought his software, so he's not getting any money from Windows, directly or indirectly.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 18:56 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <mtc70p$cke$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #70651 |
On 16.09.2015 18:48, James Kuyper wrote: > On 09/16/2015 12:31 PM, Morten W. Petersen wrote: >> On 16.09.2015 18:29, jacobnavia wrote: >>> Le 16/09/2015 18:22, Morten W. Petersen a écrit : >>>> On 16.09.2015 18:14, jacobnavia wrote: >>>>> Le 16/09/2015 11:20, David Brown a écrit : >>>>>> or >>>>>> has declared to be "unsafe" and therefore not immediately available. >>>>> >>>>> Please just keep the facts clear and do not spread FUD... >>>>> >>>>> All functions of C89 are available under MSVC as always. You will get a >>>>> warning (that can be avoided by adding a #define) if you use them, that >>>>> is all. >>>> >>>> Just out of curiosity, who pays your bills? [...] >>> Go to hell moron [...] >> So you resort to aggression when I ask you a perfectly simple question.. [...] > He provides a compiler targeting Windows platforms (and therefore in > competition with Microsoft's compiler) that is free except for > commercial users. He's said that he doesn't sell anything, so apparently > no commercial users have bought his software, so he's not getting any > money from Windows, directly or indirectly. Well he still hasn't answered my question, and you're guessing.. So I'm still waiting for a good answer. -Morten
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 13:09 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <55F9A23D.9090509@verizon.net> |
| In reply to | #70652 |
On 09/16/2015 12:56 PM, Morten W. Petersen wrote: > On 16.09.2015 18:48, James Kuyper wrote: >> On 09/16/2015 12:31 PM, Morten W. Petersen wrote: >>> On 16.09.2015 18:29, jacobnavia wrote: >>>> Le 16/09/2015 18:22, Morten W. Petersen a écrit : >>>>> On 16.09.2015 18:14, jacobnavia wrote: >>>>>> Le 16/09/2015 11:20, David Brown a écrit : >>>>>>> or >>>>>>> has declared to be "unsafe" and therefore not immediately available. >>>>>> >>>>>> Please just keep the facts clear and do not spread FUD... >>>>>> >>>>>> All functions of C89 are available under MSVC as always. You will get a >>>>>> warning (that can be avoided by adding a #define) if you use them, that >>>>>> is all. >>>>> >>>>> Just out of curiosity, who pays your bills? > [...] >>>> Go to hell moron > [...] >>> So you resort to aggression when I ask you a perfectly simple question.. > [...] >> He provides a compiler targeting Windows platforms (and therefore in >> competition with Microsoft's compiler) that is free except for >> commercial users. He's said that he doesn't sell anything, so apparently >> no commercial users have bought his software, so he's not getting any >> money from Windows, directly or indirectly. > > Well he still hasn't answered my question, and you're guessing.. I'm not guessing. Everything I wrote that you quoted above is based on his previous public statements in this newsgroup. If you haven't seen such comments, that's just because you haven't been monitoring this group long enough. He's even given out his web-site's URL, and I checked it out myself (just to confirm what he had already said about commercial users - I found it confusing, in combination with his claim that he wasn't selling anything). > So I'm still waiting for a good answer. Why do you deserve an answer, good or bad, to an irrelevant question? If he hadn't already broadcast the answer to that question to the general public, he'd be well within his rights to object to that question as excessively personal.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 23:41 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <mtcnm8$m4b$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #70654 |
On 16.09.2015 19:09, James Kuyper wrote: > On 09/16/2015 12:56 PM, Morten W. Petersen wrote: [...] >> Well he still hasn't answered my question, and you're guessing.. > > I'm not guessing. Everything I wrote that you quoted above is based on > his previous public statements in this newsgroup. If you haven't seen > such comments, that's just because you haven't been monitoring this > group long enough. He's even given out his web-site's URL, and I checked > it out myself (just to confirm what he had already said about commercial > users - I found it confusing, in combination with his claim that he > wasn't selling anything). To quote the other post from Jacob I didn't reply to: Other post: > > Look, there is > > 1) The MS bashing contest > 2) The facts > > If you use functions deprecated by Microsoft like "strlen" you will > get a warning about it. That is a warning, and compilation will go on > as usual. > > If you do not like the warning you can add a #define to silence the > warnings, it is something like "NO_DEPRECATE" or similar, I do not > remember exactly. Well, might we be talking about the default again? Is it necessary to replace the default and standard functionality of C with something custom, that ties the user to a specific platform? How big of a hurdle are these custom C features to porting a program to another platform? I'm wondering about the pattern here, a pattern similar to what they did with the web and internet explorer and now possibly their "Edge" browser. -Morten
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 18:05 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <55F9E7B4.5020900@verizon.net> |
| In reply to | #70725 |
On 09/16/2015 05:41 PM, Morten W. Petersen wrote: ... > To quote the other post from Jacob I didn't reply to: > > Other post: > > > > Look, there is > > > > 1) The MS bashing contest > > 2) The facts > > > > If you use functions deprecated by Microsoft like "strlen" you will > > get a warning about it. That is a warning, and compilation will go on > > as usual. > > > > If you do not like the warning you can add a #define to silence the > > warnings, it is something like "NO_DEPRECATE" or similar, I do not > > remember exactly. > > Well, might we be talking about the default again? Is it necessary > to replace the default and standard functionality of C with something > custom, that ties the user to a specific platform? The standard functionality of C includes the possibility of producing arbitrary warning messages. A compiler that fully conforms to the C standard can provide warnings about anything it wants to: it could complain about the fact that your program uses identifiers containing an odd number of characters. This is why I reject the idea, that many people promote, that it is essential to write your code in such a way that it produces no warning messages on any compiler. If you want to pay more attention to a warning than is justified by the fact that it is labeled only as a "warning" and not an "error", that's your choice. If you don't like a given compiler because it produces too many spurious warnings, that's a legitimate complaint, and I might agree with you - but it isn't a portability issue unless those warning messages prevent a strictly conforming program from compiling and executing in conformance with the requirements of the standard. > How big of a hurdle are these custom C features to porting a program > to another platform? ... It's only as big a hurdle as you make it into. By themselves, diagnostic messages not mandated by the standard, and which do not prevent a program from compiling and executing in accordance with the requirements of the standard, present no hurdle to me whatsoever.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Martin Shobe <martin.shobe@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 12:13 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <mtc7rf$hdg$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #70652 |
On 9/16/2015 11:56 AM, Morten W. Petersen wrote: > On 16.09.2015 18:48, James Kuyper wrote: >> On 09/16/2015 12:31 PM, Morten W. Petersen wrote: >>> On 16.09.2015 18:29, jacobnavia wrote: >>>> Le 16/09/2015 18:22, Morten W. Petersen a écrit : >>>>> On 16.09.2015 18:14, jacobnavia wrote: >>>>>> Le 16/09/2015 11:20, David Brown a écrit : >>>>>>> or >>>>>>> has declared to be "unsafe" and therefore not immediately available. >>>>>> >>>>>> Please just keep the facts clear and do not spread FUD... >>>>>> >>>>>> All functions of C89 are available under MSVC as always. You will >>>>>> get a >>>>>> warning (that can be avoided by adding a #define) if you use them, >>>>>> that >>>>>> is all. >>>>> >>>>> Just out of curiosity, who pays your bills? > [...] >>>> Go to hell moron > [...] >>> So you resort to aggression when I ask you a perfectly simple question.. > [...] >> He provides a compiler targeting Windows platforms (and therefore in >> competition with Microsoft's compiler) that is free except for >> commercial users. He's said that he doesn't sell anything, so apparently >> no commercial users have bought his software, so he's not getting any >> money from Windows, directly or indirectly. > > Well he still hasn't answered my question, and you're guessing.. The above was all publicly disclosed by the one who would best know the truth about it. Some of it can even be directly verified. > So I'm still waiting for a good answer. Quite frankly, I don't see how the answer is any of your business. Martin Shobe
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 10:13 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <85f1e25d-c898-4a3a-a51b-facfb6910faf@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #70652 |
On Wednesday, September 16, 2015 at 5:57:13 PM UTC+1, Morten W. Petersen wrote: > > Well he still hasn't answered my question, and you're guessing.. > > So I'm still waiting for a good answer. > He earns his living from commercial licences for his compiler. It's not uncommon for software companies to charge for professional use and to charge a much lower rate or allow the product to be used for free by students, amateurs, and potential purchasers for assessment purposes. It's no secret and has been discussed many times here.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 14:01 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <010fbc06-ea4a-4277-9503-8d0e8278c53f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #70652 |
W dniu środa, 16 września 2015 18:57:13 UTC+2 użytkownik Morten W. Petersen napisał: > > So I'm still waiting for a good answer. > lol, what an obvious primitive - this is almost amazing
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 10:02 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3ed2d48f-d788-4e4f-91e3-5880b5084cfd@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #70651 |
On Wednesday, September 16, 2015 at 5:49:10 PM UTC+1, James Kuyper wrote: > > He provides a compiler targeting Windows platforms (and therefore in > competition with Microsoft's compiler) that is free except for > commercial users. He's said that he doesn't sell anything, so apparently > no commercial users have bought his software, so he's not getting any > money from Windows, directly or indirectly. > No, that's a language / willingness to understand issue. Jacob has a compiler which he mentions frequently on this newsgroup, obviously in the hope of getting some users. He has therefore been accused of using the newsgroup as a sales platform. He rejects that accusation, since the compiler is free for hobbyist use, so free to the majority of newsgroup participants. Only those who are self-employed developers are direct target customers. In my view it's perfectly legitimate to mention your own work when it is clearly C-related, and Jacob's posts do not constitute an unreasonable use of the group.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 13:53 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <72982917-971c-4117-8017-6914cd1f86dc@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #70647 |
W dniu środa, 16 września 2015 18:31:57 UTC+2 użytkownik Morten W. Petersen napisał: > On 16.09.2015 18:29, jacobnavia wrote: > > Le 16/09/2015 18:22, Morten W. Petersen a écrit : > >> On 16.09.2015 18:14, jacobnavia wrote: > >>> Le 16/09/2015 11:20, David Brown a écrit : > >>>> or > >>>> has declared to be "unsafe" and therefore not immediately available. > >>> > >>> Please just keep the facts clear and do not spread FUD... > >>> > >>> All functions of C89 are available under MSVC as always. You will get a > >>> warning (that can be avoided by adding a #define) if you use them, that > >>> is all. > >> > >> Just out of curiosity, who pays your bills? > >> > >> -Morten > >> > > > > I receive a daily paycheck from Bill Gates. > > > > I told you some FACTS, so I am bound to be payed by the GREAT MASTER OF > > THE UNIVERSE Bill Gates himself. > > > > So, you ask questions here, but if somebody tells you some factual > > answers you have no other business than to insult them? > > > > Go to hell moron > > So you resort to aggression when I ask you a perfectly simple question.. > > :) > > -Morten yea i agre perfectly simple indeed if you not see how 'impertinent' / 'arrogant swine' this type of question is then youre in quite poor state (dont bring 5cm diameter brain here ;c
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 14:10 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ca922c39-e74c-4fb5-835b-c976918d28db@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #70646 |
W dniu środa, 16 września 2015 18:29:19 UTC+2 użytkownik jacobnavia napisał: > > Go to hell moron well said
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-16 10:33 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <lnpp1ijmkl.fsf@kst-u.example.com> |
| In reply to | #70644 |
"Morten W. Petersen" <morphex@gmail.com> writes:
> On 16.09.2015 18:14, jacobnavia wrote:
>> Le 16/09/2015 11:20, David Brown a écrit :
>>> or
>>> has declared to be "unsafe" and therefore not immediately available.
>>
>> Please just keep the facts clear and do not spread FUD...
>>
>> All functions of C89 are available under MSVC as always. You will get a
>> warning (that can be avoided by adding a #define) if you use them, that
>> is all.
>
> Just out of curiosity, who pays your bills?
Just out of curiosity, why do you care about something that's none of
your business, and that has no apparent relevance to anything discussed
in this newsgroup in general, or in this thread in particular?
--
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]
Page 2 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web