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

Groups > comp.lang.c > #73154 > unrolled thread

Re: C pointer semantics with dynamically allocated struct

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

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: C pointer semantics with dynamically allocated struct Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-17 12:20 -0700
    Re: C pointer semantics with dynamically allocated struct Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-10-17 22:29 +0100
    Re: C pointer semantics with dynamically allocated struct Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-17 15:28 -0700

#73154 — Re: C pointer semantics with dynamically allocated struct

On Wednesday, August 12, 2015 at 1:11:58 AM UTC+1, Richard Heathfield wrote:
> On 12/08/15 00:46, glen herrmannsfeldt wrote:
>
> I don't think it's an "actual rule". It's really only common sense. A 
> quotation is a playing-back of something someone said (or, to be more 
> precise, wrote). If you change the text (other than in trivial ways, 
> such as whitespace), it is no longer a quotation.
> 
If you transcribe speech verbatim it's full of "kinda"s and "see what
I mean"s, and is very difficult to read. So journalists usually recast
it into written sentences. Occasionally they don't, when they wish
to imply that the speaker is an idiot. It's just a trick you should
be aware of.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#73156

On 17/10/15 20:20, Malcolm McLean wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 12, 2015 at 1:11:58 AM UTC+1, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> On 12/08/15 00:46, glen herrmannsfeldt wrote:
>>
>> I don't think it's an "actual rule". It's really only common sense. A
>> quotation is a playing-back of something someone said (or, to be more
>> precise, wrote). If you change the text (other than in trivial ways,
>> such as whitespace), it is no longer a quotation.
>>
> If you transcribe speech verbatim it's full of "kinda"s and "see what
> I mean"s, and is very difficult to read. So journalists usually recast
> it into written sentences. Occasionally they don't, when they wish
> to imply that the speaker is an idiot. It's just a trick you should
> be aware of.

Malcolm, the context is Usenet articles. I suppose it's true that some 
people might have text-to-speech Usenet clients, but I don't imagine 
that even they would manually transcribe material that they wish to 
quote, would they? Surely they'd quote material in the usual manner?

-- 
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]

#73163

Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> writes:
> On Wednesday, August 12, 2015 at 1:11:58 AM UTC+1, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> On 12/08/15 00:46, glen herrmannsfeldt wrote:
>>
>> I don't think it's an "actual rule". It's really only common sense. A 
>> quotation is a playing-back of something someone said (or, to be more 
>> precise, wrote). If you change the text (other than in trivial ways, 
>> such as whitespace), it is no longer a quotation.
>> 
> If you transcribe speech verbatim it's full of "kinda"s and "see what
> I mean"s, and is very difficult to read. So journalists usually recast
> it into written sentences. Occasionally they don't, when they wish
> to imply that the speaker is an idiot. It's just a trick you should
> be aware of.

The context of the discussion is quoting *written* material on Usenet.

-- 
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] | [standalone]

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

csiph-web