Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #140381 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2019-01-29 10:50 -0800 |
| Last post | 2019-02-19 18:19 -0600 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 380 — 25 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
"...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2019-01-29 10:50 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-01-29 20:30 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2019-01-29 14:47 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-01-29 16:36 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2019-01-29 18:48 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-01-30 05:48 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-01-30 14:06 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2019-01-30 15:07 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-01-30 06:42 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2019-01-30 17:12 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-01-30 14:42 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2019-01-30 11:19 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-01-29 11:57 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2019-01-29 14:32 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-01-29 16:24 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-01-29 12:13 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-01-29 12:20 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2019-01-29 15:08 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-01-29 21:38 -0500
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2019-01-29 19:01 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-01-30 11:27 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-01-30 04:18 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2019-01-30 11:00 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-02-25 14:18 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-01-30 14:34 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-01-30 23:12 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-01-31 15:44 +1300
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-01-30 19:00 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2019-01-31 14:32 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2019-01-31 09:44 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-01-31 23:15 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2019-01-30 15:11 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2019-01-29 14:12 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-01-29 22:46 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2019-01-29 14:57 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-01-29 16:27 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2019-01-29 16:48 -0700
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2019-01-29 16:13 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" nobody@example.org (Scott) - 2019-01-30 16:57 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2019-01-30 18:04 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-01-30 17:35 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-01-30 19:23 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" nobody@example.org (Scott) - 2019-01-31 03:25 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-01-31 08:53 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2019-01-31 14:35 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-02-25 12:52 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2019-01-31 18:19 +0300
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2019-01-31 09:55 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-01-31 19:53 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2019-02-01 13:24 +0300
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-01 12:15 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2019-02-04 12:08 +0300
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-04 11:14 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-04 03:40 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2019-02-04 15:24 +0300
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-04 12:03 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-04 22:34 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ike Naar <ike@sdf.lonestar.org> - 2019-02-04 22:00 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-04 21:32 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-04 12:32 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-04 22:06 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-04 23:30 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-05 13:27 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-05 14:36 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-05 16:50 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-05 18:44 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-06 08:23 +1300
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-05 12:43 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-06 09:51 +1300
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-05 13:14 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-06 01:42 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-06 22:44 +1300
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-06 02:36 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" nobody@example.org (Scott) - 2019-02-06 17:39 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-02-06 10:39 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-07 07:58 +1300
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-02-25 22:45 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-26 08:44 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-02-26 08:03 -0500
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-26 15:29 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-07 07:59 +1300
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-06 12:07 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-06 03:42 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-06 13:36 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-06 04:44 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-02-06 05:40 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-06 05:50 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-02-06 06:03 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-06 06:22 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-06 15:54 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-07 10:40 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-06 05:56 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-06 16:04 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-07 00:26 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-07 09:39 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-07 10:57 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-07 19:55 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-07 23:27 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-07 16:35 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-08 02:02 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-02-25 16:10 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-26 02:37 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-02-25 14:06 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-02-07 12:01 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-07 21:55 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-07 23:17 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-07 16:36 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-08 02:04 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-08 01:39 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-08 11:42 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" mark.bluemel@gmail.com - 2019-02-08 03:07 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" mark.bluemel@gmail.com - 2019-02-08 03:10 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-08 13:43 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-08 06:47 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-08 17:56 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-02-08 10:27 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-10 05:01 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-10 16:51 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-10 09:14 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-11 02:34 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-11 09:54 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-11 12:35 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-11 14:03 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-11 14:53 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-02-25 16:36 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-26 02:57 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-02-25 22:24 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-26 14:25 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-03-06 08:50 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-11 01:48 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-11 13:53 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2019-02-11 08:01 -0500
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-11 17:01 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-11 11:30 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-12 01:40 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-12 01:51 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-12 12:13 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-12 03:39 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-12 16:27 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-12 07:57 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-13 09:50 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2019-02-12 21:13 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2019-02-12 21:52 -0700
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 01:30 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-13 11:52 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 03:29 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-13 13:26 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-13 11:41 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-02-13 05:26 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 05:32 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-02-25 14:34 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-12 16:09 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-12 08:42 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-13 04:40 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 02:05 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-13 02:55 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 03:32 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" mark.bluemel@gmail.com - 2019-02-13 03:36 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-13 13:32 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 06:30 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-13 16:10 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 07:21 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-13 16:38 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-13 11:57 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-13 21:27 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-14 00:55 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-14 02:41 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-14 03:14 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-14 15:12 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-14 07:28 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-15 01:06 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-24 20:47 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 13:43 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" mark.bluemel@gmail.com - 2019-02-25 02:26 -0800
Wow... (Was: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached") gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2019-02-25 12:12 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-13 15:46 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 08:15 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-13 18:07 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-11 13:43 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-10 12:43 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-10 13:14 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-10 13:59 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2019-02-10 17:50 -0500
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-02-25 15:17 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2019-02-25 17:38 -0700
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-02-25 21:40 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-26 01:37 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2019-02-11 20:24 -0700
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-07 10:41 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-06 14:47 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2019-02-06 07:51 -0500
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-02-06 05:12 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-06 05:22 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-02-06 05:51 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-07 10:33 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-05 21:24 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-06 00:24 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-06 14:13 +1300
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-06 08:56 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-05 23:59 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-06 00:15 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-06 08:25 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-06 11:51 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-06 14:41 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-06 14:17 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-06 06:37 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-06 16:10 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-04 14:48 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-04 22:09 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-05 10:19 +1300
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-04 22:05 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-12 12:10 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-13 08:47 +1300
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-12 12:41 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-12 20:55 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-13 10:07 +1300
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-12 21:53 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-13 11:01 +1300
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-16 15:09 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-16 16:33 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-16 16:51 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-16 16:52 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-16 18:20 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-16 20:00 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-17 08:54 +1300
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-16 23:23 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-17 12:31 +1300
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-17 00:34 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-17 14:26 +1300
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-17 01:45 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-17 20:12 +1300
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-17 11:23 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2019-02-12 23:00 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-12 14:12 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-12 22:44 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-12 23:32 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-13 12:51 +1300
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-13 01:13 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-14 07:39 +1300
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-13 19:54 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-14 16:30 +1300
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-14 13:17 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-14 15:19 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-14 14:45 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-14 16:10 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-14 16:38 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-14 20:24 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-02-14 07:17 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-14 20:28 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-02-14 12:05 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-15 01:48 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-02-14 06:29 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-14 14:19 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-02-15 01:33 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Manfred <noname@invalid.add> - 2019-02-18 19:33 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-18 18:53 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-18 19:05 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-18 20:11 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-18 19:25 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-18 21:39 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-02-14 19:22 -0500
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-02-15 02:14 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-02-25 15:53 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-15 09:27 +1300
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-13 10:02 +0100
Just an end-user... (Was: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is) reached" gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2019-02-13 09:13 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-13 11:32 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-13 13:37 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-13 14:21 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-13 16:32 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-13 15:18 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-13 16:36 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-13 23:09 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-14 01:51 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-14 02:35 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-14 10:00 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-14 12:26 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-14 15:22 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-14 15:02 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-14 16:23 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-14 17:03 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-14 20:41 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-14 21:23 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-15 10:38 +1300
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-14 22:53 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-02-14 08:19 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-14 20:45 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-02-15 02:32 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-15 11:51 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-14 16:47 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-14 17:18 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-14 17:48 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-14 19:26 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2019-02-14 20:21 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-14 21:20 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-14 22:24 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-15 00:18 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-15 01:29 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-15 08:14 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-02-15 07:03 -0500
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-15 04:42 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" mark.bluemel@gmail.com - 2019-02-15 05:26 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-15 16:37 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-02-25 14:24 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-15 14:07 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-02-15 07:02 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-15 17:06 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-15 08:10 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-02-25 21:45 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-26 14:16 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-26 15:04 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-26 15:26 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-26 12:06 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-26 21:05 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-26 13:55 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2019-02-27 06:41 -0500
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-27 12:33 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2019-02-27 08:18 -0500
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-27 14:02 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-02-26 21:18 -0500
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-27 02:41 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2019-02-26 19:13 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-02-26 22:29 -0500
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-27 09:33 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-02-27 07:41 -0500
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-27 14:15 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-02-27 07:02 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-27 17:18 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-28 15:05 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-03-07 11:24 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-03-21 11:13 +0000
Re: Readability (was: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached") Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-03-21 23:25 -0700
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-03-24 03:01 -0700
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-02-25 16:03 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-26 17:38 +1300
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-04 21:31 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" nobody@example.org (Scott) - 2019-02-01 02:38 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-01 01:57 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2019-02-01 13:26 +0300
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-02-01 07:18 -0500
The look of C (Was: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is) reached" gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2019-02-01 14:26 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-01 14:32 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-02-01 06:54 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-01 16:42 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-01 09:56 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-01 18:09 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-01 10:31 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-01 10:58 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-01 12:47 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-02 16:18 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-01 21:52 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-01 23:52 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-02 01:00 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-01 16:41 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-02 02:00 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-01 15:10 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2019-02-01 14:36 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-02-01 07:05 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-02-25 22:30 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2019-02-26 12:37 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-03-06 09:09 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-02-26 05:50 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-03-06 09:06 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-03-06 10:48 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-03-23 10:27 -0700
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-03-25 12:14 -0700
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-01 09:43 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" nobody@example.org (Scott) - 2019-01-31 03:46 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-01-30 22:49 -0500
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2019-01-30 20:08 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2019-02-10 09:11 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2019-02-19 10:23 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-19 22:55 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-19 15:48 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-20 00:10 +0000
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-19 16:42 -0800
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-20 13:05 +0100
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2019-02-20 10:30 -0600
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2019-02-19 16:05 -0600
Re: "...the value becomes,indeterminate each time the declaration is reached" Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2019-02-19 18:19 -0600
Page 8 of 19 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 … 19 Next page →
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-13 09:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <q40loo$cg8$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #140874 |
On 12/02/2019 16:57, Malcolm McLean wrote: > On Tuesday, 12 February 2019 15:28:12 UTC, David Brown wrote: >> >> Your idea about "grammar" is so wide as to be redundant - if it has a >> meaning at all, it merely means "correct". >> > Just defining what the word actually means isn't very fruitful, though > people have had huge difficulty with it. It means "allowed by the > language". Which is a requirement for being correct. It's better to > think in terms of meaningful versus non-meaningful. > You are not even using the word "meaningful", or the phrase "allowed by the language", in any sense that other people will recognise. This discussion is getting way too painful. Please learn some of the basics of computer science - or perhaps the English language - and then come back to us if you want. Alternatively, accept that when lots of other people (including several here that are way more qualified and experienced in such things than you or I) tell you that you are wrong, talking nonsense, and using terms incorrectly - accept that this is probably because they are right and you are wrong. Now we need to add "Malcolm-grammar", "Malcolm-meaningful", and "Malcolm-allowed by the Malcolm-language" to terms like "Malcolm-function" and "Malcolm-array". Don't you think it would be more helpful to use the terms as they are commonly used in this group (with a C language focus), and keep your own definitions, if you have any, for comp.lang.malcolm ?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-12 21:13 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnq66do1.4jo.grahn+nntp@frailea.sa.invalid> |
| In reply to | #140871 |
On Tue, 2019-02-12, Malcolm McLean wrote: ... > Grammar separates meaning from non-meaning. The way I was taught computer science, this is exactly what it /doesn't/ do. Just because this thread is so confusing, here's what I was taught: When you define a language and write a compiler or an interpreter, it's useful to do part of the work by describing an EBNF grammar. There are tools like yacc(1) to process it, and people can read it too. The grammar for C++ says things like "if x=1;" isn't a valid statement. It doesn't define semantics, i.e. it doesn't define the meaning of a program. Then you have to, somehow, add additional checks to weed out strings which match the grammar, but still aren't valid programs. Typical checks here are type system checks. To some extent, you can move checks between the grammar and the next step, but putting them all in the grammar is impractical. (Or impossible; I forget which). /Jorgen -- // Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . . \X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-12 21:52 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1ba7j0cmst.fsf@pfeifferfamily.net> |
| In reply to | #140881 |
Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> writes: > On Tue, 2019-02-12, Malcolm McLean wrote: > ... >> Grammar separates meaning from non-meaning. > > The way I was taught computer science, this is exactly what it > /doesn't/ do. > > Just because this thread is so confusing, here's what I was taught: > > When you define a language and write a compiler or an interpreter, > it's useful to do part of the work by describing an EBNF grammar. > There are tools like yacc(1) to process it, and people can read it > too. The grammar for C++ says things like "if x=1;" isn't a valid > statement. It doesn't define semantics, i.e. it doesn't define the > meaning of a program. > > Then you have to, somehow, add additional checks to weed out strings > which match the grammar, but still aren't valid programs. Typical > checks here are type system checks. > > To some extent, you can move checks between the grammar and the next > step, but putting them all in the grammar is impractical. (Or > impossible; I forget which). Yes, you are describing what grammar has meant in computer science for decades. Malcolm... has his own ideas, and a Humpty-Dumpty-esque view of terminology that is standard for everyone else. (not impossible, if you create a sufficiently bizarre context sensitive grammar. But the *big* take-home on grammar classes isn't what the most they can theoretically do, it's what's reasonable to do with a grammar class and maybe some extra hacks).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-13 01:30 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <91b288de-78bb-4c3b-a3c9-788481730cde@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #140897 |
On Wednesday, 13 February 2019 04:52:45 UTC, Joe Pfeiffer wrote: > Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> writes: > > > On Tue, 2019-02-12, Malcolm McLean wrote: > > ... > >> Grammar separates meaning from non-meaning. > > > > The way I was taught computer science, this is exactly what it > > /doesn't/ do. > > > > Just because this thread is so confusing, here's what I was taught: > > > > When you define a language and write a compiler or an interpreter, > > it's useful to do part of the work by describing an EBNF grammar. > > There are tools like yacc(1) to process it, and people can read it > > too. The grammar for C++ says things like "if x=1;" isn't a valid > > statement. It doesn't define semantics, i.e. it doesn't define the > > meaning of a program. > > > > Then you have to, somehow, add additional checks to weed out strings > > which match the grammar, but still aren't valid programs. Typical > > checks here are type system checks. > > > > To some extent, you can move checks between the grammar and the next > > step, but putting them all in the grammar is impractical. (Or > > impossible; I forget which). > > Yes, you are describing what grammar has meant in computer science for > decades. Malcolm... has his own ideas, and a Humpty-Dumpty-esque view > of terminology that is standard for everyone else. > > (not impossible, if you create a sufficiently bizarre context sensitive > grammar. But the *big* take-home on grammar classes isn't what the most > they can theoretically do, it's what's reasonable to do with a grammar > class and maybe some extra hacks). > You have the grammar in your head. And it's not the formal Backus Nuar grammar. No one learns C by looking at that and committing it to memory.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-13 11:52 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <q40stc$fpf$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #140903 |
On 13/02/2019 10:30, Malcolm McLean wrote: > You have the grammar in your head. And it's not the formal Backus Nuar > grammar. No one learns C by looking at that and committing it to memory. > > So you are saying that "grammar" is something you make up in your imagination, not something that is described in specifications, or agreed upon by the language standards, the compiler implementers, and the compiler users? Everyone makes up their own idea of what they think "grammar" means, and what C's "grammar" actually is? Thanks, but no thanks. I'll stick to C grammar, rather than Malcolm-grammar.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-13 03:29 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <04be19e1-65af-409d-b251-ec35a68c1dc7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #140905 |
On Wednesday, 13 February 2019 10:52:42 UTC, David Brown wrote: > On 13/02/2019 10:30, Malcolm McLean wrote: > > > You have the grammar in your head. And it's not the formal Backus Nuar > > grammar. No one learns C by looking at that and committing it to memory. > > > > > > So you are saying that "grammar" is something you make up in your > imagination, not something that is described in specifications, or > agreed upon by the language standards, the compiler implementers, and > the compiler users? Everyone makes up their own idea of what they think > "grammar" means, and what C's "grammar" actually is? > > Thanks, but no thanks. I'll stick to C grammar, rather than > Malcolm-grammar. > Exactly. No-one or very few people look at the formal grammar, commit it to memory, then works through applying those rules to create C programs. However we still program in C. You can also have obfuscated C, which virtually no-one can actually parse, though the compiler can. That's grammatical C in the sense of being accepted, not grammatical in the sense that it doesn't match the user's grammar. However if you give a set of mildly obfuscated C programs to various different programmers and ask them to say what they do, you'll get different answers. Some people will be able to parse correctly, others will reject the program as unparseable, still other will parse but make mistakes. So in fact everyone has a slightly different C grammar.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-13 13:26 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <q412e5$e0v$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #140910 |
On 13/02/2019 12:29, Malcolm McLean wrote: > On Wednesday, 13 February 2019 10:52:42 UTC, David Brown wrote: >> On 13/02/2019 10:30, Malcolm McLean wrote: >> >>> You have the grammar in your head. And it's not the formal Backus Nuar >>> grammar. No one learns C by looking at that and committing it to memory. >>> >>> >> >> So you are saying that "grammar" is something you make up in your >> imagination, not something that is described in specifications, or >> agreed upon by the language standards, the compiler implementers, and >> the compiler users? Everyone makes up their own idea of what they think >> "grammar" means, and what C's "grammar" actually is? >> >> Thanks, but no thanks. I'll stick to C grammar, rather than >> Malcolm-grammar. >> > Exactly. No-one or very few people look at the formal grammar, commit it > to memory, then works through applying those rules to create C programs. > However we still program in C. I agree that most people don't read the C standards, or learn all the details of its grammar - they are content with knowing a fair amount of it, and working with that (just as with natural language grammar). No one (except compiler writers) really cares if you are allowed to write "int short" or "short int short" instead of "short int", if they only write "short" or "short int". However, that does not have the slightest influence on what the grammar of C actually /is/ - it is the syntax rules laid down in the C standards, and described in Annex A. The "rules of C" that people informally know and use is a mixture of the grammar, the constraints, the semantics, and (for most people) some implementation-specific points. And while people don't know all of these rules, it is vital that there is a reference, and an agreed standard, that gives the final judgement. We do /not/ work by a set of /personal/ rules of C (grammar, semantics, or otherwise) - C is not one of Bart's personal languages with one implementer and one user. As mere humans, each of us only knows a subset of the rules and many of us make occasional mistakes about them - but the grammar and other rules are objectively defined, not personally. > You can also have obfuscated C, which virtually no-one can actually > parse, though the compiler can. That's grammatical C in the sense of > being accepted, not grammatical in the sense that it doesn't match > the user's grammar. Users don't have grammar. The obfuscated C program is grammatically correct if it conforms to the C grammar rules - how comprehensible it is to other people is irrelevant. You are totally and complete wrong about this. I can't imagine where you got your ideas from here. > However if you give a set of mildly obfuscated C programs to various > different programmers and ask them to say what they do, you'll get > different answers. Some people will be able to parse correctly, others > will reject the program as unparseable, still other will parse but > make mistakes. > > So in fact everyone has a slightly different C grammar. > No, they don't. They may have a different understanding of the C grammar, and they may understand different subsets or have different misunderstandings, but the C grammar is the same. (And only part of the "rules of C" are grammar - that's your other major misunderstanding here.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-13 11:41 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <878syjlxu6.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #140903 |
Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> writes: <cut> > You have the grammar in your head. And it's not the formal Backus Nuar > grammar. No one learns C by looking at that and committing it to > memory. Or, translated into the conventional terms, you have the syntax and semantics in your head. The syntax is largely defined by a formal grammar which no one commits to memory. -- Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-13 05:26 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <d3ccd5a8-f05e-49b8-9ea8-f360bb4fb165@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #140903 |
On Wednesday, February 13, 2019 at 4:30:57 AM UTC-5, Malcolm McLean wrote: ... > You have the grammar in your head. And it's not the formal Backus Nuar > grammar. No one learns C by looking at that and committing it to memory. I did, and I think most people do. I don't mean that I've got the whole thing memorized - but I do have most of it memorized. I also don't mean that I can write out the grammar in Backus-Naur format precisely as it is written in the standard - I mean that I know how to write and parse code that is consistent with the grammar. I don't do rote memorization of anything - I've never found it useful or effective. When I need to know the grammar for a given construct, and don't remember it, I go to the standard and read it. Eventually I stop needing to look it up (for most of the basic C grammar, I reached that point decades ago) - that's the same way I've memorized virtually everything I've ever learned. And my knowledge of the grammar is distinct from my knowledge of the constraints. My knowledge of those things are, in turn, distinct from my knowledge of the semantics: the defined, unspecified, implementation- defined, and undefined behavior of the code. Each of those categories has different implications for the code. You might find it useful to invent a concept of a Malcolm-grammar which includes all of those things, ignoring the differences between them, but the rest of us will continue to use the term "grammar" in its proper sense, as referring only to the syntax, and not to the semantics.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-13 05:32 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <343341b7-737e-438d-b5b2-a4e15b41afa7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #140927 |
On Wednesday, 13 February 2019 13:27:02 UTC, James Kuyper wrote: > On Wednesday, February 13, 2019 at 4:30:57 AM UTC-5, Malcolm McLean wrote: > ... > > You have the grammar in your head. And it's not the formal Backus Nuar > > grammar. No one learns C by looking at that and committing it to memory. > > I did, and I think most people do. I don't mean that I've got the whole > thing memorized - but I do have most of it memorized. I also don't mean > that I can write out the grammar in Backus-Naur format precisely as it > is written in the standard - I mean that I know how to write and parse > code that is consistent with the grammar. I don't do rote memorization > of anything - I've never found it useful or effective. When I need to > know the grammar for a given construct, and don't remember it, I go to > the standard and read it. Eventually I stop needing to look it up (for > most of the basic C grammar, I reached that point decades ago) - that's > the same way I've memorized virtually everything I've ever learned. > > And my knowledge of the grammar is distinct from my knowledge of the > constraints. My knowledge of those things are, in turn, distinct from my > knowledge of the semantics: the defined, unspecified, implementation- > defined, and undefined behavior of the code. Each of those categories > has different implications for the code. You might find it useful to > invent a concept of a Malcolm-grammar which includes all of those > things, ignoring the differences between them, but the rest of us will > continue to use the term "grammar" in its proper sense, as referring > only to the syntax, and not to the semantics. Here's Technopedia. It doesn't have a definition for "grammar" but it has one for "syntax". Definition - What does Syntax mean? In programming, syntax refers to the rules that specify the correct combined sequence of symbols that can be used to form a correctly structured program using a given programming language. Programmers communicate with computers through the correctly structured syntax, semantics and grammar of a programming language.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-25 14:34 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <8636obebvn.fsf@mailhub.linuxsc.com> |
| In reply to | #140927 |
James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> writes: > On Wednesday, February 13, 2019 at 4:30:57 AM UTC-5, Malcolm McLean wrote: > ... > >> You have the grammar in your head. And it's not the formal Backus Nuar >> grammar. No one learns C by looking at that and committing it to memory. > > I did, and I think most people do. [...] I would be very surprised if the facts bore this out. I usually look at language grammars for reference at some point, but that isn't how I learn the language to start with. If I had to bet, I think most students (either classroom or self-taught) never even look at a formal grammar, let alone learn the language that way. My experience learning C was out of (the original) K&R, and I certainly didn't look at formal syntax until I was done reading the main part of the book, because there was no need.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-12 16:09 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <87bm3hm1k0.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #140869 |
Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tuesday, 12 February 2019 01:40:29 UTC, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>> Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> > The text is a production. You produced it from the C grammar rules in
>> > your head. It's meaningful to me in that I can see the intention,
>> > and it is meaningful to the compiler in that it describes an executable
>> > the compiler can spit out (it's "accepted"). But of course there are two
>> > problems with it. If user enters a long string of digits that overflows
>> > the range of an int then I believe it is undefined behaviour.
>>
>> We are at an impasse now. Your meaningful and non-meaningful
>> productions were supposed to correlate to undefined behaviour but you
>> don't seem to see the problem with that.
>>
> That's one definition of "meaningful". Program with defined
> behaviour.
It's the one I was correcting.
> There are other definitions you can also use, such as "accepted by the
> C compiler", or "intelligible to a human programmer reading the program".
> Then "ungrammaticsl" doesn't mean "totally meaningless", at least usually.
>
> You seem to be stuck in a black and white world.
Yes. Your statement was wrong. My critique of it was correct. I know
that the fashion is for relative truth and alternative facts, but these
have no place in this sort of technical discussion.
>> > Then it
>> > doesn't return an integer to the environment.
>>
>> Yes it does.
>>
>> > [...] However there's no constraint over the behaviour, so the program
>> > doesn't describe the executable, so we can say it isn't grammatical.
>>
>> So how does "ungrammatical" correlate with undefined behavour?
>>
> If it's got UB, it violates one of the rules of C. Now admittedly this
> is where the C grammar breaks down. But if it violates a rule, we can
> say it's ungrammatical.
You've cut all the context. My example was of a text that did not break
a rule of C (at least I saw not such violation). It does not help that
you picked up on a non-error one that, were it an error, could be
described as related to the text alone. Here is the example again:
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void) { int i; if (scanf("%d", &i) == 1) printf("%d\n", i); }
What rule of C does the text break?
>> Surely you see this was an example of my general point that the vast
>> majority of undefined behaviour is not a property of the text alone
>> whereas grammatical and ungrammatical are?
>>
> You have a valid point here. But normally we have to assume that
> data supplied to a program can be of any physically possible sequence
> of bytes. So it becomes a property of the text alone.
So you want to say that a C program is ungrammatical if there is any way
in which run-time undefined behaviour could result? Even if this would
involve impossible analysis of the text? You can use the term like that
if you want but don't expect to persuade many other people. It's
essentially useless.
Here is another example text:
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void) { printf("%d\n", 1 << 15); }
This is, presumably, Malcolm-ungrammatical C. Just as all data must be
considered, all possible implementations and all possible build options
need to be considered. Have you ever written a non-trivial
Malcolm-grammatical C program?
>> The point it that "grammatical" == "accepted by the C compiler" is
>> essentially vacuous.
>>
> Of course it's a simple definition.
You are offering two interpretation of your initial remark. One is of
no practical value, and the other is vacuous.
<cut>
--
Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-12 08:42 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <d21291ea-335a-4073-bdb5-88e122de9d5c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #140875 |
On Tuesday, 12 February 2019 16:09:27 UTC, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>
> Here is another example text:
>
> #include <stdio.h>
> int main(void) { printf("%d\n", 1 << 15); }
>
> This is, presumably, Malcolm-ungrammatical C. Just as all data must be
> considered, all possible implementations and all possible build options
> need to be considered. Have you ever written a non-trivial
> Malcolm-grammatical C program?
>
That's implementation defined. It is allowed to rely on the implementation's
limits (so yes, you do need context, grammar isn't purely a feature
of the text with no context whatsoever, although it is basically a property
of texts).
So why isn't it allowed to rely on data being well formed? Because we
can't control that at the time of setting up the system. Unless we
can, of course, for instance if the data file ships with the program on
a ROM cartridge. But then the data plus the executable becomes "the program".
But in reality as well as in theory, data can usually be anything, including
malicious input specifically designed to exploit UB.
UB creates problems when thinking about what rules are "grammar rules"
because effectively the C standard has given up. It says "this must be
accepted but it is not allowed", because it is too hard, sometimes
even mathematically impossible, to enforce the constraint at compile time.
But UB is a grammar rule. Why? Because it separates meaningful from non-
meaningful programs, and that's what grammar does.
Then "non-grammatical" doesn't usually mean "gibberish". If we define
"grammatical", legitimately, to mean "accepted by the C compiler" then of
course we are in the world of black and white. But take a program to
calculate average height, from an input of all British men. What happens
if the population falls to zero? UB. But in those circumstances, who
will run the program? It's a tiny, tiny glitch which doesn't matter.
But it is still a fault. By presenting a marginal case, you don't render
a word or concept meaningless.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-13 04:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <87k1i4l2rq.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #140876 |
Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tuesday, 12 February 2019 16:09:27 UTC, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>
>> Here is another example text:
>>
>> #include <stdio.h>
>> int main(void) { printf("%d\n", 1 << 15); }
>>
>> This is, presumably, Malcolm-ungrammatical C. Just as all data must be
>> considered, all possible implementations and all possible build options
>> need to be considered. Have you ever written a non-trivial
>> Malcolm-grammatical C program?
>>
> That's implementation defined. It is allowed to rely on the implementation's
> limits (so yes, you do need context, grammar isn't purely a feature
> of the text with no context whatsoever, although it is basically a property
> of texts).
Can you can't say if this program is Malcolm-grammatical or not? A
simple use of scanf is, I think, Malcolm-un-grammatical, but would I be
right to say that this case can't be determined without more
information?
(Note to others: the program's behaviour is not implementation defined
as that term is used in C. It is either well-defined or undefined,
depending on the implementation's int width.)
> So why isn't it allowed to rely on data being well formed? Because we
> can't control that at the time of setting up the system. Unless we
> can, of course, for instance if the data file ships with the program on
> a ROM cartridge. But then the data plus the executable becomes "the program".
> But in reality as well as in theory, data can usually be anything, including
> malicious input specifically designed to exploit UB.
>
> UB creates problems when thinking about what rules are "grammar rules"
> because effectively the C standard has given up. It says "this must be
> accepted but it is not allowed", because it is too hard, sometimes
> even mathematically impossible, to enforce the constraint at compile time.
> But UB is a grammar rule. Why? Because it separates meaningful from non-
> meaningful programs, and that's what grammar does.
Note to others: even a simple and correct use of scanf, or an integer
addition with an operand derived from input, renders a program
ungrammatical in Malcolm's sense. You may feel you have no need of that
term (I don't).
Rejecting it will allow you to use the word "grammar" and it's
derivatives as they are used in the field of programming and computer
science. Those terms have well-defined and useful meanings.
<cut>
--
Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-13 02:05 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <a8967391-4f69-462e-8861-497a80a51e3d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #140896 |
On Wednesday, 13 February 2019 04:40:43 UTC, Ben Bacarisse wrote: > Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> writes: > > Can you can't say if this program is Malcolm-grammatical or not? A > simple use of scanf is, I think, Malcolm-un-grammatical, but would I be > right to say that this case can't be determined without more > information? > > (Note to others: the program's behaviour is not implementation defined > as that term is used in C. It is either well-defined or undefined, > depending on the implementation's int width.) > A rule of C is that the implementation's integer sizes can vary, and that affects what is allowed and what is disallowed. These are language rules, or in other words "grammar" rules. So yes, the rules mention context. > > Note to others: even a simple and correct use of scanf, or an integer > addition with an operand derived from input, renders a program > ungrammatical in Malcolm's sense. You may feel you have no need of that > term (I don't). > Unfortunately it is the case that if you don't sanity check your inputs, then according to the rules of C, the program can behave in any way at all, and this is also considered disallowed. I didn't make those rules, but those are the rules. > > Rejecting it will allow you to use the word "grammar" and it's > derivatives as they are used in the field of programming and computer > science. Those terms have well-defined and useful meanings. > "Grammar" has a useful meaning. Don't mistake your difficulties with the concept - and it is quite difficult to use language to talk about itself, with "grammar" not being a useful and important word, in the sense it is used in linguistics. But computer grammars are not full grammars, even in the narrow sense of specifying all the rules of a computer language like C.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-13 02:55 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <lnbm3grm8u.fsf@kst-u.example.com> |
| In reply to | #140904 |
Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> writes:
[...]
> "Grammar" has a useful meaning. Don't mistake your difficulties with
> the concept - and it is quite difficult to use language to talk about
> itself, with "grammar" not being a useful and important word,
> in the sense it is used in linguistics.
> But computer grammars are not full grammars, even in the narrow sense
> of specifying all the rules of a computer language like C.
You assert that a "grammar" specifies "all the rules" of C.
I'll ask this one more time.
Malcolm, will you at least acknowledge that most of us use the word
"grammar" to refer to the syntax in Annex A? A simple "yes" would be
sufficient, even if you think we're wrong to use the word that way.
If you're unwilling to acknowledge that, then I will conclude that
any discussion with you regarding what "grammar" means will be
useless, and I will encourage everyone else to recognize the same
thing and stop trying to argue with you.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Will write code for food.
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-13 03:32 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <8d0f14e9-5fa9-4eba-ae9e-f7c7c6adbd00@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #140906 |
On Wednesday, 13 February 2019 10:55:41 UTC, Keith Thompson wrote: > Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> writes: > [...] > > "Grammar" has a useful meaning. Don't mistake your difficulties with > > the concept - and it is quite difficult to use language to talk about > > itself, with "grammar" not being a useful and important word, > > in the sense it is used in linguistics. > > But computer grammars are not full grammars, even in the narrow sense > > of specifying all the rules of a computer language like C. > > You assert that a "grammar" specifies "all the rules" of C. > > I'll ask this one more time. > > Malcolm, will you at least acknowledge that most of us use the word > "grammar" to refer to the syntax in Annex A? A simple "yes" would be > sufficient, even if you think we're wrong to use the word that way. > > If you're unwilling to acknowledge that, then I will conclude that > any discussion with you regarding what "grammar" means will be > useless, and I will encourage everyone else to recognize the same > thing and stop trying to argue with you. > Yes, that's how the C standard uses the term, and how Ben is using it. It not what the term "grammar" really means. It's broader than that. It means "all the rules of the language", or "rules that distinguish meaning from non-meaning".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mark.bluemel@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-13 03:36 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <1edafb53-0f40-4f99-9055-38157420e115@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #140912 |
On Wednesday, 13 February 2019 11:32:11 UTC, Malcolm McLean wrote: > On Wednesday, 13 February 2019 10:55:41 UTC, Keith Thompson wrote: > > I'll ask this one more time. > > > > Malcolm, will you at least acknowledge that most of us use the word > > "grammar" to refer to the syntax in Annex A? A simple "yes" would be > > sufficient, even if you think we're wrong to use the word that way. > > > > If you're unwilling to acknowledge that, then I will conclude that > > any discussion with you regarding what "grammar" means will be > > useless, and I will encourage everyone else to recognize the same > > thing and stop trying to argue with you. > > > Yes, that's how the C standard uses the term, and how Ben is using it. > > It not what the term "grammar" really means. It's broader than that. > It means "all the rules of the language", or "rules that distinguish > meaning from non-meaning". So what the C standard says the word "grammar" means in the context of the C language is not what the word "grammar" means in the context of the C language, because you think it should mean something else? Fascinating.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-13 13:32 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <q412o2$fnl$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #140912 |
On 13/02/2019 12:32, Malcolm McLean wrote: > On Wednesday, 13 February 2019 10:55:41 UTC, Keith Thompson wrote: >> Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> writes: >> [...] >>> "Grammar" has a useful meaning. Don't mistake your difficulties with >>> the concept - and it is quite difficult to use language to talk about >>> itself, with "grammar" not being a useful and important word, >>> in the sense it is used in linguistics. >>> But computer grammars are not full grammars, even in the narrow sense >>> of specifying all the rules of a computer language like C. >> >> You assert that a "grammar" specifies "all the rules" of C. >> >> I'll ask this one more time. >> >> Malcolm, will you at least acknowledge that most of us use the word >> "grammar" to refer to the syntax in Annex A? A simple "yes" would be >> sufficient, even if you think we're wrong to use the word that way. >> >> If you're unwilling to acknowledge that, then I will conclude that >> any discussion with you regarding what "grammar" means will be >> useless, and I will encourage everyone else to recognize the same >> thing and stop trying to argue with you. >> > Yes, that's how the C standard uses the term, and how Ben is using it. > Hey, a step forward! > It not what the term "grammar" really means. It's broader than that. > It means "all the rules of the language", or "rules that distinguish > meaning from non-meaning". > OK, let's go for the next step - will you acknowledge that no one else uses the term "grammar" in the sense you describe here? Clearly no one in this thread agrees with you, except in the vaguest of terms (such as noting that in the context of natural language, the word "grammar" has sometimes been used to include some semantics). Please find a clear and reputable reference and web link that demonstrate that other people use the word "grammar" to mean the "rules of a programming language" or "rules that distinguish meaning from non-meaning in a programming language". It would be too much to ask you to find such reference in the context of C programming - so start with something for any established programming language. Failing that, please admit and accept that when /you/ use the word "grammar", you mean something different from everyone else - and therefore your use is meaningless.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-02-13 06:30 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <9fde77b9-146e-469b-acca-4ca8fa6ca7a3@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #140922 |
On Wednesday, 13 February 2019 12:32:11 UTC, David Brown wrote: > > OK, let's go for the next step - will you acknowledge that no one else > uses the term "grammar" in the sense you describe here? Clearly no one > in this thread agrees with you, except in the vaguest of terms (such as > noting that in the context of natural language, the word "grammar" has > sometimes been used to include some semantics). Please find a clear and > reputable reference and web link that demonstrate that other people use > the word "grammar" to mean the "rules of a programming language" or > "rules that distinguish meaning from non-meaning in a programming > language". It would be too much to ask you to find such reference in > the context of C programming - so start with something for any > established programming language. > > Failing that, please admit and accept that when /you/ use the word > "grammar", you mean something different from everyone else - and > therefore your use is meaningless. Here we go: https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-programming-language-Grammar-and-programming-language-Syntax "You can consider syntax as the sentence structure which obeys the laws of the grammar. For e.g.: Ordering of words in a sentence has more to do with syntax. A grammar is a much bigger concept. It is the set of all rules which a program needs to obey. You can also visualize syntax as a subset of a language grammar. For more details, I won't duplicate content. You can always read this QA What's the difference between syntax and grammar?" Now it's almost always the case on Usenet that when a challenge is made, and is met, the challenger finds some reason to claim it hasn't been met. Why not be an exception?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 8 of 19 — ← Prev page 1 … 6 7 [8] 9 10 … 19 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web