Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #106814 > unrolled thread
| Started by | acidlategamer@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-03-23 09:56 -0700 |
| Last post | 2017-03-23 19:02 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 213 — 32 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault acidlategamer@gmail.com - 2017-03-23 09:56 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault GOTHIER Nathan <nathan.gothier@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 18:04 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-23 17:07 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault acidlategamer@gmail.com - 2017-03-23 10:36 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault acidlategamer@gmail.com - 2017-03-23 10:42 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault GOTHIER Nathan <nathan.gothier@gmail.com> - 2017-03-23 18:52 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2017-03-23 12:54 -0600
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault GOTHIER Nathan <nathan.gothier@gmail.com> - 2017-03-24 00:02 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2017-03-23 17:16 -0600
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault GOTHIER Nathan <nathan.gothier@gmail.com> - 2017-03-24 00:32 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2017-03-23 11:57 -0600
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault acidlategamer@gmail.com - 2017-03-23 11:23 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2017-03-23 12:53 -0600
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-23 19:00 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-03-23 15:59 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-23 20:40 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-23 22:06 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-03-23 20:43 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-24 14:09 +1300
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-03-23 21:28 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-24 14:33 +1300
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-03-24 09:23 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-25 08:39 +1300
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-03-24 20:40 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2017-03-23 19:48 -0600
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2017-03-24 13:32 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-03-24 20:42 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2017-04-17 06:30 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2017-03-23 19:29 -0600
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-24 10:10 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-03-24 09:26 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-24 13:52 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-03-24 10:30 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-24 14:37 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-03-24 12:51 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-24 18:05 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-03-24 15:09 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-03-24 12:55 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2017-03-24 09:45 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-03-24 12:52 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2017-03-24 10:10 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-24 18:48 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-03-24 14:04 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-24 19:16 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-03-24 15:10 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-03-24 15:17 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-25 00:49 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-03-24 21:10 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-25 02:37 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-03-24 21:45 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Manfred <noname@invalid.add> - 2017-03-25 15:58 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-03-24 12:44 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-03-24 12:07 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-25 00:54 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2017-03-25 10:16 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-25 12:32 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-25 15:17 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-25 16:32 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-03-25 10:15 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-03-25 14:07 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-25 18:23 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2017-03-25 18:48 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.com> - 2017-03-25 23:22 +0300
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2017-03-25 20:47 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.com> - 2017-03-26 15:56 +0300
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2017-03-26 18:13 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-26 17:03 +0200
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-03-25 21:16 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2017-03-25 21:28 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-03-25 19:16 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-26 08:53 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-03-26 02:39 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Sjouke Burry <burrynulnulfour@ppllaanneett.nnll> - 2017-03-26 11:54 +0200
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-26 22:57 +1300
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-27 08:18 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2017-03-26 11:37 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-27 08:19 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2017-03-27 21:53 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-03-27 16:22 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-27 08:18 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-03-27 08:49 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-03-27 16:57 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault GOTHIER Nathan <nathan.gothier@gmail.com> - 2017-03-27 18:19 +0200
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-03-27 17:47 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-03-27 09:27 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2017-03-27 17:56 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault asetofsymbols@gmail.com - 2017-04-01 12:42 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-03-27 09:36 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-03-27 17:51 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-03-27 13:59 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-03-27 19:00 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-03-27 15:13 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-03-27 20:05 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2017-03-27 13:14 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2017-03-27 21:28 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-03-27 16:21 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-28 13:44 +1300
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-28 08:39 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2017-04-03 17:36 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-04-03 14:02 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2017-04-14 11:24 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-04-14 18:39 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-04-14 14:38 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2017-04-22 21:06 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-04-23 17:38 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Ken Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2017-04-14 13:54 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-04-14 14:36 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2017-04-16 19:08 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-26 17:11 +0200
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-27 08:23 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-27 10:27 +0200
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-27 10:22 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-03-27 15:01 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-27 18:19 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-03-27 12:37 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-03-27 15:40 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-03-27 21:28 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-27 22:27 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-03-27 23:37 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-28 08:33 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-03-28 11:21 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-03-28 15:38 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault jm.bourguet@gmail.com - 2017-03-28 09:03 -0700
Re: Readabilty of "3 == x" (was: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault) Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-03-28 09:20 -0700
Re: Readabilty of "3 == x" Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-28 18:55 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-28 18:49 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-03-28 14:53 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2017-03-28 15:19 -0500
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2017-04-02 12:49 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-04-03 17:19 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2017-04-03 21:44 +0200
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2017-04-03 15:05 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2017-04-04 01:19 +0200
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-04-04 00:49 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2017-04-03 18:22 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-04-04 06:38 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-03-29 00:16 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-29 00:26 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Alla <vitale.alla@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 12:34 +0300
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-28 13:28 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2017-03-28 07:04 -0600
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-28 14:38 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-03-28 10:55 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault jadill33@gmail.com - 2017-03-28 07:27 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-03-28 07:58 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-28 16:13 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Alla <vitale.alla@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 18:49 +0300
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-03-28 09:15 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-28 18:53 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-03-28 18:12 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-03-28 11:51 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-28 19:59 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Alla <vitale.alla@gmail.com> - 2017-03-28 23:11 +0300
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Alla <vitale.alla@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 17:20 +0300
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-04-01 08:58 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault GOTHIER Nathan <nathan.gothier@gmail.com> - 2017-04-01 18:41 +0200
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-04-01 11:37 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Alla <vitale.alla@gmail.com> - 2017-04-02 22:43 +0300
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-04-03 08:47 +0200
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2017-04-26 07:58 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2017-03-25 19:35 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2017-03-25 21:37 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-26 08:39 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2017-03-25 21:21 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-25 16:54 -0500
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2017-03-25 22:32 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-03-26 13:46 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2017-04-03 17:39 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-04-03 11:42 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-04-03 12:10 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-04-03 15:22 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2017-04-05 11:01 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-26 08:45 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-03-26 02:35 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-26 17:19 +0200
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-27 08:15 +0100
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-03-24 15:12 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-25 08:41 +1300
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2017-03-24 16:27 -0600
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2017-03-24 21:36 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-03-24 20:44 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2017-03-25 14:46 +1300
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-03-24 11:24 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-03-24 13:52 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-24 13:55 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-03-24 10:31 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-24 14:39 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-03-24 12:54 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2017-03-23 21:56 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-03-23 15:18 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2017-03-23 16:39 -0600
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-03-23 20:42 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2017-03-23 16:33 -0600
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-03-23 20:45 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-24 10:01 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-03-24 09:27 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-24 13:53 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-03-24 10:32 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-03-24 14:42 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-03-24 12:56 -0400
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault supercat@casperkitty.com - 2017-03-24 08:45 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2017-03-23 21:14 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2017-03-23 11:52 -0600
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault acidlategamer@gmail.com - 2017-03-23 11:03 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault acidlategamer@gmail.com - 2017-03-23 11:14 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2017-03-23 12:41 -0600
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-03-23 11:48 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault acidlategamer@gmail.com - 2017-03-23 11:59 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-03-23 12:35 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault acidlategamer@gmail.com - 2017-03-23 12:48 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2017-03-23 13:24 -0700
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2017-03-23 20:46 +0000
Re: My C program does not compile or gives segmentation fault Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2017-03-23 19:02 -0700
Page 5 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 3 4 [5] 6 7 … 11 Next page →
| From | Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-27 08:49 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <lnlgrq7maa.fsf@kst-u.example.com> |
| In reply to | #107138 |
Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes:
> On 26/03/17 10:39, Keith Thompson wrote:
>> Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes:
>> [...]
>>> Anyone who is bright enough to understand that addition is commutative
>>> (and thus that x + y gives the same result as y + x) is also bright
>>> enough to understand that comparison for equality is commutative (and
>>> thus that x == y gives the same results as y == x).
>>>
>>> Anyone who is not bright enough to understand commutativity needs to be
>>> looking at other careers.
>>>
>>> Everybody in this thread who has expressed an opinion /is/ bright enough
>>> to understand commutativity, so I really, truly don't see why they are
>>> so upset by 3 == x. Do these same people find it difficult to read B == x?
>>
>> I see that you don't understand.
>
> I think I'm beginning to.
>
>> Repeating that addition and equality are commutative is not helpful.
>> We all know that.
>
> I know you all know that. Because I know you all know that, I'm really
> struggling to see why you have an issue here.
>
>> I assure you that (a) I understand perfectly well that `x == 3` and
>> `3 == x` are equivalent, and (b) I find `3 == x` ugly and jarring.
>
> I accept your assurance. I find it strange, but I accept it.
Thank you.
>> Can we start by acknowledging that I'm not just making that up,
>> and that a lot of people share the same feeling?
>
> Yes, but let's be clear that it's a /feeling/. It doesn't seem to have
> any logical grounds whatsoever.
That was just a starting point. I assert that there *are* some
(fuzzy) logical grounds (and some people in this thread have tried
to explain them).
("Fuzzy logic" is a thing, but it's not what I'm referring to.)
Nobody looks at C expressions purely in terms of their C semantics.
We consider context, both within and outside the program.
Certainly `x == 3` is an expression, specifically an
equality-expression. But I also think of it as a statement *about
x*. x has some value. Is that value (equal to) 3? Yes it is, or
no it isn't. Evaluating the comparison tells me something about x.
By contrast, `3 == x` seems like a statement *about 3*. 3 has
some value. Is that value equal to the value of x? Yes it is,
or no it isn't. By evaluating that expression, I haven't learned
anything new about 3.
And if C had chosen assignment and equality operators that aren't
so easy to mix up (say, := for assignment and == for equality),
I don't think anybody would ever consider writing `if (3 == x)`.
There are other cases where order matters for clarity even if it doesn't
matter semantically. If I want to compute the distance from the
origin of the point (x, y), I'll write
sqrt(x*x + y*y)
Writing
sqrt(y*y + x*x)
would be weird.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BartC <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-27 16:57 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <obbcji$enb$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #107164 |
On 27/03/2017 16:49, Keith Thompson wrote:
> And if C had chosen assignment and equality operators that aren't
> so easy to mix up (say, := for assignment and == for equality),
> I don't think anybody would ever consider writing `if (3 == x)`.
#define EQ ==
if (x EQ 3) ....
> (say, := for assignment and == for equality),
If := meant assignment, why wouldn't you use = for equality? You just
need to make it an error to write:
x = y;
for those mistakenly using = in place of :=
--
bartc
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | GOTHIER Nathan <nathan.gothier@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-27 18:19 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <20170327181926.343f76963c7436256e8b76b8@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #107166 |
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:57:22 +0100 BartC <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: > #define EQ == > > if (x EQ 3) .... That's why C95 provide <iso646.h>. > > (say, := for assignment and == for equality), > > If := meant assignment, why wouldn't you use = for equality? You just > need to make it an error to write: > > x = y; > > for those mistakenly using = in place of := I assume the C inventors considered defining assigments with ":=" like Pascal but chose "=" to quickly write bad code. :o)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BartC <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-27 17:47 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <obbfhl$qfq$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #107169 |
On 27/03/2017 17:19, GOTHIER Nathan wrote: > On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:57:22 +0100 > BartC <bc@freeuk.com> wrote: > >> #define EQ == >> >> if (x EQ 3) .... > > That's why C95 provide <iso646.h>. That doesn't help here. > >> > (say, := for assignment and == for equality), >> >> If := meant assignment, why wouldn't you use = for equality? You just >> need to make it an error to write: >> >> x = y; >> >> for those mistakenly using = in place of := > > I assume the C inventors considered defining assigments with ":=" like Pascal > but chose "=" to quickly write bad code. :o) At the time it would have been the Algols that used :=. But FORTRAN, BASIC and I think PL/I used "=". FORTRAN used .EQ. for equality; the others used "=", but assignment and equality were used in different contexts so there was no confusion.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | supercat@casperkitty.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-27 09:27 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <0c0d12bd-57b1-4826-acff-d70e53e55cb4@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #107166 |
On Monday, March 27, 2017 at 10:57:32 AM UTC-5, Bart wrote:
> If := meant assignment, why wouldn't you use = for equality? You just
> need to make it an error to write:
>
> x = y;
>
> for those mistakenly using = in place of :=
If an assignment can only be performed as a standalone statement, and if
a statement had to include something other than an expression, those two
requirements together would mean that assignment would be invalid in
contexts where equality checking would be legal, and vice versa. If
assignment yields a value, however, using := and == would help make the
programmer's intentions more clear given either
x := y := z;
or
x := (y == z);
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BartC <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-27 17:56 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <obbg2k$sek$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #107171 |
On 27/03/2017 17:27, supercat@casperkitty.com wrote: > On Monday, March 27, 2017 at 10:57:32 AM UTC-5, Bart wrote: >> If := meant assignment, why wouldn't you use = for equality? You just >> need to make it an error to write: >> >> x = y; >> >> for those mistakenly using = in place of := > > If an assignment can only be performed as a standalone statement, and if > a statement had to include something other than an expression, those two > requirements together would mean that assignment would be invalid in > contexts where equality checking would be legal, and vice versa. That's not a problem. I implement assignment (either as := or =) in two forms, one used inside expressions, and one used standalone as a statement. Both use the same symbol, but can be implemented differently. However, when "=" is used for equality, then I ban standalone statements such as "a=b", partly because they are meaningless, and partly to detect the instances when I mistakenly write it in place of "a:=b" (when I've previously been writing C for example). Implementing C, of course, a==b has to be allowed by itself, but is a less likely typo. If > assignment yields a value, however, using := and == would help make the > programmer's intentions more clear given either > > x := y := z; > or > x := (y == z); So what would "=" be used for? -- bartc
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | asetofsymbols@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-01 12:42 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <50ed4456-4de2-4dbc-8d79-0e191ee0ea17@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #107171 |
Axiom use := For assignment to a var
. = For equation symbol
. = For bool compare
== For assigned to a var
. it seems as a rule
but possible I not understand or not remember...
So symbols depend from contest (overloaded)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-27 09:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <lnbmsm7k2q.fsf@kst-u.example.com> |
| In reply to | #107166 |
BartC <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
> On 27/03/2017 16:49, Keith Thompson wrote:
>> And if C had chosen assignment and equality operators that aren't
>> so easy to mix up (say, := for assignment and == for equality),
>> I don't think anybody would ever consider writing `if (3 == x)`.
>
> #define EQ ==
>
> if (x EQ 3) ....
I prefer not to use the preprocessor to change the language syntax.
Personally, I find (x EQ 3) worse than (3 == x).
> > (say, := for assignment and == for equality),
>
> If := meant assignment, why wouldn't you use = for equality? You just
> need to make it an error to write:
>
> x = y;
>
> for those mistakenly using = in place of :=
I think you just answered your own question. "=" is commonly used
either for assignment or for equality. ":=" is rarely used for anything
other than assignment. "==" is rarely used for anything other than
equality. I used "==" to avoid ambiguity in the current discussion.
I have no problem with a language using ":=" for assignment and "=" for
equality (as Pascal and Ada do, for example), but "==" makes for clearer
examples here.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-27 17:51 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <JicCA.153934$sJ.68074@fx06.iad> |
| In reply to | #107164 |
Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> writes: >Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes: >> On 26/03/17 10:39, Keith Thompson wrote: >>> Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes: >>> [...] > >Nobody looks at C expressions purely in terms of their C semantics. >We consider context, both within and outside the program. > >Certainly `x == 3` is an expression, specifically an >equality-expression. But I also think of it as a statement *about >x*. x has some value. Is that value (equal to) 3? Yes it is, or >no it isn't. Evaluating the comparison tells me something about x. > >By contrast, `3 == x` seems like a statement *about 3*. 3 has >some value. Is that value equal to the value of x? Yes it is, >or no it isn't. By evaluating that expression, I haven't learned >anything new about 3. Concur. I particularly dislike: if (-1 == open(path, flags, mode)) as it appears to reverse causality :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-27 13:59 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <31f56503-d595-32e3-3295-27b8c5b4cd7e@verizon.net> |
| In reply to | #107184 |
On 03/27/2017 01:51 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote: ... > I particularly dislike: > > if (-1 == open(path, flags, mode)) > > as it appears to reverse causality :-) You can reach that conclusion, even as a metaphor (I assume that's what you mean, because there's certainly no real-world causality issue there) only by invalidly assuming that -1 necessarily gets evaluated before the call to open(). If you are suffering from that delusion, I recommend a steady diet of Yoda conditions until such time as you have lost that delusion.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-27 19:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <9jdCA.90426$_83.71540@fx07.iad> |
| In reply to | #107187 |
"James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> writes: >On 03/27/2017 01:51 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote: >... >> I particularly dislike: >> >> if (-1 == open(path, flags, mode)) >> >> as it appears to reverse causality :-) > >You can reach that conclusion, even as a metaphor (I assume that's what >you mean, because there's certainly no real-world causality issue there) >only by invalidly assuming that -1 necessarily gets evaluated before the >call to open(). If you are suffering from that delusion, I recommend a >steady diet of Yoda conditions until such time as you have lost that >delusion. > Many of us learned to read from left to right.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-27 15:13 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <41474d54-fc54-75dd-9c49-fc74547ffb2a@verizon.net> |
| In reply to | #107194 |
On 03/27/2017 03:00 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote: > "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> writes: >> On 03/27/2017 01:51 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote: >> ... >>> I particularly dislike: >>> >>> if (-1 == open(path, flags, mode)) >>> >>> as it appears to reverse causality :-) >> >> You can reach that conclusion, even as a metaphor (I assume that's what >> you mean, because there's certainly no real-world causality issue there) >> only by invalidly assuming that -1 necessarily gets evaluated before the >> call to open(). If you are suffering from that delusion, I recommend a >> steady diet of Yoda conditions until such time as you have lost that >> delusion. >> > > Many of us learned to read from left to right. A fact that can lead to unjustified assumptions about the behavior of C code, unless careful attention is paid to correcting those assumptions.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-27 20:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <hgeCA.237354$IM7.78996@fx39.iad> |
| In reply to | #107196 |
"James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> writes: >On 03/27/2017 03:00 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote: >> "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> writes: >>> On 03/27/2017 01:51 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote: >>> ... >>>> I particularly dislike: >>>> >>>> if (-1 == open(path, flags, mode)) >>>> >>>> as it appears to reverse causality :-) >>> >>> You can reach that conclusion, even as a metaphor (I assume that's what >>> you mean, because there's certainly no real-world causality issue there) >>> only by invalidly assuming that -1 necessarily gets evaluated before the >>> call to open(). If you are suffering from that delusion, I recommend a >>> steady diet of Yoda conditions until such time as you have lost that >>> delusion. >>> >> >> Many of us learned to read from left to right. > >A fact that can lead to unjustified assumptions about the behavior of C >code, unless careful attention is paid to correcting those assumptions. Who said anything about assumptions. I simply don't like that style.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jameskuyper@verizon.net |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-27 13:14 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e502baf7-3b26-40ae-9ebe-3d2393db640e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #107203 |
On Monday, March 27, 2017 at 4:05:39 PM UTC-4, Scott Lurndal wrote: > "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> writes: > >On 03/27/2017 03:00 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote: > >> "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> writes: > >>> On 03/27/2017 01:51 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote: > >>> ... > >>>> I particularly dislike: > >>>> > >>>> if (-1 == open(path, flags, mode)) > >>>> > >>>> as it appears to reverse causality :-) > >>> > >>> You can reach that conclusion, even as a metaphor (I assume that's what > >>> you mean, because there's certainly no real-world causality issue there) > >>> only by invalidly assuming that -1 necessarily gets evaluated before the > >>> call to open(). If you are suffering from that delusion, I recommend a > >>> steady diet of Yoda conditions until such time as you have lost that > >>> delusion. > >>> > >> > >> Many of us learned to read from left to right. > > > >A fact that can lead to unjustified assumptions about the behavior of C > >code, unless careful attention is paid to correcting those assumptions. > > Who said anything about assumptions. I simply don't like that style. You implied some (rather ridiculous) assumptions when you made reference to reverse causality. Even as a joke, that comment implies having misapprehensions about what C fails to require with respect to the order of evaluation of expressions.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-27 21:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrn3vfsodj160.qfh.ike@iceland.freeshell.org> |
| In reply to | #107164 |
On 2017-03-27, Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> wrote: > By contrast, `3 == x` seems like a statement *about 3*. No. When K&R designed the == operator they obviously had an operator in mind that tested for the equality of its operands. I really don't think that if one of those operands were 3 and the other one were x, the == expression would suddenly lose it's original meaning an turn into a statement about the 3. I also don't think they had characters from the Star Wars movie in mind when they designed the == operator.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-27 16:21 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ln7f3a71cv.fsf@kst-u.example.com> |
| In reply to | #107218 |
Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> writes:
> On 2017-03-27, Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> wrote:
>> By contrast, `3 == x` seems like a statement *about 3*.
>
> No.
Yes. I wrote that it *seems* like a statement about 3. That's a
statement about my perception of it (and, I think, that of a lot of
other people).
> When K&R designed the == operator they obviously had an
> operator in mind that tested for the equality of its operands.
> I really don't think that if one of those operands were 3 and
> the other one were x, the == expression would suddenly lose it's
> original meaning an turn into a statement about the 3.
Of course they didn't. We all know that == is commutative, and that
`x == 3` has the same semantics as `3 == x`. Any argument based
on the assumption that we're not perfectly well aware of that is
likely to be invalid.
I know what `x == 3` and `3 == x` mean in terms of C semantics.
And I know which one I prefer and find more natural and easier
to read.
I don't expect to convince anyone that my perception is right and
theirs is wrong. Indeed, if you really don't have a preference one
way or the other, then your intuition is closer to the C semantics
than mine is.
> I also don't think they had characters from the Star Wars movie in
> mind when they designed the == operator.
?
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-28 13:44 +1300 |
| Message-ID | <ejtpvqFr72rU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #107229 |
On 03/28/17 12:21 PM, Keith Thompson wrote: > Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> writes: >> On 2017-03-27, Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> wrote: >>> By contrast, `3 == x` seems like a statement *about 3*. >> >> No. > > Yes. I wrote that it *seems* like a statement about 3. That's a > statement about my perception of it (and, I think, that of a lot of > other people). In my case, it is because I tend the read "==" as "is". Whether this is due the wiring in my brain or cross-contamination from other languages (Python springs to mind) where the two are almost synonymous is another story... -- Ian
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-28 08:39 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <obd3q1$eva$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #107238 |
On 28/03/17 01:44, Ian Collins wrote: > On 03/28/17 12:21 PM, Keith Thompson wrote: >> Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> writes: >>> On 2017-03-27, Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> wrote: >>>> By contrast, `3 == x` seems like a statement *about 3*. >>> >>> No. >> >> Yes. I wrote that it *seems* like a statement about 3. That's a >> statement about my perception of it (and, I think, that of a lot of >> other people). > > In my case, it is because I tend the read "==" as "is". Whether this > is due the wiring in my brain or cross-contamination from other > languages (Python springs to mind) where the two are almost synonymous > is another story... But (in C) that is most certainly /not/ what == means! Whether x has the value 3 or not, to say that x /is/ 3 is utterly wrong, unless you have #defined x as 3 (which is possible but seems unlikely). x is an identifier that is used for identifying an object that has storage and location and (presumably, in this case) the capacity to have its stored value changed. 3 has none of these properties. To say that x /is/ 3 is to misunderstand the nature of identifiers. -- Richard Heathfield Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999 Sig line 4 vacant - apply within
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-03 17:36 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <58e28659.9975046@news.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #107138 |
Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> wrote: > On 26/03/17 10:39, Keith Thompson wrote: > > Can we start by acknowledging that I'm not just making that up, > > and that a lot of people share the same feeling? > > Yes, but let's be clear that it's a /feeling/. It doesn't seem to have > any logical grounds whatsoever. Of course not. We were raised - and read our code - in English (or Dutch), not Lojban. It may be to do with a difference in _how_ we read the code. When I see a line "if (x == 3)", my mind reads to me (and I truly _hear_ this internally): "if ex equals three". It does not _show_ me a neat, symmetrically drawn PSD. I don't see anything in my mind, with the symmetry prettily outlined; I hear things in my mind, with the natural flow either exposing the meaning of the code more clearly or making it harder to discern. I'm an auditive thinker; I actually do hear any code I read read out in my head. (Not just code, by the way; normal text, as well.) I can easily imagine that my reaction would be different if I were a visual thinker, but I'm not. I hear my code as if it were an English sentence, and therefore, it makes a difference to me whether code _sounds_ good, as an English sentence. In other words, "if (3 == x)" sounds wrong to me for the same reason as "three years old is George" does. It sounds, and _therefore_ reads, artificial, as if it were a shoehorned line of Victorian poetry. Richard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-03 14:02 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <4a27c5a0-952e-2a10-38f5-bae2da184dd4@verizon.net> |
| In reply to | #107679 |
On 04/03/2017 01:36 PM, Richard Bos wrote: > Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> wrote: > >> On 26/03/17 10:39, Keith Thompson wrote: > >>> Can we start by acknowledging that I'm not just making that up, >>> and that a lot of people share the same feeling? >> >> Yes, but let's be clear that it's a /feeling/. It doesn't seem to have >> any logical grounds whatsoever. > > Of course not. We were raised - and read our code - in English (or > Dutch), not Lojban. That's funny. It would never have occurred to me to try to read my C code in any language other than C, and I've never done so. That may be because my second computer language was APL, for which any such attempt would be doomed to failure. C was my fourth or fifth computer language. I learned COBOL around the same time, and I've always thought that trying to define a computer language so that it could be easily read in English was one of the most ridiculous concepts I'd ever seen. I've seldom had sufficient motivation to learn any language other English well enough to be truly fluent with it - C is the main exception. However, I've always had a knack for learning new languages, both natural and computer - I adapt pretty easily to the idea that there are different ways of saying things than the "one true way" used by the other languages I already know. That's become less true with age. My most recently acquired language is Mandarin, and I have a hard time recognizing and reproducing the tonal patterns it depends on - the grammar, despite being very different from that of any of the other languages I know, was much less of a problem. My most recent attempt at learning a computer language was Haskal, but I didn't have enough time to spend on that project to get past the initial stage of utter confusion.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 3 4 [5] 6 7 … 11 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web