Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #63278 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-06-15 14:08 +0100 |
| Last post | 2015-07-14 13:14 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 442 — 31 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
typedef forward declaration Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-06-15 14:08 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-15 14:23 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-15 09:30 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-15 18:01 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-16 09:44 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-16 18:06 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-16 19:22 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-16 19:33 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-06-16 14:53 -0400
Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-17 09:54 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-17 11:04 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-18 11:11 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-18 12:00 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-19 09:50 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-19 18:02 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-19 10:25 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-19 20:10 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-19 18:11 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-19 10:40 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-19 18:58 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-19 11:35 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-19 12:31 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-18 20:47 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration mark.bluemel@gmail.com - 2015-06-19 03:35 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-10 17:23 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-17 09:46 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2015-06-17 10:34 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-17 10:43 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-06-18 16:00 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-18 08:52 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-06-19 10:21 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-06-19 11:35 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-19 05:34 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-19 13:45 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-19 06:23 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-19 15:55 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-19 08:06 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-19 16:14 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-19 08:41 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-19 17:19 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-06-19 21:02 -0400
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-19 18:57 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-20 00:59 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-06-20 17:25 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration Nathan Wagner <nw@hydaspes.if.org> - 2015-06-21 12:04 +0000
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-21 13:07 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Nathan Wagner <nw@hydaspes.if.org> - 2015-06-23 13:08 +0000
Re: typedef forward declaration Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-10 17:36 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-20 01:00 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-19 08:40 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-06-20 08:54 +0000
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-20 02:06 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-20 10:46 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-20 03:16 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-06-20 09:01 -0400
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-20 15:44 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-20 12:08 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-06-21 21:02 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-21 21:24 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-06-21 22:41 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-22 00:08 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-22 05:43 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-06-22 08:14 -0500
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-22 07:13 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-22 16:28 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-22 08:47 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-22 17:25 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-06-22 18:23 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-22 19:11 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-22 10:50 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-22 19:23 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-06-22 14:38 -0500
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-22 10:35 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-22 11:31 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-22 12:36 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-22 12:47 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-22 21:02 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Nathan Wagner <nw@hydaspes.if.org> - 2015-06-23 13:04 +0000
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-23 06:13 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-06-23 15:26 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-23 07:31 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-23 07:39 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-23 14:38 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-06-24 09:19 +0000
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-22 13:14 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-06-22 20:29 +0000
Re: typedef forward declaration "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-06-23 12:31 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-23 12:40 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration crisdunbar@gmail.com - 2015-06-23 12:48 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-23 13:04 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-23 21:08 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-19 14:05 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-19 06:26 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-19 08:47 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-19 17:19 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-06-20 08:59 +0000
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-20 02:10 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-06-20 17:34 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-20 08:42 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-20 08:50 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-06-20 16:59 +0000
Re: typedef forward declaration Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-06-20 18:40 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-20 12:21 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-06-20 21:31 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-20 14:07 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-22 05:20 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-06-22 13:38 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-22 05:45 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-22 08:49 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-22 08:54 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-22 16:54 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-22 09:02 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-22 21:33 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-19 10:00 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-06-19 22:33 -0500
Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-20 07:50 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-20 08:12 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-06-20 15:30 +0000
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-20 08:40 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2015-06-19 10:10 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-19 12:58 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-06-19 21:30 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-19 13:34 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-19 14:56 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-19 13:45 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-19 16:26 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-06-20 12:26 +1200
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-20 00:40 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-06-20 20:05 +1200
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-20 01:17 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-19 17:52 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-06-20 01:12 +0000
Re: typedef forward declaration Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-06-19 22:35 -0500
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-20 00:55 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-20 10:27 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-20 02:31 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-20 15:45 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-06-22 15:13 -0400
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-20 11:56 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-22 05:36 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-22 17:12 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-22 09:25 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-22 17:54 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-22 10:58 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-22 19:39 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Martin Shobe <martin.shobe@yahoo.com> - 2015-06-22 13:59 -0500
Re: typedef forward declaration David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-06-23 10:37 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-11 11:01 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-12 09:02 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-07-12 09:44 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-12 19:42 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-07-12 11:47 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> - 2015-07-12 21:21 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-07-12 13:32 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> - 2015-07-13 09:03 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-07-13 03:13 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-12 21:53 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-07-12 14:05 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-07-12 14:30 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-13 00:52 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-07-12 20:57 -0400
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-12 22:52 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-07-12 16:56 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-13 13:22 +1200
Re: typedef forward declaration Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-13 10:05 +1200
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-07-12 19:04 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-13 20:28 +1200
Re: typedef forward declaration Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-13 09:45 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-07-13 03:01 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-13 11:01 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-07-13 03:19 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-13 19:56 +0000
Re: typedef forward declaration James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-13 08:27 -0400
Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-13 10:01 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-13 18:38 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-13 12:20 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-07-14 11:15 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-14 08:57 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2015-07-13 23:25 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-15 12:59 -0400
Re: typedef forward declaration David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-07-20 17:32 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2015-07-13 07:22 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-13 11:58 -0400
Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-13 10:06 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2015-07-15 05:24 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> - 2015-07-13 19:49 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-15 08:08 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-07-15 08:32 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-20 09:12 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-15 20:21 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-20 09:15 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-22 12:14 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-22 12:17 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-22 20:54 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-22 13:16 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-22 13:59 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-22 22:36 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-22 14:38 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-23 06:00 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-23 14:37 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-06-23 16:40 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-23 16:14 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-06-23 22:51 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-23 22:06 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-06-24 00:14 +0000
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-24 01:17 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-06-24 05:18 +0000
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-24 09:35 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-24 10:43 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-06-24 11:19 -0400
Re: typedef forward declaration Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-14 07:20 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-14 17:55 +0000
Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-15 20:06 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-07-15 23:28 -0500
Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-15 22:06 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-20 09:42 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-23 09:16 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-23 09:27 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-24 07:38 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-24 07:55 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-06-25 21:22 -0500
Re: typedef forward declaration raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-06-28 10:41 +0000
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-28 03:52 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-06-23 22:57 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-24 07:52 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-06-24 17:09 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-24 08:43 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-24 08:47 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-06-24 23:01 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-06-24 17:13 -0400
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-24 23:40 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2015-06-24 21:38 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-25 11:23 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-25 11:36 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-25 11:55 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-06-25 00:46 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-06-25 01:47 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-25 05:53 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-06-24 20:24 -0400
Re: typedef forward declaration David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-06-25 10:00 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-25 05:51 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-25 14:15 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-25 07:54 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-25 08:08 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-25 16:21 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-06-25 17:46 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-06-25 18:16 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-06-25 19:55 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-25 11:02 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-06-25 18:30 +0000
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-25 12:54 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-06-26 11:01 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-06-25 18:03 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-25 18:27 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-25 10:30 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-25 10:35 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-25 19:07 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-06-26 09:43 +1200
Re: typedef forward declaration David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-06-26 11:26 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-06-26 09:45 +1200
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-25 14:51 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-06-26 09:57 +1200
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-25 15:01 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-06-25 17:24 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-25 08:30 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-25 16:35 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-06-25 20:05 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-25 11:09 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-25 11:19 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-06-25 20:04 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-06-26 11:42 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-26 05:01 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-06-26 14:11 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-26 05:26 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-06-27 22:01 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-06-27 20:46 +0000
Re: typedef forward declaration Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-06-27 16:37 -0500
[OT] was Re: typedef forward declaration David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-06-26 14:25 +0200
Re: [OT] was Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-26 05:31 -0700
Re: [OT] was Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-26 14:18 +0100
Re: [OT] was Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-26 06:31 -0700
Re: [OT] was Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-26 08:20 -0700
Re: [OT] was Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-26 08:24 -0700
Re: [OT] was Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-26 10:24 -0700
Re: [OT] was Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-26 10:30 -0700
Re: [OT] was Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-26 13:40 -0700
Re: [OT] was Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-26 14:09 -0700
Re: [OT] was Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-26 14:23 -0700
Re: [OT] was Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-26 22:12 -0700
Re: [OT] was Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-27 03:03 -0700
Re: [OT] was Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-27 13:08 +0100
Re: [OT] was Re: typedef forward declaration gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-06-27 11:37 +0000
Re: [OT] was Re: typedef forward declaration "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-06-27 13:06 -0700
Re: [OT] was Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-27 07:51 -0700
Re: [OT] was Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-27 07:55 -0700
Re: [OT] was Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-26 08:59 -0700
Re: [OT] was Re: typedef forward declaration raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-06-27 12:13 +0000
Re: [OT] was Re: typedef forward declaration Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-06-27 08:25 -0700
Re: [OT] was Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-27 08:43 -0700
Re: [OT] was Re: typedef forward declaration Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2015-06-27 08:55 -0700
Re: [OT] was Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-27 09:10 -0700
Re: [OT] was Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-27 11:25 -0700
Re: [OT] was Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-26 08:56 -0700
Re: [OT] was Re: typedef forward declaration David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-06-27 22:05 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-06-25 12:46 -0400
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-25 10:00 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-06-28 10:58 +0000
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-28 04:03 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-28 12:43 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-28 06:05 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-28 06:33 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-28 18:28 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-28 10:42 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-28 18:17 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-28 10:32 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-28 20:53 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-28 17:53 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-29 12:10 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-29 04:59 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-29 14:21 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-29 06:40 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-29 17:38 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-29 10:44 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-29 22:10 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-29 15:09 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-28 11:43 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-06-28 10:43 +0000
Re: typedef forward declaration David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-06-29 08:50 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-06-27 12:32 -0400
Re: typedef forward declaration James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-06-23 13:17 -0400
Re: typedef forward declaration James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-06-23 13:20 -0400
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-23 10:25 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-06-24 09:51 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-06-24 12:05 -0400
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-24 10:43 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-06-27 12:18 +0000
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-27 05:26 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-27 14:11 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-27 06:38 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-06-27 13:55 +0000
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-27 07:15 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-27 07:34 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-27 15:56 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-27 08:13 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-27 21:35 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-06-27 18:58 +0000
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-27 12:35 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-06-27 13:21 -0400
Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-27 11:34 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-27 12:07 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-06-28 11:02 +0000
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-28 06:12 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-07-03 17:25 +0000
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-24 11:51 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-06-24 15:17 -0400
Re: typedef forward declaration James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-06-24 12:31 -0400
Re: typedef forward declaration Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> - 2015-06-23 21:11 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-23 20:22 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-23 12:39 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-23 01:51 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-22 19:55 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Chris M. Thomasson" <nospam@nospam.nospam> - 2015-06-22 22:51 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-23 02:57 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-23 11:08 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-23 00:00 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-23 09:40 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-06-23 11:03 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-23 06:06 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-23 14:45 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-11 11:33 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-06-23 15:15 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-23 15:23 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-23 07:23 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-23 15:50 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-06-23 16:51 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-22 10:53 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-22 19:26 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Nathan Wagner <nw@hydaspes.if.org> - 2015-06-23 13:37 +0000
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-23 07:53 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-06-23 17:04 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-23 16:24 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-23 08:44 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-23 09:01 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-23 15:22 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-24 07:56 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-24 08:00 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-24 08:26 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-06-23 23:06 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-23 22:20 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-22 21:18 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-22 14:21 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-06-20 10:30 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-06-20 09:08 +0000
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-20 02:14 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-06-20 09:08 +0000
Re: typedef forward declaration David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-06-17 10:52 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Dr Nick <nospam-4@temporary-address.org.uk> - 2015-06-17 19:52 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-06-17 15:32 -0400
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-17 19:58 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-15 20:02 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-06-15 17:40 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-15 17:57 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-06-15 18:37 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-15 18:44 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-06-15 19:39 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-15 19:45 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-15 20:31 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-15 13:29 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-15 19:09 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2015-06-15 18:10 -0600
Re: typedef forward declaration glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-06-16 00:30 +0000
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-15 17:41 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2015-06-15 20:58 -0600
Re: typedef forward declaration Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-06-16 09:43 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-16 12:27 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2015-06-16 09:20 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-16 19:18 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-15 10:13 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-06-15 18:24 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-06-18 21:47 +0000
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-15 06:24 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Lőrinczy Zsigmond <nospam@for.me> - 2015-06-15 21:20 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2015-06-15 18:08 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-26 09:18 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> - 2015-06-26 18:46 +0200
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-26 10:28 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-07-13 05:34 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-13 21:40 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-07-14 09:27 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-14 20:11 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-07-14 12:20 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-07-14 12:50 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2015-07-14 16:56 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-07-14 17:16 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-15 01:28 +0100
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-07-15 04:38 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-15 08:54 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-07-15 08:57 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2015-07-14 17:03 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-15 05:10 +0000
Re: typedef forward declaration Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2015-07-14 22:59 -0700
Re: typedef forward declaration "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-07-14 13:14 -0700
Page 22 of 23 — ← Prev page 1 … 20 21 [22] 23 Next page →
| From | "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-06-15 06:24 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b030fd12-f8a7-4620-a926-63de12c58ac1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #63278 |
On Monday, June 15, 2015 at 9:09:08 AM UTC-4, Bart wrote:
> How do I create forward typedefs? The following doesn't work, it says
> 'conflict with previous declaration'.
>
> typedef R;
> typedef S;
>
> typedef struct {
> S* p;
> } R;
>
> typedef struct {
> R* p;
> } S;
>
> (I want to be able to use R and S without sticking 'struct' in front
> each time. I don't want to use void* then apply casts either.)
>
> --
> Bartc
#define R struct SR
#define S struct SS
struct SR;
struct SS;
struct SR {
S* p;
};
struct SS {
R* p;
};
Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lőrinczy Zsigmond <nospam@for.me> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-06-15 21:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <mln8hm$4nh$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #63278 |
typedef struct R R;
typedef struct S S;
struct R {
struct S *p;
};
struct S {
struct R *p;
};
/* the 1st and 2nd lines could moved to here -- no difference */
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-06-15 18:08 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8b24be03-c397-4a88-b49d-cf8380035b7e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #63278 |
On Monday, June 15, 2015 at 8:09:08 AM UTC-5, Bart wrote:
> How do I create forward typedefs? The following doesn't work, it says
> 'conflict with previous declaration'.
>
> typedef R;
> typedef S;
>
> typedef struct {
> S* p;
> } R;
>
> typedef struct {
> R* p;
> } S;
>
> (I want to be able to use R and S without sticking 'struct' in front
> each time. I don't want to use void* then apply casts either.)
>
typedef struct R *R;
typedef struct S *S;
struct S { R p; };
struct R { S p; };
But, of course, there are strong opinions in circulation
against typedefing pointers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-06-26 09:18 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ab60b556-06ae-4f45-a3d9-953a3ed1a417@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #63278 |
I will add another thought to consider: When Jesus came the first time it was as a servant Savior. He came here to rescue us from sin. When He comes the second time it is as Conquering Ruler, whereby He then puts an end to sin. You want to meet Him while He is the servant Savior. You do not want to meet Him as Conquering Ruler because you will lose. Only in His Grace is there forgiveness, and all you have to do is ask Him to forgive you. Approach Him humbly remembering your sin, remembering that you too need forgiveness, just as I do, just as all of us do. Ask Him to forgive you and if you are true in your heart, He will forgive you and set your feet on a new path in life. The old will pass away, for the new has come (the new life in Him, the new way of thinking, the new feelings which now point out in your life where the enemy had you deceived). Jesus is love. He gives you eternal life. He restores you to the creation you were made to be: as God is, in His image and likeness. We will not be God, but we are His Bride. And just as on Earth the husband and wife are joined and everything he has becomes hers, and everything she has becomes his, it will be the same with Jesus Christ in Heaven, for we are called "joint heirs" with Jesus Christ (and He has received everything, a name above all names, all power and authority in Heaven, and upon the Earth, by what He did at the cross for mankind). Trust in the Lord. He is that name for a reason. And it is with a capital 'L' for a reason. Please contact me if you have any questions. And remember, I am not leading you to my church. I am not asking you for money. I am doing nothing other than pointing you to the One who can save your soul from Judgement, from the fires of Hell, forever. I am pointing you to Jesus Christ so that you too can be saved. Email me privately if you'd like. And remember, no matter where you are (good or bad), there He is. You can call upon Him instantly for help, for prayer, and you can be sure that the books of Heaven are being filled up with all your secret doings, those which you think nobody knows about. He knows. And they will be your undoing. Repent. There isn't much time. Jesus is servant Savior today. And He will return soon as Conquering Ruler. He is coming to put an end to the sinful activities on this world and there will be a 1,000 year reign of peace. His peace. During that time there will be no death. No disease. The Life will be here. Jesus Himself will be seated in authority. No longer will it be Satan with his brigade of death, but it will Jesus and His Power and Life. Repent. Ask forgiveness. And enter in to that life. Forever. Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-06-26 18:46 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <50vqoalgpj7gibkp3su2s2nne2m38f0s71@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #64241 |
On Fri, 26 Jun 2015 09:18:49 -0700 (PDT), "Rick C. Hodgin" wrote: >Repent. There isn't much time. Jesus is servant Savior today. >And He will return soon as Conquering Ruler. He is coming to put >an end to the sinful activities on this world and there will be >a 1,000 year reign of peace. questo potrebbe essere l'inganno A quel poco che ne so: quando tornerà il Cristo lo vedranno tutti, e sarà la fine di questo mondo come lo intendiamo quindi ci sarà la fine di questo universo, un cataclisma mai visto etc tipo un buco nero che risucchia tutto l'universo non la terra solamente, tutto l'universo: galassie stelle tutto "faro' nuove tutte le cose etc" e creera' un nuovo universo totalmente differente Per me ti sbagli infatti dice qualcosa come: "verranno falsi cristi" e "se fosse possibile ingannerebbero anche i figli della luce etc" --------------translation this could be the mistake In what little I know : when Christ returns, all will see He in the sky, and will be the end of this world as we know it then there will be the end of this universe , an unseen catstrophe etc like a black hole that sucks everything in the universe not only the earth , the whole universe : galaxies, stars all " I will all things new , etc. " and it will create ' a new universe completely different for me you are wrong, in fact he says something like : " there will arrive false Christs " and " they would mislead the sons of the light too, if that would be possible" because miracle etc so miracles, people of see the other world "veggenti" count for nothing if one only their word is different of what the Bibble really say
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-06-26 10:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <67605c37-8554-43bb-9a08-1f42ac5e7f28@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #64243 |
On Friday, June 26, 2015 at 12:46:32 PM UTC-4, Rosario19 wrote: > On Fri, 26 Jun 2015 09:18:49 -0700 (PDT), "Rick C. Hodgin" wrote: > > >Repent. There isn't much time. Jesus is servant Savior today. > >And He will return soon as Conquering Ruler. He is coming to put > >an end to the sinful activities on this world and there will be > >a 1,000 year reign of peace. > > questo potrebbe essere l'inganno > > A quel poco che ne so: quando tornerà il Cristo lo vedranno tutti, e > sarà la fine di questo mondo come lo intendiamo > > quindi ci sarà la fine di questo universo, un cataclisma mai visto etc > tipo un buco nero che risucchia tutto l'universo > non la terra solamente, tutto l'universo: galassie stelle tutto > > "faro' nuove tutte le cose etc" > > e creera' un nuovo universo totalmente differente > > Per me ti sbagli infatti dice qualcosa come: > > "verranno falsi cristi" > e > "se fosse possibile ingannerebbero anche i figli della luce etc" > > --------------translation > this could be the mistake > > In what little I know : when Christ returns, all will see He in the > sky, and will be the end of this world as we know it > > then there will be the end of this universe , an unseen catstrophe etc > like a black hole that sucks everything in the universe > not only the earth , the whole universe : galaxies, stars all > > " I will all things new , etc. " > > and it will create ' a new universe completely different > > for me you are wrong, in fact he says something like : > > " there will arrive false Christs " > and > " they would mislead the sons of the light too, if that would be > possible" > because miracle etc > > so miracles, people of see the other world "veggenti" > count for nothing if one only their word is different of what the > Bibble really say All will see Him when He returns. But it will not be the end of all. It will be the end of all sin ... for a time. Jesus will reclaim His throne here upon the Earth and He will reign in peace for 1,000 years. This will be upon this Earth, and it will be here where we are today. At the end of the 1,000 years, Satan, who has been bound in such a way as to be unable to exhibit any force upon any person alive during this time, will be loosed from his prison for a short while. He will go out and deceive the people of the nations gathering them together for the final battle. The saints of God will be in the holy city, Jerusalem, with the Lord. The enemies of God will be compassed all about on the outside, encroaching in from all sides. But the fire of God from Heaven comes down and destroys all of the enemies, all who have risen up at that time against the Lord. And that is the end of Satan, and all who turned against the Lord, forever. After this, a new Heaven and a new Earth are seen, and the holy city descending from Heaven, the New Jerusalem. God has a plan, but He has only revealed certain parts of it to us thus far, though with the promise that on the other side, we will know the rest. He describes it as us seeing through a lens darkly right now, but then we will see clearly, face to face. And this is for our benefit because right now, here upon this Earth sin is abounding greatly and exceedingly. But where sin has abounded, His Grace has much more abounded so that He will forgiven the heinous sins of the day. It has been foretold that Heaven and Earth will pass away, but His words will never pass away. Like a garment the Heaven and Earth will wear out and be changed. But His words will never change. To all: Seek the Lord while you are able (still alive, hearing these messages, while you are able to have the choice). Time is short. Things are moving very quickly now. The end times have been described as a woman giving birth. There are a lot of early signs, but the delivery comes later. There will be a time when the labor becomes almost continuous, and the baby is near, but it still may be a while off. But then, the delivery takes place very quickly at the end. It will be like this in these end times. Things are heating up. Moving faster. The world is changing faster and faster. And the enemy is making his last stand against all of us, so as to take down as many of us as he can sink his teeth into. Do not let him take you down. Seek the truth. Ask the Lord to help you. Repent of your sin and ask Him to forgive you. He will do this because of who He is (Faithful and True). Trust in Him and He will lead you all the way Home (in Heaven). Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-07-13 05:34 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b3fa6062-510f-46bc-a876-18bbce2ac7fd@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #63278 |
What should I call it then? The values supported by int are not absolutely known at compile time, apart from the minimum values (+/- 32767 for int), and apart from a possible list of candidate ranges, of which it will fall into one. It's also not known at compile time how many bytes wide an integer will be when written to disk even if I do determine the range made visible to me by the C runtime environment. I call that "not finite." Perhaps "unknown" or "variable" would be more appropriate, though in my use of the phrase "not finite," that is what I mean. Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-07-13 21:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <87zj2zn64d.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #65480 |
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> writes: > What should I call it then? The values supported by int are not > absolutely known at compile time, apart from the minimum values > (+/- 32767 for int), and apart from a possible list of candidate > ranges, of which it will fall into one. It's also not known at > compile time how many bytes wide an integer will be when written > to disk even if I do determine the range made visible to me by > the C runtime environment. I don't think you mean "compile time". I think most people would say that both things -- the number of bytes used to write out an int and the range of values supported by int -- *are* known at compile time. > I call that "not finite." Perhaps "unknown" or "variable" would > be more appropriate, though in my use of the phrase "not finite," > that is what I mean. These are things that vary between implementations. They are variable. They are subject to very lose guarantees. They are implementation defined. There are lots of way to say it correctly. "Not finite" and "not know at compile time" do not convey the meaning you are trying to convey. -- Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-07-14 09:27 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d9228f02-0dac-44c6-975b-fb03f2bc2778@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #65520 |
On Monday, July 13, 2015 at 4:40:44 PM UTC-4, Ben Bacarisse wrote: > "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> writes: > > > What should I call it then? The values supported by int are not > > absolutely known at compile time, apart from the minimum values > > (+/- 32767 for int), and apart from a possible list of candidate > > ranges, of which it will fall into one. It's also not known at > > compile time how many bytes wide an integer will be when written > > to disk even if I do determine the range made visible to me by > > the C runtime environment. > > I don't think you mean "compile time". I think most people would say > that both things -- the number of bytes used to write out an int and the > range of values supported by int -- *are* known at compile time. I mean compile time because while I'm on my one machine I can know these things, but if I'm on a network and receive files from another machine, then I cannot know what size its int will be. I am, instead, forced to communicate data using character strings, which require additional processing above binary data. It is a pronounced and vocal shortcoming in C, though some would argue that because the mechanism exists to bypass it with character expressions, it's not an issue. It is an issue. It's a waste of data, and of time. And had the C authors simply decided back in the 70s to create some type of variable which is ALWAYS this way or that way (a particular size, a particular endian), then we would not have any of these issues today, and all of the 10s of thousands of developers out there would not have had to spend an extra hour to write out a binary structure in text form, and then the corresponding algorithm to read it back in from text form. > > I call that "not finite." Perhaps "unknown" or "variable" would > > be more appropriate, though in my use of the phrase "not finite," > > that is what I mean. > > These are things that vary between implementations. They are variable. > They are subject to very lose guarantees. They are implementation > defined. There are lots of way to say it correctly. "Not finite" and > "not know at compile time" do not convey the meaning you are trying to > convey. I disagree. Finite is something like definite. And in this case, it is not definite. It merely exists within a range, of which it will be one, but it is not known in advance which one it will be, just that it will be one of them. Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-07-14 20:11 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <87egkaftb7.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #65563 |
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> writes: > On Monday, July 13, 2015 at 4:40:44 PM UTC-4, Ben Bacarisse wrote: >> "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> writes: >> >> > What should I call it then? The values supported by int are not >> > absolutely known at compile time, apart from the minimum values >> > (+/- 32767 for int), and apart from a possible list of candidate >> > ranges, of which it will fall into one. It's also not known at >> > compile time how many bytes wide an integer will be when written >> > to disk even if I do determine the range made visible to me by >> > the C runtime environment. >> >> I don't think you mean "compile time". I think most people would say >> that both things -- the number of bytes used to write out an int and the >> range of values supported by int -- *are* known at compile time. > > I mean compile time because while I'm on my one machine I can > know these things, but if I'm on a network and receive files > from another machine, then I cannot know what size its int will > be. I am, instead, forced to communicate data using character > strings, which require additional processing above binary data. That's not what "known at compile time" means. > It is a pronounced and vocal shortcoming in C, though some > would argue that because the mechanism exists to bypass it > with character expressions, it's not an issue. Others would argue that it's a pronounced strength of C. Even if it is very much less important now, it is almost certainly one reason we are using C at all. A language such as you want would not have been fit for systems programming in the mixed-architecture environment that permitted C to become successful. > It is an > issue. It's a waste of data, and of time. And had the C > authors simply decided back in the 70s to create some type > of variable which is ALWAYS this way or that way (a particular > size, a particular endian), then we would not have any of > these issues today, and all of the 10s of thousands of > developers out there would not have had to spend an extra > hour to write out a binary structure in text form, and then > the corresponding algorithm to read it back in from text form. I don't know what you mean by this. Can you give an example? Since it has been done by tens of thousands of developers there should be lots of examples. You solution with text form sounds like a dreadful design, but maybe I've never come across whatever issue it is you are describing. >> > I call that "not finite." Perhaps "unknown" or "variable" would >> > be more appropriate, though in my use of the phrase "not finite," >> > that is what I mean. >> >> These are things that vary between implementations. They are variable. >> They are subject to very lose guarantees. They are implementation >> defined. There are lots of way to say it correctly. "Not finite" and >> "not know at compile time" do not convey the meaning you are trying to >> convey. > > I disagree. Finite is something like definite. And in this case, > it is not definite. It merely exists within a range, of which it > will be one, but it is not known in advance which one it will be, > just that it will be one of them. The set of permitted values for INT_MAX is not finite, but once again you have replied without saying what "it" refers to. That's starting to look deliberate. My objections have always been either to simply incorrect uses of the term (for example, and I quote, "An integer is not a finite quantity") or to ambiguous uses like "It's not a finite quantity across machines". -- Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-07-14 12:20 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <acd0f548-3471-4e87-ae5b-9aa0c508af57@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #65581 |
On Tuesday, July 14, 2015 at 3:11:39 PM UTC-4, Ben Bacarisse wrote: > "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> writes: > > > On Monday, July 13, 2015 at 4:40:44 PM UTC-4, Ben Bacarisse wrote: > >> "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> writes: > >> > >> > What should I call it then? The values supported by int are not > >> > absolutely known at compile time, apart from the minimum values > >> > (+/- 32767 for int), and apart from a possible list of candidate > >> > ranges, of which it will fall into one. It's also not known at > >> > compile time how many bytes wide an integer will be when written > >> > to disk even if I do determine the range made visible to me by > >> > the C runtime environment. > >> > >> I don't think you mean "compile time". I think most people would say > >> that both things -- the number of bytes used to write out an int and the > >> range of values supported by int -- *are* known at compile time. > > > > I mean compile time because while I'm on my one machine I can > > know these things, but if I'm on a network and receive files > > from another machine, then I cannot know what size its int will > > be. I am, instead, forced to communicate data using character > > strings, which require additional processing above binary data. > > That's not what "known at compile time" means. When I am developing and compiling this source code, I do not know that information which will only be possible to know by some type of examination at runtime. > > It is a pronounced and vocal shortcoming in C, though some > > would argue that because the mechanism exists to bypass it > > with character expressions, it's not an issue. > > Others would argue that it's a pronounced strength of C. Even if it is > very much less important now, it is almost certainly one reason we are > using C at all. A language such as you want would not have been fit for > systems programming in the mixed-architecture environment that permitted > C to become successful. The language I want would contain everything it does today, with these new features added which introduce binary types which are always in a particular format (specific byte size in 8-bit characters, and of a particular endian form). This would've made it easy to exchange data between file storage, and the native internal formats used for processing. > > It is an > > issue. It's a waste of data, and of time. And had the C > > authors simply decided back in the 70s to create some type > > of variable which is ALWAYS this way or that way (a particular > > size, a particular endian), then we would not have any of > > these issues today, and all of the 10s of thousands of > > developers out there would not have had to spend an extra > > hour to write out a binary structure in text form, and then > > the corresponding algorithm to read it back in from text form. > > I don't know what you mean by this. Can you give an example? Since it > has been done by tens of thousands of developers there should be lots of > examples. You solution with text form sounds like a dreadful design, > but maybe I've never come across whatever issue it is you are > describing. Someone earlier in this thread described it. > >> > I call that "not finite." Perhaps "unknown" or "variable" would > >> > be more appropriate, though in my use of the phrase "not finite," > >> > that is what I mean. > >> > >> These are things that vary between implementations. They are variable. > >> They are subject to very lose guarantees. They are implementation > >> defined. There are lots of way to say it correctly. "Not finite" and > >> "not know at compile time" do not convey the meaning you are trying to > >> convey. > > > > I disagree. Finite is something like definite. And in this case, > > it is not definite. It merely exists within a range, of which it > > will be one, but it is not known in advance which one it will be, > > just that it will be one of them. > > The set of permitted values for INT_MAX is not finite, but once again > you have replied without saying what "it" refers to. That's starting to > look deliberate. My objections have always been either to simply > incorrect uses of the term (for example, and I quote, "An integer is not > a finite quantity") or to ambiguous uses like "It's not a finite > quantity across machines". The "it" I am referring to in all of those cases is either the integer, or the size of the integer, as is represented in C by the "int" keyword. Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-07-14 12:50 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <53f38362-cdea-48f6-8a9c-f868e5c51de7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #65582 |
On Tuesday, July 14, 2015 at 3:20:44 PM UTC-4, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 14, 2015 at 3:11:39 PM UTC-4, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> > "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> writes:
> > > It is an
> > > issue. It's a waste of data, and of time. And had the C
> > > authors simply decided back in the 70s to create some type
> > > of variable which is ALWAYS this way or that way (a particular
> > > size, a particular endian), then we would not have any of
> > > these issues today, and all of the 10s of thousands of
> > > developers out there would not have had to spend an extra
> > > hour to write out a binary structure in text form, and then
> > > the corresponding algorithm to read it back in from text form.
> >
> > I don't know what you mean by this. Can you give an example? Since it
> > has been done by tens of thousands of developers there should be lots of
> > examples. You solution with text form sounds like a dreadful design,
> > but maybe I've never come across whatever issue it is you are
> > describing.
>
> Someone earlier in this thread described it.
It was Tim Rentsch. He was describing communicating binary data using
char values in a file, and that any competent programmer should be
able to write these algorithms in not much time.
My argument is that such a form should never have been needed. Had the
C authors created specific types for this kind of i/o with storage or
other devices, then the format it is conveyed to/fro would always have
been known without manual fixups. Something so simple as this could've
been possible:
int myValue;
int_io myValueIO;
myValue = some_function();
more_processing(&myValue);
// Prepare for disk write, and write
myValueIO = myValue;
fwrite(&myValueIO, 1, sizeof(myValueIO), fh);
Now, the data written to disk is always of a known form and size.
It required nothing more than storing the machine-computational
value to the IO form, and viola! All done.
If a series of char-based binary sequences can be created manually
by every C developer who has need to write out binary data in a
portable manner, then why not incorporate the same into the language
so that when the fwrite() completes, what's written to disk is that
sequence from the int_io type and the myValueIO value at that time.
Data could be read from disk:
struct SWhateverIO
{
int_io value1;
int_io value2;
int_io value3;
};
struct SWhatever
{
int value1;
int value2;
int value3;
};
SWhateverIO dataIO;
SWhatever data;
fread(&dataIO, 1, sizeof(dataIO), fh);
data.value1 = dataIO.value1;
data.value2 = dataIO.value2;
data.value3 = dataIO.value3;
// Now, use data.* for internal processing
In the alternative, create fixed types which handle all of this
automatically by defining a type to be a particular bit-size and
endian ... problem also solved.
Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-07-14 16:56 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.300f4197d57266d650@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #65582 |
Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > Ben Bacarisse wrote: > > Rick C. Hodgin writes: > > > Ben Bacarisse wrote: > > >> Rick C. Hodgin writes: > > >> > > >> > What should I call it then? The values supported by int are not > > >> > absolutely known at compile time, apart from the minimum values > > >> > (+/- 32767 for int), and apart from a possible list of candidate > > >> > ranges, of which it will fall into one. It's also not known at > > >> > compile time how many bytes wide an integer will be when written > > >> > to disk even if I do determine the range made visible to me by > > >> > the C runtime environment. > > >> > > >> I don't think you mean "compile time". I think most people would say > > >> that both things -- the number of bytes used to write out an int and the > > >> range of values supported by int -- *are* known at compile time. > > > > > > I mean compile time because while I'm on my one machine I can > > > know these things, but if I'm on a network and receive files > > > from another machine, then I cannot know what size its int will > > > be. I am, instead, forced to communicate data using character > > > strings, which require additional processing above binary data. > > > > That's not what "known at compile time" means. > > When I am developing and compiling this source code, I do not know > that information which will only be possible to know by some type > of examination at runtime. This is simply not true. The information is possible to know by some type of examination *at compile time* (by code that you can write to do the examination). If you use the term "at compile time" in a way that is different from the way everyone else here uses the term, you should not be surprised that you are misunderstood (or argued with).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-07-14 17:16 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <20036ea8-0fb2-4919-a7f5-a3c59625cc6f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #65595 |
Philip Lantz wrote: > Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > > When I am developing and compiling this > > source code, I do not know that information > > which will only be possible to know by some > > type of examination at runtime. > > This is simply not true. The information is > possible to know by some type of examination > *at compile time* (by code that you can write > to do the examination). Yeah. It's not worth another lengthy exchange to explain my point (at least not to me). It's hard enough to communicate over typing. Harder when the people you're communicating with won't meet you at any point between you and them. Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-07-15 01:28 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mo49c0$b48$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #65598 |
On 15/07/15 01:16, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > Philip Lantz wrote: >> Rick C. Hodgin wrote: >> > When I am developing and compiling this >> > source code, I do not know that information >> > which will only be possible to know by some >> > type of examination at runtime. >> >> This is simply not true. The information is >> possible to know by some type of examination >> *at compile time* (by code that you can write >> to do the examination). > > Yeah. It's not worth another lengthy exchange to > explain my point (at least not to me). It shouldn't take a lengthy exchange. Compile time is the time when the program is being compiled. At compile time, if you have #included <limits.h>, you know INT_MIN and INT_MAX, which is all you need for complete information about the range of int for your implementation. > It's hard enough to communicate over typing. > Harder when the people you're communicating > with won't meet you at any point between you > and them. When the truth is at A and you're at B, all we can do is show you where A is. There is no value in moving closer to B if it means moving further from A. -- 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 | "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-07-15 04:38 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e7e1682e-8852-447e-87ff-26db6039df29@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #65599 |
Richard Heathfield wrote: > [snip] https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXDgn4OTnjU Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-07-15 08:54 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <lntwt5ju1z.fsf@kst-u.example.com> |
| In reply to | #65615 |
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> writes:
> Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> [snip]
>
> https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXDgn4OTnjU
Just to save others a little time, that's "Love Me Do" by The Beatles.
--
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 | "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-07-15 08:57 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <2504d32a-7a7d-419a-97af-87c07e7a2454@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #65631 |
On Wednesday, July 15, 2015 at 11:54:08 AM UTC-4, Keith Thompson wrote: > "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> writes: > > Richard Heathfield wrote: > >> [snip] > > https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXDgn4OTnjU > Just to save others a little time, that's "Love Me Do" by The Beatles. You do read my posts, Keith! Awesome. :-) And... thank you. Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-07-14 17:03 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.300f4322d8b406fe51@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #65582 |
Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > > >> > I call that "not finite." Perhaps "unknown" or "variable" would > > >> > be more appropriate, though in my use of the phrase "not finite," > > >> > that is what I mean. > > >> > > >> These are things that vary between implementations. They are variable. > > >> They are subject to very lose guarantees. They are implementation > > >> defined. There are lots of way to say it correctly. "Not finite" and > > >> "not know at compile time" do not convey the meaning you are trying to > > >> convey. > > > > > > I disagree. Finite is something like definite. And in this case, > > > it is not definite. It merely exists within a range, of which it > > > will be one, but it is not known in advance which one it will be, > > > just that it will be one of them. > > > > The set of permitted values for INT_MAX is not finite, but once again > > you have replied without saying what "it" refers to. That's starting to > > look deliberate. My objections have always been either to simply > > incorrect uses of the term (for example, and I quote, "An integer is not > > a finite quantity") or to ambiguous uses like "It's not a finite > > quantity across machines". > > The "it" I am referring to in all of those cases is either the integer, > or the size of the integer, as is represented in C by the "int" keyword. Every value of every object of integral type in every C program that has ever been written and executed has been finite, and the size of every integral type in every C implementation that has ever been created has been finite. I think you mean something different than what you are writing.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-07-15 05:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mo4pvm$uej$2@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #65596 |
Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> wrote: (snip) > Every value of every object of integral type in every C program that has > ever been written and executed has been finite, and the size of every > integral type in every C implementation that has ever been created has > been finite. I think you mean something different than what you are > writing. As far as I know, there are no general purpose computers with an integer format with + or -Inf or NaN, but it seems possible that someone could do that. But yes, C doesn't allow for it, at least not for unsigned. I am not so sure it couldn't work for signed. -- glen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 22 of 23 — ← Prev page 1 … 20 21 [22] 23 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web