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

Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #363964 > unrolled thread

C is Number One

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy

Contents

  C is Number One Adlbifhr Mjduhgfks <am@random.us> - 2016-07-27 23:40 +0000
    Re: C is Number One Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-07-27 17:37 -0700
      Re: C is Number One chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-07-28 07:08 -0500
        Re: C is Number One Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-07-28 07:07 -0700
          Re: C is Number One chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-07-28 09:18 -0500
            Re: C is Number One Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-07-28 07:31 -0700
              Re: C is Number One Adlbifhr Mjduhgfks <am@random.us> - 2016-07-28 15:08 +0000
                Re: C is Number One DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-07-28 11:47 -0400
                  Re: C is Number One flatfish+++ <flatfish4real@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 12:48 -0400
                  Re: C is Number One Takuya Saitoh <taka0038@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 18:19 -0700
                    Re: C is Number One Adlbifhr Mjduhgfks <am@random.us> - 2016-07-29 02:19 +0000
          Re: C is Number One Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-07-28 16:59 +0200
        Re: C is Number One Adlbifhr Mjduhgfks <am@random.us> - 2016-07-28 14:52 +0000
          Re: C is Number One Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-07-28 17:06 +0200
          Re: C is Number One DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-07-28 11:38 -0400
          Re: C is Number One "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-07-29 00:44 +0000
            Re: C is Number One Adlbifhr Mjduhgfks <am@random.us> - 2016-07-29 02:10 +0000
              Re: C is Number One "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-07-29 15:01 +0000
            Re: C is Number One GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-07-28 20:20 -0600
              C is Number One John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 21:43 -0700
              Re: C is Number One Adlbifhr Mjduhgfks <am@random.us> - 2016-07-29 08:58 +0000
                Re: C is Number One DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-07-29 10:12 -0400
                  Re: C is Number One fr314159@gmail.com - 2016-07-29 07:48 -0700
                    Re: C is Number One "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-07-29 15:07 +0000
                      Re: C is Number One fr314159@gmail.com - 2016-07-29 08:16 -0700
                        Re: C is Number One Old Friend <old.friend@cheerful.com> - 2016-07-29 11:22 -0400
                          Re: C is Number One GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-07-29 11:35 -0600
                        Re: C is Number One "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-07-29 15:31 +0000
                          Re: C is Number One Adlbifhr Mjduhgfks <am@random.us> - 2016-07-29 22:56 +0000
                            Re: C is Number One "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-07-30 00:39 +0000
                        Re: C is Number One GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-07-29 11:35 -0600
                    Re: C is Number One GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-07-29 11:34 -0600
                    Re: C is Number One DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-07-29 23:25 -0400
                    Re: C is Number One DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-07-29 23:26 -0400
                    Re: C is Number One DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-07-30 14:04 -0400
                  Re: C is Number One fr314159@gmail.com - 2016-07-29 10:51 -0700
                    Re: C is Number One GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-07-29 14:43 -0600
                Re: C is Number One "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-07-29 15:05 +0000
                  Re: C is Number One GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-07-29 11:36 -0600
                Re: C is Number One GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-07-29 11:33 -0600
          Re: C is Number One DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-07-30 15:29 -0400
    Re: C is Number One Takuya Saitoh <taka0038@gmail.com> - 2016-07-27 18:03 -0700
      Re: C is Number One Adlbifhr Mjduhgfks <am@random.us> - 2016-07-28 17:33 +0000
        Re: C is Number One Takuya Saitoh <taka0038@gmail.com> - 2016-07-28 18:15 -0700
          Re: C is Number One GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-07-28 20:20 -0600
    Re: C is Number One Ron House <rhouse@smartchat.net.au> - 2016-07-28 12:40 +1000
    Re: C is Number One DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-07-28 09:46 -0400

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#364055

On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 20:20:16 -0600, GreyCloud wrote:

> 
> I was wondering when someone would bring that 
> one out.
>

Fuck you.  Another stupid idiot.  Everything needed is there.

What you see are basic C operators that work together to
accomplish something.  Explain exactly what is going on.

But you cannot do it.  You are another loud-mouthed miserable
failure.

Google won't help you.  Cdecl won't help you.

You are on your own, and you have only managed to clearly
demonstrate your inadequacy.

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

Fucking loser.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#364063

On 7/29/2016 4:58 AM, Adlbifhr Mjduhgfks wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 20:20:16 -0600, GreyCloud wrote:
>
>>
>> I was wondering when someone would bring that
>> one out.
>>
>
> Fuck you.  Another stupid idiot.  Everything needed is there.
>
> What you see are basic C operators that work together to
> accomplish something.  Explain exactly what is going on.
>
> But you cannot do it.  You are another loud-mouthed miserable
> failure.
  >
> Google won't help you.  Cdecl won't help you.
>
> You are on your own, and you have only managed to clearly
> demonstrate your inadequacy.
>
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>
> Fucking loser.



That's you, Feeb.

Yesterday I posted your shit-code on comp.lang.c (thread 'Question' by 
DFS), and several gurus there scoffed at it.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"A failed code review..."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
What is sizeof (imageType *) ?
What is sizeof int64_t ?

If they are different:
At best, you will get a compiler warning or error.
At worst, you get a silent corruption of clientData.

If they are the same:
Good luck with that.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This entire process could have been performed much more easily by
simply casting the value of src with
      image->clientData[0] = (int64_t)src;
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[responder points out 5 issues then says]
Any one of those issues would be sufficient to make me choose an
alternative way of handling this - and there is one.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


I already told you before, Feeb: you're a shitty programmer.  Regardless 
of the language, every single time you post some code it has major flaws.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#364064

On Friday, July 29, 2016 at 10:13:03 AM UTC-4, DFS wrote:

> 
> Yesterday I posted your shit-code on comp.lang.c (thread 'Question' by 
> DFS), and several gurus there scoffed at it.
> 

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!  What a supreme asshole!

That's not MY code, you dumb-fuck idiot.  That code was produced
by a company called Picture Elements Incorporated under contract
from the U.S. Library of Congress:

https://www.loc.gov/preservation/resources/rt/illbk/ibs2.html

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

Their product, peiHalftone, is available as open-source code from
this FTP site:

ftp://ftp2.picturel.com/pub/xo/web/halftone/pei-1.254.tar.gz

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

But it does serve as a nice example for all the dumb-fuck
asshole idiots that think they understand C programming.

So far, absolutely NO ONE can explain what that statement
accomplishes -- and no one ever will.

Except ME of course.

The source for peiHalftone was released in 1999.  It cannot
run on modern 64-bit Linux systems.  In fact, it cannot even
run on modern 32-bit Linux systems.

At least not until I fixed it.

Yes, asshole, I have patched the source code and now it can
function on 64-bit machines.  I use it all the time.

Would you like a copy of my fantastic peiHalftone patches?

Well, you ain't gonna get them.  You, as well as the rest of
these C.O.L.A. deadbeats do not deserve to be exposed to my
magnificent programming prowess.  You can all go fuck your miserable
selves.

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

But thanks to ME, peiHalftone now has a brand new life.

Now go tell the U.S. Library of Congress about your "discoveries."

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#364069

fr314159@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, July 29, 2016 at 10:13:03 AM UTC-4, DFS wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Yesterday I posted your shit-code on comp.lang.c (thread 'Question' by 
>> DFS), and several gurus there scoffed at it.
>> 
> 
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!  What a supreme asshole!
> 
> That's not MY code, you dumb-fuck idiot.

I guess that explains why you are begging people to tell you what
the code does. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#364070

On Friday, July 29, 2016 at 11:07:48 AM UTC-4, Octavian W. Lagrange wrote:

> 
> I guess that explains why you are begging people to tell you what
> the code does.
>

Well, then, smart fuck, let's see you patch the code to make
it run on a modern 64-bit Linux system.

You have the link.  Download the source and find what needs
to be done and then patch it.

C'mon, fat mouth.  Do it.

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

You'll be there a LOT longer than 2028.

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#364071

In article <22402e34-7d46-4e31-8c5f-79e751b49b75@googlegroups.com>, 
fr314159@gmail.com says...
> 
> On Friday, July 29, 2016 at 11:07:48 AM UTC-4, Octavian W. Lagrange wrote:
> 
> > 
> > I guess that explains why you are begging people to tell you what
> > the code does.
> >
> 
> Well, then, smart fuck, let's see you patch the code to make
> it run on a modern 64-bit Linux system.
> 
> You have the link.  Download the source and find what needs
> to be done and then patch it.
> 
> C'mon, fat mouth.  Do it.
> 
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
> 
> You'll be there a LOT longer than 2028.
> 
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

Are you mentally retarded?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#364088

On 07/29/16 09:22, Old Friend wrote:
> In article<22402e34-7d46-4e31-8c5f-79e751b49b75@googlegroups.com>,
> fr314159@gmail.com says...
>>
>> On Friday, July 29, 2016 at 11:07:48 AM UTC-4, Octavian W. Lagrange wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I guess that explains why you are begging people to tell you what
>>> the code does.
>>>
>>
>> Well, then, smart fuck, let's see you patch the code to make
>> it run on a modern 64-bit Linux system.
>>
>> You have the link.  Download the source and find what needs
>> to be done and then patch it.
>>
>> C'mon, fat mouth.  Do it.
>>
>> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>>
>> You'll be there a LOT longer than 2028.
>>
>> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>
> Are you mentally retarded?
>
He dipped into you know who's stash of glue.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#364073

fr314159@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, July 29, 2016 at 11:07:48 AM UTC-4, Octavian W. Lagrange wrote:
> 
>> 
>> I guess that explains why you are begging people to tell you what
>> the code does.
>>
> 
> Well, then, smart fuck, let's see you patch the code to make
> it run on a modern 64-bit Linux system.
> 
> You have the link.  Download the source and find what needs
> to be done and then patch it.
> 

I especially like this part, in pei.h:

  typedef struct imageType imageType;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#364127

On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 15:31:42 +0000, Octavian W. Lagrange wrote:

> 
> I especially like this part,
>

That's the only part that you CAN like.

You are nothing more that a cheap technician.  You
have no real creativity or innovate spirit, because such
qualities go well beyond the simplistic nit picking
which is your specialty.

And, as usual, your idiotic nit picking this time was totally
meaningless.

But do not despair.  On C.O.L.A. most participants share
your ineptitude.  You have lots of company and commiseration.

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#364130

Adlbifhr Mjduhgfks <am@random.us> wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 15:31:42 +0000, Octavian W. Lagrange wrote:
> 
>> 
>> I especially like this part,
>>
> 
> That's the only part that you CAN like.
> 
> You are nothing more that a cheap technician.  You
> have no real creativity or innovate spirit, because such
> qualities go well beyond the simplistic nit picking
> which is your specialty.
> 

Trying to write code without nit picking appears to be your
major problem.  "Semicolons?  Who needs 'em!  Closing braces?
Who needs 'em!  typedefs?  Who needs 'em!"

Maybe you should take up finger painting as a proper outlet
for your creativity.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#364087

On 07/29/16 09:16, fr314159@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, July 29, 2016 at 11:07:48 AM UTC-4, Octavian W. Lagrange wrote:
>
>>
>> I guess that explains why you are begging people to tell you what
>> the code does.
>>
>
> Well, then, smart fuck, let's see you patch the code to make
> it run on a modern 64-bit Linux system.
>
> You have the link.  Download the source and find what needs
> to be done and then patch it.
>
> C'mon, fat mouth.  Do it.
>
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>
> You'll be there a LOT longer than 2028.
>
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>
>
Clueless you are, fabtard... or is that fabturd.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#364086

On 07/29/16 08:48, fr314159@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, July 29, 2016 at 10:13:03 AM UTC-4, DFS wrote:
>
>>
>> Yesterday I posted your shit-code on comp.lang.c (thread 'Question' by
>> DFS), and several gurus there scoffed at it.
>>
>
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!  What a supreme asshole!
>
> That's not MY code, you dumb-fuck idiot.  That code was produced
> by a company called Picture Elements Incorporated under contract
> from the U.S. Library of Congress:
>
> https://www.loc.gov/preservation/resources/rt/illbk/ibs2.html
>
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>
> Their product, peiHalftone, is available as open-source code from
> this FTP site:
>
> ftp://ftp2.picturel.com/pub/xo/web/halftone/pei-1.254.tar.gz
>
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>
> But it does serve as a nice example for all the dumb-fuck
> asshole idiots that think they understand C programming.
>
> So far, absolutely NO ONE can explain what that statement
> accomplishes -- and no one ever will.
>
> Except ME of course.
>
> The source for peiHalftone was released in 1999.  It cannot
> run on modern 64-bit Linux systems.  In fact, it cannot even
> run on modern 32-bit Linux systems.
>
> At least not until I fixed it.
>
> Yes, asshole, I have patched the source code and now it can
> function on 64-bit machines.  I use it all the time.
>
> Would you like a copy of my fantastic peiHalftone patches?
>
> Well, you ain't gonna get them.  You, as well as the rest of
> these C.O.L.A. deadbeats do not deserve to be exposed to my
> magnificent programming prowess.  You can all go fuck your miserable
> selves.
>
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>
> But thanks to ME, peiHalftone now has a brand new life.
>
> Now go tell the U.S. Library of Congress about your "discoveries."
>
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>
>
Guffaw!!!  Your assinine projection noted, luser.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#364133

On 7/29/2016 10:48 AM, fr314159@gmail.com wrote:


> my magnificent programming prowess.


Good one, Feeb!

Last time your C coding 'prowess' was on display, you made 6 glaring 
mistakes in just 21 lines.  Even an Ubuntu hobo developer can do better 
than that.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#364134

On 7/29/2016 10:48 AM, fr314159@gmail.com wrote:


> Yes, asshole, I have patched the source code and now it can
> function on 64-bit machines.  I use it all the time.


You can only use others' code; you're unable to create your own.

Take away imageMagick, g'mic, peiHalfTone, NETPBM, etc and you're 
completely lost.

Your 'programming prowess' is fantasy bullshit.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#364177

On 7/29/2016 10:48 AM, fr314159@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, July 29, 2016 at 10:13:03 AM UTC-4, DFS wrote:
>
>>
>> Yesterday I posted your shit-code on comp.lang.c (thread 'Question' by
>> DFS), and several gurus there scoffed at it.
>>
>
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!  What a supreme asshole!
>
> That's not MY code, you dumb-fuck idiot.


Figures a Linux loser like you would post someone else's code without 
attribution.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#364095

On Friday, July 29, 2016 at 10:13:03 AM UTC-4, DFS wrote:

> 
> I already told you before,
>

You can't tell anyone anything, because you a universal incompetent.


Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!  The dumb-fuck shill has egg all over
his stupid face.  Once again he has shown himself to be a complete
ass.

Not only is he a brain-dead programmer, as he has unequivocally demonstrated
many times on this NG, but he possesses pathetic basic intelligence and
perception as well.

Let us recount the many ways he has flopped this time.

In the first place, he encounters a tiny fragment of code, which had
been snipped form a much larger work purely for the sake of illustrating
a very specific issue, and, without fully comprehending anything, begins
to make outlandish assumptions and then runs off in desperation to seek
the assistance of what he terms Usenet "gurus" (yet another of his mistaken
assumptions).

Whew!  What a fucking demented loon!

My intention, which should have been blazingly clear to anyone with half
a brain, was to illustrate just how tricky the C language can be, and my
single-line code snippet admirably demonstrated this.

But then several dumb-fuck idiots, including the supreme dumb fuck himself,
began to focus on totally extraneous, unrelated, and UNNECESSARY details.
Each of these idiots was beguiled into believing that his misplaced analysis
was somehow relevant and insightful.  What lame dupes!

No, asshole.  The single-line fragment was all that was needed.  Period.
Case closed.  (Only a fucking retard would insist on taking things further --
and retards did.)

Then, after this lamentable display, the supreme dumb fuck then walks away from
his beloved "gurus" and begins to parrot their comments without understanding
a single word of any of it.  He essentially "plays" the expert using the ideas of others, but to even have such blind faith in casual Usenet participants is
in itself a definite sign of a stupid mind.

Yes.  Yes.  Yes.  The dumb-fuck shill does it again.

Oh, well.  I suppose we should give him points for consistency.  He is, after all, consistently a dumb-fuck idiot.

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

P.S.  Don't they still require reading comprehension skills for admission
to higher education?

Oh, wait.  His alma mater is the Hamburger University.

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#364109

On 07/29/16 11:51, fr314159@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, July 29, 2016 at 10:13:03 AM UTC-4, DFS wrote:
>
>>
>> I already told you before,
>>
>
> You can't tell anyone anything, because you a universal incompetent.
>
>
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!  The dumb-fuck shill has egg all over
> his stupid face.  Once again he has shown himself to be a complete
> ass.
>
> Not only is he a brain-dead programmer, as he has unequivocally demonstrated
> many times on this NG, but he possesses pathetic basic intelligence and
> perception as well.
>
> Let us recount the many ways he has flopped this time.
>
> In the first place, he encounters a tiny fragment of code, which had
> been snipped form a much larger work purely for the sake of illustrating
> a very specific issue, and, without fully comprehending anything, begins
> to make outlandish assumptions and then runs off in desperation to seek
> the assistance of what he terms Usenet "gurus" (yet another of his mistaken
> assumptions).
>
> Whew!  What a fucking demented loon!
>
> My intention, which should have been blazingly clear to anyone with half
> a brain, was to illustrate just how tricky the C language can be, and my
> single-line code snippet admirably demonstrated this.
>
> But then several dumb-fuck idiots, including the supreme dumb fuck himself,
> began to focus on totally extraneous, unrelated, and UNNECESSARY details.
> Each of these idiots was beguiled into believing that his misplaced analysis
> was somehow relevant and insightful.  What lame dupes!
>
> No, asshole.  The single-line fragment was all that was needed.  Period.
> Case closed.  (Only a fucking retard would insist on taking things further --
> and retards did.)
>
> Then, after this lamentable display, the supreme dumb fuck then walks away from
> his beloved "gurus" and begins to parrot their comments without understanding
> a single word of any of it.  He essentially "plays" the expert using the ideas of others, but to even have such blind faith in casual Usenet participants is
> in itself a definite sign of a stupid mind.
>
> Yes.  Yes.  Yes.  The dumb-fuck shill does it again.
>
> Oh, well.  I suppose we should give him points for consistency.  He is, after all, consistently a dumb-fuck idiot.
>
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>
> P.S.  Don't they still require reading comprehension skills for admission
> to higher education?
>
> Oh, wait.  His alma mater is the Hamburger University.
>
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>
>
Says the 13 year old loon.  You eat too much sugar.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#364068

Adlbifhr Mjduhgfks <am@random.us> wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 20:20:16 -0600, GreyCloud wrote:
> 
>> 
>> I was wondering when someone would bring that 
>> one out.
>>
> 
> Fuck you.  Another stupid idiot.  Everything needed is there.
> 

Nope.  You need a typedef.

anon@lowtide:~/code/fabtard$ diff klah.c plah.c
7c7
< typedef struct imageType { int64_t clientData[CLIENT_SIZE]; } imageType;
---
> struct imageType { int64_t clientData[CLIENT_SIZE]; } ;
anon@lowtide:~/code/fabtard$ gcc -Wall -o klah klah.c
anon@lowtide:~/code/fabtard$ gcc -Wall -o plah plah.c
plah.c: In function ‘main’:
plah.c:12:2: error: unknown type name ‘imageType’
...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#364089

On 07/29/16 09:05, Octavian W. Lagrange wrote:
> Adlbifhr Mjduhgfks<am@random.us>  wrote:
>> On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 20:20:16 -0600, GreyCloud wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I was wondering when someone would bring that
>>> one out.
>>>
>>
>> Fuck you.  Another stupid idiot.  Everything needed is there.
>>
>
> Nope.  You need a typedef.
>
> anon@lowtide:~/code/fabtard$ diff klah.c plah.c
> 7c7
> <  typedef struct imageType { int64_t clientData[CLIENT_SIZE]; } imageType;
> ---
>> struct imageType { int64_t clientData[CLIENT_SIZE]; } ;
> anon@lowtide:~/code/fabtard$ gcc -Wall -o klah klah.c
> anon@lowtide:~/code/fabtard$ gcc -Wall -o plah plah.c
> plah.c: In function ‘main’:
> plah.c:12:2: error: unknown type name ‘imageType’
> ...
>

About the best proof you can show.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#364085

On 07/29/16 02:58, Adlbifhr Mjduhgfks wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 20:20:16 -0600, GreyCloud wrote:
>
>>
>> I was wondering when someone would bring that
>> one out.
>>
>
> Fuck you.  Another stupid idiot.  Everything needed is there.
>
> What you see are basic C operators that work together to
> accomplish something.  Explain exactly what is going on.
>
> But you cannot do it.  You are another loud-mouthed miserable
> failure.
>
> Google won't help you.  Cdecl won't help you.
>
> You are on your own, and you have only managed to clearly
> demonstrate your inadequacy.
>
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>
> Fucking loser.
>
Guffaw!!!  Sounds like one of your echoes as you are shouting at 
yourself, eh Fabtard.

LOL!!!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy

csiph-web