Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #89895 > unrolled thread

Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C

Started by	Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid>
First post	2026-08-14 12:26 +0100
Last post	2026-08-17 20:27 +0100
Articles	20 on this page of 99 — 13 participants

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

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

  Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-14 12:26 +0100
    Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C Geoff Clare <geoff@clare.See-My-Signature.invalid> - 2026-08-14 13:53 +0100
      Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-08-14 21:10 +0000
    Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-08-14 16:00 +0000
    Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-14 23:47 -0400
      Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-15 07:20 +0000
        Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-15 11:33 +0100
        Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-15 22:41 -0400
          Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-08-16 10:50 +0200
            Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-16 19:04 +0000
      Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C Jim Jackson <jj@franjam.org.uk> - 2026-08-15 11:07 +0000
        Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-15 12:18 +0100
      Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-15 12:20 +0100
        Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-16 02:09 -0400
          Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-16 09:59 +0100
            Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-16 11:42 +0100
              Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-17 00:02 -0400
                Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-17 07:10 +0000
                  Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-17 09:32 +0100
                  Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-17 10:13 +0100
                    Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-17 17:15 +0000
                      Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-17 20:58 +0100
                    Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-17 22:24 -0400
                      Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-08-18 04:55 +0000
                        Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-18 06:17 +0000
                          Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-18 22:11 -0400
                            Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-19 04:21 +0000
                              Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-19 02:26 -0400
                                Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-19 14:29 +0100
                                  Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-19 19:36 +0000
                              Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-19 14:28 +0100
                            Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-19 14:24 +0100
                        Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-18 10:19 +0100
                          Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-08-18 16:30 +0000
                            Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-19 04:11 +0000
                              Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-08-19 04:22 +0000
                                Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-08-19 04:38 +0000
                                  Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-08-19 05:34 +0000
                                    Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-19 06:39 +0000
                                    Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-08-19 07:04 +0000
                                      Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-19 19:59 +0000
                                        Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-20 01:31 +0100
                                          Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-20 03:26 +0000
                                            Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-20 11:50 +0100
                                              Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-20 12:06 +0100
                                              Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-20 12:51 -0400
                                                Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-21 13:34 +0100
                                          Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-08-20 04:02 +0000
                                  Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-19 06:35 +0000
                                    Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-19 14:31 +0100
                                      Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-19 19:47 +0000
                                        [off-topic] MA 370 flight disappearance (Was: Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C) Anton Antimo <anton@safunu.org> - 2026-08-20 10:04 -0300
                                          Re: [off-topic] MA 370 flight disappearance (Was: Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-20 21:11 +0000
                                          Re: [off-topic] MA 370 flight disappearance The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-21 13:32 +0100
                                Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-19 02:28 -0400
                                  Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-08-19 16:57 +0000
                                    Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-19 22:17 +0000
                                      Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-20 01:34 +0100
                                        Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-20 03:45 +0000
                                      Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-19 23:26 -0400
                                        Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-20 21:40 +0000
                                          Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-20 23:42 -0400
                                            Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-21 06:10 +0000
                                              Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C Lars Poulsen <lars@beagle-ears.com> - 2026-08-21 06:01 -0700
                                                Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-21 18:36 +0000
                                              Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-21 21:46 -0400
                                                Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-22 13:13 +0100
                                                  Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-22 19:53 +0000
                                                    Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-22 23:47 +0100
                                                      Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-23 01:21 +0000
                                                        Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-23 12:48 +0100
                                                      Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-23 03:25 -0400
                                                  Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-23 01:50 -0400
                                                    Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-23 07:30 +0000
                                                      Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-23 04:16 -0400
                                                        Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-23 19:08 +0000
                                Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-19 06:30 +0000
                            Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-19 14:15 +0100
                              Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-19 19:39 +0000
                                Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-08-19 22:54 +0000
                                  Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-20 04:03 +0000
                                Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-20 01:25 +0100
                                  Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-20 03:56 +0000
                                    Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-08-20 04:40 +0000
                                      Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-08-20 04:46 +0000
                                        Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-08-20 04:59 +0000
                                      Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-20 21:46 +0000
                                        Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-08-20 22:44 +0000
                                          Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-21 04:35 +0000
                                          Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-21 00:54 -0400
                                        Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-21 00:05 -0400
          Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-16 19:13 +0000
            Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-17 01:14 -0400
              Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-08-17 16:58 +0000
        Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C Geoff Clare <geoff@clare.See-My-Signature.invalid> - 2026-08-17 13:44 +0100
          Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-17 15:31 +0100
            Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C Geoff Clare <geoff@clare.See-My-Signature.invalid> - 2026-08-18 13:23 +0100
              Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-18 17:16 +0100
          Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-17 20:27 +0100

Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 Next page →

#90242

From	rbowman <bowman@montana.com>
Date	2026-08-20 21:40 +0000
Message-ID	<nepahlFpub2U39@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#90189

On Wed, 19 Aug 2026 23:26:44 -0400, c186282 wrote:

>    I learned to fly - license at 17 - but then an OPEC embargo drove the
>    fuel costs beyond what I could cope with. Hell, couldn't even get the
>    red gas, they tried 100LL but the engine valves kept sticking ... not
>    good.

I was working on a project for fuel measurement and management. It was a 
DoD project and I was bored out of my mind so I decided to get some first 
hand experience with planes. The FBO at Middlebury VT was run by an ag 
pilot who offered instruction. It's an uncontrolled airport with one 
runway, 01/19. Typical mountain flying. 

I got bored enough that I took a contract in Ft. Wayne and resumed 
instruction. The instructor was a young woman building hours. My 
impression was she was in the wrong career. The real problem was Indiana. 
I don't do well in flatland. You could land in almost  any soybean field 
in an emergency but looking out and seeing nothing out to the limit of 
visibility was spooky. 

I also realized the VFR limits. I had previously worked for a company that 
was housed in the old Thurston plant that was located on an airport. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thurston_Teal

The company president decided he would take the opportunity to learn to 
fly. He did so and bought a plane since it was so convenient to park it. 
His secretary wasn't enthused by flying off to business meetings but so it 
goes. One day he went to visit a client in Kennebunk ME, a distance of 
about 20 miles. Kennebunk being where it is he encountered fog with very 
limited visibility. He managed to get home in one piece, got out of the 
plane, kissed the ground, and sold the plane. That was that.

Not a good area for VFR. For that matter I totaled my Mustang flying low 
in the fog. I knew the road but I didn't anticipate the truck parked 
across it as he searched for his turn in the murk.

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

#90256

From	c186282 <c186282@nnada.net>
Date	2026-08-20 23:42 -0400
Message-ID	<D9icnYZj4rXoVBr3nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to	#90242

On 8/20/26 17:40, rbowman wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Aug 2026 23:26:44 -0400, c186282 wrote:
> 
>>     I learned to fly - license at 17 - but then an OPEC embargo drove the
>>     fuel costs beyond what I could cope with. Hell, couldn't even get the
>>     red gas, they tried 100LL but the engine valves kept sticking ... not
>>     good.
> 
> I was working on a project for fuel measurement and management. It was a
> DoD project and I was bored out of my mind so I decided to get some first
> hand experience with planes. The FBO at Middlebury VT was run by an ag
> pilot who offered instruction. It's an uncontrolled airport with one
> runway, 01/19. Typical mountain flying.
> 
> I got bored enough that I took a contract in Ft. Wayne and resumed
> instruction. The instructor was a young woman building hours. My
> impression was she was in the wrong career. The real problem was Indiana.
> I don't do well in flatland. You could land in almost  any soybean field
> in an emergency but looking out and seeing nothing out to the limit of
> visibility was spooky.
> 
> I also realized the VFR limits. I had previously worked for a company that
> was housed in the old Thurston plant that was located on an airport.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thurston_Teal

   I was good enough so they'd trust me to rent a
   plane on bad/gusty weather days and VERY minimal
   VFR days. My old instructor had TOP creds, 'nuf
   said, plus I kinda "just knew" how to fly.

   In case of extreme weirdness, had a few instances,
   even the basic instrument cluster WILL tell you
   what you need to know IF you'll focus on them and
   not what you "feel" or THINK you're seeing.

   Never got an official IFR rating, but my instructors,
   back then, DID pretty much get you there even if that
   wasn't the official program. NOW days - more wimpy.
   How DARE you put "the hood" on a newbie !!!

   Weirdest ... a ZERO ground-speed landing - just as a
   huge thunderstorm front was moving in. 50 knot gust
   just as I was coming in. HAD to bring it down, straight
   vertical, before the gust ran out. FUN ! Runway, you
   still just kinda 'fly' it in the gusts. Also caught
   the edge of a forming T-storm (FAST in my area) that
   fuckin' FLIPPED the plane. Well, worry LATER - just
   work the problem. The instruments will tell you which
   way is up and straight. Oddly did not lose much
   altitude, the updraft was THAT strong.

   Hmm, ONE day, went up and VFR turned into IFR - then
   an F-18 blew by barely 100 feet away. Could see the
   pilots face. DID post a complaint on UNICOM. You
   could not see the ground or anything, just a total
   general haze. The F-18 had fuckin' active RADAR
   though - he was fuckin' around with me.

   Anyway, if yer gonna panic, panic LATER. Meanwhile
   just Work The Problem.

> The company president decided he would take the opportunity to learn to
> fly. He did so and bought a plane since it was so convenient to park it.
> His secretary wasn't enthused by flying off to business meetings but so it
> goes. One day he went to visit a client in Kennebunk ME, a distance of
> about 20 miles. Kennebunk being where it is he encountered fog with very
> limited visibility. He managed to get home in one piece, got out of the
> plane, kissed the ground, and sold the plane. That was that.
> 
> Not a good area for VFR. For that matter I totaled my Mustang flying low
> in the fog. I knew the road but I didn't anticipate the truck parked
> across it as he searched for his turn in the murk.

   IMHO, from long-past experiences, "VFR" training SHOULD
   include pretty much everything you need for basic IFR.
   It can save yer ass. Saved mine a couple of times. The
   instruments, the instilled discipline ... guess JFK Jr.
   never GOT that level .........

   Anyway, don't fly now. A few times on little planes ALWAYS
   insisted on the right seat, just in case. DID get to very
   briefly fly a C-47 - the Cap said "fly it" while he went
   in the back to do something. Cap's word is Law.

   Pretty heavy controls - but manageable. Kinda a BIG
   FAT Cessna :-)

   MIGHT have made a fair commercial pilot. carrying FedEx
   packages (FUCK passengers !). But, went bio/biochem and
   then physical anthropology and then computers. I'm one
   of those "Wide"-Ed people. Specialization is TOO boring
   and awful and ignorant. "Big Picture" serves me best.

   But, if you wanna boost yer GPA, just take in a
   "psychology" course. Very VAGUE pseudo-science
   shit. Mostly just remember the Holy Men in the
   "science". Easy "A". Owned a PRINTER - made very
   NEAT looking papers. Added a point to the GPA
   right there !  :-)

   Anyway, STILL keep track of new Neanderthal/H.Erectus/
   Denisovan info ... know where ya CAME from to kinda
   know where yer GOING.

   Oh, NO SUCH THING as a "human". Hybrids of hybrids
   of hybrids moving all around and fucking everything
   in sight along the way :-)

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

#90265

From	rbowman <bowman@montana.com>
Date	2026-08-21 06:10 +0000
Message-ID	<neq8f8Fpub2U51@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#90256

On Thu, 20 Aug 2026 23:42:12 -0400, c186282 wrote:

>    But, if you wanna boost yer GPA, just take in a "psychology" course.
>    Very VAGUE pseudo-science shit. Mostly just remember the Holy Men in
>    the "science". Easy "A". Owned a PRINTER - made very NEAT looking
>    papers. Added a point to the GPA right there !

That all depends on the flavor of psychology.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_psychology

What do you know about neurophysiology?  Given a brain can you identify 
the optic chiasm?

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

#90283

From	Lars Poulsen <lars@beagle-ears.com>
Date	2026-08-21 06:01 -0700
Message-ID	<1169i7l$b06q$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#90265

On 2026-08-20 23:10, rbowman wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Aug 2026 23:42:12 -0400, c186282 wrote:
> 
>>     But, if you wanna boost yer GPA, just take in a "psychology" course.
>>     Very VAGUE pseudo-science shit. Mostly just remember the Holy Men in
>>     the "science". Easy "A". Owned a PRINTER - made very NEAT looking
>>     papers. Added a point to the GPA right there !
> 
> That all depends on the flavor of psychology.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_psychology
> 
> What do you know about neurophysiology?  Given a brain can you identify
> the optic chiasm?

Early on in my California life, several of the young programmers I 
worked with had entered the computer field through the psych department 
at UCSB.

-- 
Lars Poulsen - an old geek in Santa Barbara, California

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

#90297

From	rbowman <bowman@montana.com>
Date	2026-08-21 18:36 +0000
Message-ID	<nerk4vFpub2U54@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#90283

On Fri, 21 Aug 2026 06:01:41 -0700, Lars Poulsen wrote:

> On 2026-08-20 23:10, rbowman wrote:
>> On Thu, 20 Aug 2026 23:42:12 -0400, c186282 wrote:
>> 
>>>     But, if you wanna boost yer GPA, just take in a "psychology"
>>>     course.
>>>     Very VAGUE pseudo-science shit. Mostly just remember the Holy Men
>>>     in the "science". Easy "A". Owned a PRINTER - made very NEAT
>>>     looking papers. Added a point to the GPA right there !
>> 
>> That all depends on the flavor of psychology.
>> 
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_psychology
>> 
>> What do you know about neurophysiology?  Given a brain can you identify
>> the optic chiasm?
> 
> Early on in my California life, several of the young programmers I
> worked with had entered the computer field through the psych department
> at UCSB.

When I graduated in the '60s 'cognitive science' didn't exist as a 
discipline. I don't think the term was even invented until the '70s. Had 
it been that's where I would have wound up. 

The department head at RPI was an old school behaviorist. Other than a 
survey course what most people think of as psychology wasn't on the table. 
Most work was with rats but even in experiments involving humans measured 
physiological responses to stimuli were what was of interest, not what 
they were babbling about. 

In the '60s a 360/30 didn't have the horsepower to do a FFT in one pass 
let alone model the neural networks; it took a while to catch up. 

I still lean heavily to epiphenomenalism and nominalism. Speech evolved as 
a very handy tool but then humans used what is essentially a commentary on 
what is really happening to build castles in the sky equipped with 
unicorns and butterflies.

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

#90309

From	c186282 <c186282@nnada.net>
Date	2026-08-21 21:46 -0400
Message-ID	<36ucnelaq_rEYhX3nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to	#90265

On 8/21/26 02:10, rbowman wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Aug 2026 23:42:12 -0400, c186282 wrote:
> 
>>     But, if you wanna boost yer GPA, just take in a "psychology" course.
>>     Very VAGUE pseudo-science shit. Mostly just remember the Holy Men in
>>     the "science". Easy "A". Owned a PRINTER - made very NEAT looking
>>     papers. Added a point to the GPA right there !
> 
> That all depends on the flavor of psychology.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_psychology
> 
> What do you know about neurophysiology?  Given a brain can you identify
> the optic chiasm?

   There are a few branches still called "psychology"
   but are really 'physiology' or 'neurology'. Those
   are testable SCIENCE.

   IMHO, they should distance themselves from the
   shameful pseudoscience bulk of 'psychology'.

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

#90333

From	The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date	2026-08-22 13:13 +0100
Message-ID	<116c3ot$143jr$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#90309

On 22/08/2026 02:46, c186282 wrote:
> On 8/21/26 02:10, rbowman wrote:
>> On Thu, 20 Aug 2026 23:42:12 -0400, c186282 wrote:
>>
>>>     But, if you wanna boost yer GPA, just take in a "psychology" course.
>>>     Very VAGUE pseudo-science shit. Mostly just remember the Holy Men in
>>>     the "science". Easy "A". Owned a PRINTER - made very NEAT looking
>>>     papers. Added a point to the GPA right there !
>>
>> That all depends on the flavor of psychology.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_psychology
>>
>> What do you know about neurophysiology?  Given a brain can you identify
>> the optic chiasm?
> 
>    There are a few branches still called "psychology"
>    but are really 'physiology' or 'neurology'. Those
>    are testable SCIENCE.
> 
>    IMHO, they should distance themselves from the
>    shameful pseudoscience bulk of 'psychology'.
> 
Indeed. Freud is actually metaphysics.

Because it starts with 'lets assume' that people are absolutely 
dominated by their early relationships within their families.

Especially with men, their mothers.

Well the stereotypical 'Yiddishy Momma' is indeed a formidable force in 
any Jewish family, but in others? Not really

I certainly never wanted to kill my father. And I was revolted by the 
idea of sleeping with my mother.

And does the unconscious mind actually exist? If you delve deep 
enoughits a s slippery as God. And indeed there are grounds for saying 
that it IS god, at some deep level of cognition. The agency that forms 
the shape of the reality you experience.

But science? No way. It's hypotheses are impossible to prove or 
disprove. Its like 'critical race theory' It's a way to look at the 
world, a metaphysical notion, not one that can be upheld or refuted by 
any even handed tests.

-- 
The New Left are the people they warned you about.

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

#90354

From	rbowman <bowman@montana.com>
Date	2026-08-22 19:53 +0000
Message-ID	<neud2bF5rktU9@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#90333

On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 13:13:17 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> Well the stereotypical 'Yiddishy Momma' is indeed a formidable force in
> any Jewish family, but in others? Not really

Jung could get rather strange but he did break with Freud when he realized 
that building a universe on neurotic Jewish women in Vienna wasn't 
viable. 

I came of age in an era when the Freudian bullshit was the order of the 
day with amateur psychologists on every corner. Carl Rogers scheme which 
was simulated (mocked?) by ELIZA was little better although Rogers seems 
to have survived in ChatGPT.

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

#90362

From	The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date	2026-08-22 23:47 +0100
Message-ID	<116d8u4$1gc75$6@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#90354

On 22/08/2026 20:53, rbowman wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 13:13:17 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> 
>> Well the stereotypical 'Yiddishy Momma' is indeed a formidable force in
>> any Jewish family, but in others? Not really
> 
> Jung could get rather strange but he did break with Freud when he realized
> that building a universe on neurotic Jewish women in Vienna wasn't
> viable.
> 
That's exactly what I think.

> I came of age in an era when the Freudian bullshit was the order of the
> day with amateur psychologists on every corner. Carl Rogers scheme which
> was simulated (mocked?) by ELIZA was little better although Rogers seems
> to have survived in ChatGPT.
> 
Oh yes. Everyone had an 'analyst' didn't they?

I am more Jungian than that. We also had Ronny Laing, who took a lot of 
drugs, and then stated bluntly that most of the child mental health 
problems he saw could be resolved by treating the parents...

I wonder what happened to him?
Oh. He died. in 1989



>   

-- 
There’s a mighty big difference between good, sound reasons and reasons 
that sound good.

Burton Hillis (William Vaughn, American columnist)

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

#90369

From	rbowman <bowman@montana.com>
Date	2026-08-23 01:21 +0000
Message-ID	<nev08eF5rktU18@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#90362

On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 23:47:32 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> Oh yes. Everyone had an 'analyst' didn't they?

The closest I came was some 'group therapy' sessions in grade school. Life 
lesson: don't be a wise-ass when the teacher hands out personality 
assessment questionnaires.  It may have been counterproductive since the 
rest of the group consisted of young hoodlums, or as close as you could 
get in a 1950s small town.

> I am more Jungian than that. We also had Ronny Laing, who took a lot of
> drugs, and then stated bluntly that most of the child mental health
> problems he saw could be resolved by treating the parents...

Probably. I was a late arrival and had an interesting childhood. Since I 
have a nephew about the same age as I my parents could well have been the 
parents of the parents of my classmates. My mother didn't think much of 
the Dr. Spock drivel that was 'the science' in the '50s. PTA meetings were 
interesting. She may have wanted to treat the other mothers to a good 
spanking.

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

#90385

From	The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date	2026-08-23 12:48 +0100
Message-ID	<116emlk$1sako$4@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#90369

On 23/08/2026 02:21, rbowman wrote:
> She may have wanted to treat the other mothers to a good
> spanking.

I actually did that to a grown woman once. She was being provocative and 
said I should 'break my bounds' and 'do what I wanted to do'
So I did.

-- 
“Some people like to travel by train because it combines the slowness of 
a car with the cramped public exposure of  an airplane.”

Dennis Miller

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

#90374

From	c186282 <c186282@nnada.net>
Date	2026-08-23 03:25 -0400
Message-ID	<j72cnbZzwufMPRf3nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to	#90362

On 8/22/26 18:47, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 22/08/2026 20:53, rbowman wrote:
>> On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 13:13:17 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> Well the stereotypical 'Yiddishy Momma' is indeed a formidable force in
>>> any Jewish family, but in others? Not really
>>
>> Jung could get rather strange but he did break with Freud when he 
>> realized
>> that building a universe on neurotic Jewish women in Vienna wasn't
>> viable.
>>
> That's exactly what I think.
> 
>> I came of age in an era when the Freudian bullshit was the order of the
>> day with amateur psychologists on every corner. Carl Rogers scheme which
>> was simulated (mocked?) by ELIZA was little better although Rogers seems
>> to have survived in ChatGPT.
>>
> Oh yes. Everyone had an 'analyst' didn't they?

   Just watch Woody Allen movies :-)

> I am more Jungian than that. We also had Ronny Laing, who took a lot of 
> drugs, and then stated bluntly that most of the child mental health 
> problems he saw could be resolved by treating the parents...
> 
> I wonder what happened to him?
> Oh. He died. in 1989

   IMHO, they keep the SCIENTIFIC branches under
   the "psychology" umbrella to cover-ass for the
   totally UN-scientific branches.

   Those branches should BREAK FREE and DUMP the
   psychoanalytical bullshit artists.

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

#90371

From	c186282 <c186282@nnada.net>
Date	2026-08-23 01:50 -0400
Message-ID	<jhudnZxUvu7JFxf3nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to	#90333

On 8/22/26 08:13, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 22/08/2026 02:46, c186282 wrote:
>> On 8/21/26 02:10, rbowman wrote:
>>> On Thu, 20 Aug 2026 23:42:12 -0400, c186282 wrote:
>>>
>>>>     But, if you wanna boost yer GPA, just take in a "psychology" 
>>>> course.
>>>>     Very VAGUE pseudo-science shit. Mostly just remember the Holy 
>>>> Men in
>>>>     the "science". Easy "A". Owned a PRINTER - made very NEAT looking
>>>>     papers. Added a point to the GPA right there !
>>>
>>> That all depends on the flavor of psychology.
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_psychology
>>>
>>> What do you know about neurophysiology?  Given a brain can you identify
>>> the optic chiasm?
>>
>>    There are a few branches still called "psychology"
>>    but are really 'physiology' or 'neurology'. Those
>>    are testable SCIENCE.
>>
>>    IMHO, they should distance themselves from the
>>    shameful pseudoscience bulk of 'psychology'.
>>
> Indeed. Freud is actually metaphysics.

   Close. Also very pro-class 19th century
   thinking/prejudices. Oh all those naughty
   women with undignified thoughts that drive
   them insane !!!  :-)

> Because it starts with 'lets assume' that people are absolutely 
> dominated by their early relationships within their families.
> 
> Especially with men, their mothers.
> 
> Well the stereotypical 'Yiddishy Momma' is indeed a formidable force in 
> any Jewish family, but in others? Not really
> 
> I certainly never wanted to kill my father. And I was revolted by the 
> idea of sleeping with my mother.
> 
> And does the unconscious mind actually exist? If you delve deep 
> enoughits a s slippery as God. And indeed there are grounds for saying 
> that it IS god, at some deep level of cognition. The agency that forms 
> the shape of the reality you experience.
> 
> But science? No way. It's hypotheses are impossible to prove or 
> disprove. Its like 'critical race theory' It's a way to look at the 
> world, a metaphysical notion, not one that can be upheld or refuted by 
> any even handed tests.

   This is why I'd like to see the actual, testable,
   SCIENCE stuff now under the umbrella of "psychology"
   to ESCAPE. Sometimes seems the 'science' bits are
   used to justify/'prove' the OTHER ridiculous bits.

   Oh well, massive doses of 12 "anti-depressants"
   solve all problems, right ? Have you SEEN US
   TV ads lately ? Wow.

   Gotta wonder ... are so many women "depressed" for
   biochem reasons - or because the "happily ever after"
   shit they were promised turned out to be a crushing LIE ?
   Maybe they should become cops or military - something
   more engaging ???

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

#90375

From	rbowman <bowman@montana.com>
Date	2026-08-23 07:30 +0000
Message-ID	<nevlruF5rktU19@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#90371

On Sun, 23 Aug 2026 01:50:02 -0400, c186282 wrote:

>    This is why I'd like to see the actual, testable, SCIENCE stuff now
>    under the umbrella of "psychology"
>    to ESCAPE. Sometimes seems the 'science' bits are used to
>    justify/'prove' the OTHER ridiculous bits.

Good luck with that. The word had been around for a long time but Wundt 
was the first to try to draw boundaries between philosophy and physiology 
and was an experimentalist. In the US William James is the start.

James was a pragmatist that goes back to Pierce but he was a philosopher 
and mathematician.

It's easy to stumble into Zen paradoxes if you believe the wetware does 
all the work and language is an epiphenomenon for stories we tell 
ourselves post facto but still have to use language to try to explain it.

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

#90377

From	c186282 <c186282@nnada.net>
Date	2026-08-23 04:16 -0400
Message-ID	<j72cnbFzwue2MRf3nZ2dnZfqnPsAAAAA@giganews.com>
In reply to	#90375

On 8/23/26 03:30, rbowman wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Aug 2026 01:50:02 -0400, c186282 wrote:
> 
>>     This is why I'd like to see the actual, testable, SCIENCE stuff now
>>     under the umbrella of "psychology"
>>     to ESCAPE. Sometimes seems the 'science' bits are used to
>>     justify/'prove' the OTHER ridiculous bits.
> 
> Good luck with that. 

   Yea, yea, I know ....

   Academia changes at a sub-glacial pace.
   Everybody has vested interests, needs to
   justify their branch/career/legacy.

   But can always HOPE :-)

> The word had been around for a long time but Wundt
> was the first to try to draw boundaries between philosophy and physiology
> and was an experimentalist. In the US William James is the start.
> 
> James was a pragmatist that goes back to Pierce but he was a philosopher
> and mathematician.
> 
> It's easy to stumble into Zen paradoxes if you believe the wetware does
> all the work and language is an epiphenomenon for stories we tell
> ourselves post facto but still have to use language to try to explain it.

   OH ... DID finally get my damned MX lap to update to
   the latest kernel. My lap is still "bookworm", but
   MX still fully supports it. NEXT Deb release though
   and they probably will cut back. Then, evil evil,
   I'll have to do a complete re-install. Have SO
   many pgms installed though, SO many custom settings,
   WHAT a huge mess ! Winders actually does that shit
   much better.

   The previous FIVE updates NEVER TOOK - poorly specified
   "dependencies" I wouldn't have the energy to track/fix
   regardless. "inxi -S" showed the ORIGINAL 7.x.x kernel
   was STILL ruling.

   Did heavy purging/cleaning and even allowing a few
   spots to load "un-signed" things (yes, naughty !).

   "apt dist-upgrade" works better than "upgrade" or
   "full-upgrade".

   Anyway, half a day of fighting with it and FINALLY
   got THE latest kernel to install.

   The other five, STILL the 'dependencies' complaints.

   MX ... there are two versions ... the 'regular' version
   and the "AHS" (advanced hardware support) version. The
   AHS uses the 7.x.x kernels, the regular the 6.x.x ones.
   Have ONE box that actually NEEDS the AHS, but I've loaded
   it on a couple others Just Because.

   I'm not compulsive about the Latest Kernel ... there
   seem to be VERY few 'improvements' between dot versions.
   However I don't want to get TOO far behind because a few
   of those tweaks are relevant 'security' stuff and it's
   an Evil World now.

   Others here manually compile THE latest kernel and jam
   it into their distro. I applaud their skill and energy,
   but I'm just too fuckin' old now to cope with all that.
   Shit, ever READ what the update scrips output these
   days ... DOZENS of steps involving MANY little utils.
   SO many 'modules' to re-do. Wow !

   I'd find a Y2K version of SUSE, but it probably
   wouldn't recognize 90% of my hardware :-)

   Downloaded the most recent Mint ... I'll try it in
   a VM. It's still near the top of the DistroWatch
   list. I think "cachy.os", an Arch, is currently
   at the top. Don't love the Arch packaging scheme
   however ... and, frankly, "Synaptic" is SO damned
   superior to any other package-management apps.
   "OctoPkg" is close, but still not AS good.

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

#90409

From	rbowman <bowman@montana.com>
Date	2026-08-23 19:08 +0000
Message-ID	<nf0upkF5rktU23@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#90377

On Sun, 23 Aug 2026 04:16:13 -0400, c186282 wrote:

>    The previous FIVE updates NEVER TOOK - poorly specified
>    "dependencies" I wouldn't have the energy to track/fix regardless.
>    "inxi -S" showed the ORIGINAL 7.x.x kernel was STILL ruling.

My Mint laptop is still 6.17. I don't always watch the update process so I 
assume it tried 7.0, failed in the DKMS attempt and stayed with 6.17. No 
big deal.

>    "apt dist-upgrade" works better than "upgrade" or "full-upgrade".

When I first installed Debian I was queasy about 'upgrade'. To me upgrade 
meant going to the new major release which I didn't want to do. 

>    MX ... there are two versions ... the 'regular' version and the "AHS"
>    (advanced hardware support) version. The AHS uses the 7.x.x kernels,
>    the regular the 6.x.x ones. Have ONE box that actually NEEDS the AHS,
>    but I've loaded it on a couple others Just Because.

I used the regular version. I don't have any hardware that needs the 
latest kernel.

>    I'd find a Y2K version of SUSE, but it probably wouldn't recognize
>    90% of my hardware

I still have the box set of 8.1. It would be interesting. I've got an old 
Compaq tower in the shed but I don't know what shape it's in. I may have 
stolen the PS. It would be the right vintage. I think it may be Mandrake 
if it boots at all.

>    Downloaded the most recent Mint ... I'll try it in a VM. It's still
>    near the top of the DistroWatch list. I think "cachy.os", an Arch, is
>    currently at the top. Don't love the Arch packaging scheme however

CachyOS supposedly has a kernel that's optimized for gamers although I 
have read reviews that weren't too impressed. There are subreddits like r/
DistroHopping where many of the posts start with 'Can I run games?' etc. 
Distrowatch doesn't claim to know how many distros are installed, only the 
count of how many have been poking at the distro, sort of like the TIOBE 
index. Traffic consisting of 'WTF is Rust' doesn't translate to how many 
people actually use Rust.

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

#90109

From	rbowman <bowman@montana.com>
Date	2026-08-19 06:30 +0000
Message-ID	<nel0sgFe0jfU17@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#90098

On Wed, 19 Aug 2026 04:22:04 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

> On 2026-08-19, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, 18 Aug 2026 16:30:04 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>
>>> Back in my early skydiving days I was so spaced out by the experience
>>> that I was given the nickname "Spaceman".
>>
>> Jumping out of perfectly good airplanes...
> 
> Speaking as a jump pilot as well as a jumper... have you _seen_ some of
> those airplanes?
> 
> If not, try watching the movie "Fandango" -
> the skydiving scenes, while hilarious, are a lot closer to reality than
> you might think.

I wouldn't be surprised. I learned to fly in an elderly Lark Commander. 
The usual procedures on final included pumping the brakes up if you 
expected to stop. afaik they haven't figured out the Butler crash yet. 
That was a fairly new plane too.

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

#90124

From	The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date	2026-08-19 14:15 +0100
Message-ID	<1164a8o$2le0s$7@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#90073

On 18/08/2026 17:30, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2026-08-18, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> On 18/08/2026 05:55, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>
>>> On 2026-08-18, c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 8/17/26 05:13, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Yes. USA is being raped by its political classes...
>>>>
>>>>      Umm ... read yer history. It's ALWAYS been thus,
>>>>      USA or anywhere else. No fixing it. Send all the
>>>>      pols to Mars and the NEW ones will be doing the
>>>>      SAME things from the get-go. A "human nature" quirk.
>>>
>>>       No matter who you vote for, the government always get in.
>>>         -- The Bonzo Dog Band
>>
>> +1
>>
>> Bonzo dog DOODAH band.
> 
> Thank you.  :-)
> 
> Back in my early skydiving days I was so spaced out by
> the experience that I was given the nickname "Spaceman".
> At the time I was working for an outfit called "Urban
> Computers Ltd."  So I really _am_ the Urban Spaceman.
> 
Darling, back in the day, who wasn't?

I remember London in the 1970s too, in brief moments of lucidity

-- 
“when things get difficult you just have to lie”

― Jean Claud Jüncker

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

#90157

From	rbowman <bowman@montana.com>
Date	2026-08-19 19:39 +0000
Message-ID	<nemf42Fpub2U9@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#90124

On Wed, 19 Aug 2026 14:15:04 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> I remember London in the 1970s too, in brief moments of lucidity

I think I have mislaid the '70s. I vaguely remember getting married and 
divorced but I would have to ask my ex when that was. She was the 
designated driver for much of our time together.

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

#90172

From	Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
Date	2026-08-19 22:54 +0000
Message-ID	<guqhS.48258$9DC1.20658@fx18.iad>
In reply to	#90157

On 2026-08-19, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 19 Aug 2026 14:15:04 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> I remember London in the 1970s too, in brief moments of lucidity
>
> I think I have mislaid the '70s. I vaguely remember getting married and 
> divorced but I would have to ask my ex when that was. She was the 
> designated driver for much of our time together.

    Anyone who remembers the '60s probably wasn't there.
      -- Robin Williams (or maybe someone else)

-- 
/~\  Charlie Gibbs                  |  In this world there are
\ /  <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>      |  two kinds of people:
 X   I'm really at ac.dekanfrus     |  1. Those who can extrapolate
/ \  if you read it the right way.  |  from incomplete data.

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

Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 Next page →

csiph-web

Re: Manipulating C code at the AST level, in C

Contents

#90242

#90256

#90265

#90283

#90297

#90309

#90333

#90354

#90362

#90369

#90385

#90374

#90371

#90375

#90377

#90409

#90109

#90124

#90157

#90172