Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #56833 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Ted Lee <tmplee@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-02-22 12:56 -0600 |
| Last post | 2014-03-01 21:53 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 197 — 21 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system
Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Ted Lee <tmplee@gmail.com> - 2014-02-22 12:56 -0600
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-22 14:15 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-22 14:47 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-22 21:30 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-22 19:04 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-23 00:36 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-23 09:48 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-23 16:41 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-23 12:05 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-23 17:22 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw billy@MIX.COM - 2014-02-24 02:15 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-02-24 03:57 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-24 18:25 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-02-25 08:16 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-25 19:50 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2014-02-23 07:51 -0800
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-23 11:23 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2014-02-23 15:05 -0800
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-23 20:01 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-02-24 04:21 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Bill Findlay <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2014-02-24 04:35 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-02-24 06:00 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-02-24 16:52 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Bill Findlay <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2014-02-24 21:54 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-24 17:44 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Bill Findlay <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2014-02-25 00:19 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-24 19:26 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Bill Findlay <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2014-02-25 00:40 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-24 19:46 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Bill Findlay <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2014-02-25 00:57 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-24 17:43 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Bill Findlay <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2014-02-25 00:19 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-24 19:29 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Bill Findlay <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2014-02-25 00:40 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-24 19:45 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Bill Findlay <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2014-02-25 00:57 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-24 05:04 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-02-24 06:00 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-24 16:10 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2014-02-24 12:15 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-02-24 22:33 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-24 17:47 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2014-02-25 13:41 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2014-02-25 09:06 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw billy@MIX.COM - 2014-02-25 17:34 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw billy@MIX.COM - 2014-02-25 19:14 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-02-25 20:42 +0100
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-25 21:32 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Ted Lee <tmplee@gmail.com> - 2014-02-25 17:12 -0600
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Ted Lee <tmplee@gmail.com> - 2014-02-25 17:24 -0600
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-26 02:38 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Ted Lee <tmplee@gmail.com> - 2014-02-25 21:03 -0600
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-26 04:19 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw "M. John Matlaw" <nouser@invalid.com> - 2014-02-28 11:29 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Ted Lee <tmplee@gmail.com> - 2014-02-28 12:48 -0600
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw billy@MIX.COM - 2014-02-26 01:44 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw billy@MIX.COM - 2014-02-25 21:59 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-02-24 22:33 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-24 23:13 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-24 17:45 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-24 23:17 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-24 18:28 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-02-24 23:16 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2014-02-24 21:17 -0800
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-02-25 21:03 +0100
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-02-25 21:00 +0100
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw billy@MIX.COM - 2014-02-25 22:02 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-02-25 08:11 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-25 16:47 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-02-25 17:03 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-25 19:45 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-02-26 00:05 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-02-25 20:57 +0100
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw "M. John Matlaw" <nouser@invalid.com> - 2014-02-26 09:52 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-04-06 02:36 +0200
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-02-24 21:24 +0100
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-24 20:43 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-24 17:40 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-23 16:47 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2014-02-23 15:37 -0800
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-23 20:08 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-24 01:15 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2014-02-23 18:45 -0800
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-24 02:52 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2014-02-23 19:01 -0800
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-02-24 04:23 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-02-24 22:10 +0100
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-24 22:21 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-24 17:27 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-24 17:27 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2014-02-24 21:05 -0800
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-25 19:34 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-02-24 21:58 +0100
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-24 18:04 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw billy@MIX.COM - 2014-02-25 02:44 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-24 01:14 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-02-24 04:11 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-24 18:36 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-02-25 08:20 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-25 17:00 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-02-25 20:05 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-25 21:31 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2014-02-25 19:13 -0800
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-26 04:35 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw billy@MIX.COM - 2014-02-26 06:42 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-03-01 21:57 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-02-26 23:29 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2014-04-13 15:06 -0400
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Tom Stiller <clusterfux.upmon@gmail.com> - 2014-04-13 21:11 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2014-04-15 17:03 -0400
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-04-16 09:29 +1200
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-25 19:29 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Bill Findlay <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2014-02-26 00:49 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-25 19:59 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Bill Findlay <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2014-02-26 02:03 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-25 22:13 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Bill Findlay <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2014-02-26 14:03 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-02-26 23:42 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-27 17:03 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-26 02:47 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-02-26 00:10 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2014-04-13 15:11 -0400
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-04-13 15:43 -0400
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-26 02:42 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2014-04-13 15:08 -0400
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-04-13 15:41 -0400
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-25 19:18 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-02-26 23:39 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-27 17:09 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-23 13:03 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Bill Findlay <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2014-02-23 01:32 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-23 10:07 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-04-06 02:44 +0200
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-02-22 17:49 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-22 19:07 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-02-22 22:23 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-23 03:49 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-23 10:12 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-23 16:42 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-23 14:38 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-23 10:11 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-23 14:38 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jim Gibson <jimsgibson@gmail.com> - 2014-02-24 10:42 -0800
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-02-24 17:07 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2014-02-22 23:01 -0800
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-23 14:38 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw billy@MIX.COM - 2014-02-24 01:46 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-03-01 21:52 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-03-02 00:05 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-02-24 22:24 +0100
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw mcarels@xs4all.nl (Maarten Carels) - 2014-02-24 10:43 +0100
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-24 18:39 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-24 19:16 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-22 14:18 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2014-02-22 13:43 -0600
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-22 14:52 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2014-02-22 20:05 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-22 15:16 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2014-02-22 21:10 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-22 16:25 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2014-02-22 22:13 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-22 22:19 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-22 18:55 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2014-02-23 09:38 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-23 10:17 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2014-02-23 15:42 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-23 10:45 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2014-02-23 17:09 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-23 13:51 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2014-02-23 20:07 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-23 15:14 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-23 15:20 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw billy@MIX.COM - 2014-02-24 02:18 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-02-22 17:51 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-22 17:55 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-02-22 21:50 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-22 19:09 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2014-02-22 12:35 -0800
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-22 16:59 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-22 22:14 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-22 17:53 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-02-22 18:01 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-22 18:22 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-22 18:29 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-22 23:33 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-23 18:23 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-24 01:08 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-02-22 21:49 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2014-02-22 22:57 -0800
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-23 16:36 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-02-23 11:58 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-23 14:35 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-23 21:03 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-02-23 18:23 -0500
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-02-24 01:07 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw billy@MIX.COM - 2014-02-24 01:53 +0000
Re: Latest IOS/OS X SSL security flaw Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-03-01 21:53 +0000
Page 2 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 … 10 Next page →
| From | Bill Findlay <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-24 04:35 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <CF307C7C.42D8D%yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk> |
| In reply to | #56947 |
On 24/02/2014 04:21, in article slrnlgli63.fcb.g.kreme@amelia.local, "Lewis"
<g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> In message <ItGdnd5-bfmfB5fOnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>> if bar(foo) then
>> begin
>> brat (tat);
>> stat (a,v)
>> end
>> else
>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>
> Is how I would space that. However, that else is something I
> particularly dislike. That, to me, is terrible obtuse code.
>
> if bar(foo) {
> brat(tat);
> stat(a,v);
> } else {
> faggetaboutit("I object!");
> }
>
> That is much clearer and more concise that the code above.
>
> I don't like putting {'s on empty lines for no reason, but the last
> close bracket matches up the else and if showing the block has ended.
How does this grab you?
if bar(foo) then
brat(tat);
stat(a,v);
else
faggetaboutit("I object!");
end if;
--
Bill Findlay
with blueyonder.co.uk;
use surname & forename;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-24 06:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnlglnv0.fcb.g.kreme@amelia.local> |
| In reply to | #56950 |
In message <CF307C7C.42D8D%yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk>
Bill Findlay <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> On 24/02/2014 04:21, in article slrnlgli63.fcb.g.kreme@amelia.local, "Lewis"
> <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>> In message <ItGdnd5-bfmfB5fOnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
>> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>> if bar(foo) then
>>> begin
>>> brat (tat);
>>> stat (a,v)
>>> end
>>> else
>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>>
>> Is how I would space that. However, that else is something I
>> particularly dislike. That, to me, is terrible obtuse code.
>>
>> if bar(foo) {
>> brat(tat);
>> stat(a,v);
>> } else {
>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>> }
>>
>> That is much clearer and more concise that the code above.
>>
>> I don't like putting {'s on empty lines for no reason, but the last
>> close bracket matches up the else and if showing the block has ended.
> How does this grab you?
> if bar(foo) then
> brat(tat);
> stat(a,v);
> else
> faggetaboutit("I object!");
> end if;
It's ok, but it looks like it's missing braces to me :)
--
The way I see it, the longer I put it off, the better it'll end up
being. Heck, school doesn't start for another 43 minutes.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-24 16:52 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <530bbf06$0$1415$c3e8da3$b1356c67@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #56950 |
On 14-02-23 23:35, Bill Findlay wrote:
> How does this grab you?
>
> if bar(foo) then
> brat(tat);
> stat(a,v);
> else
> faggetaboutit("I object!");
> end if;
The C compiler would get a field day insulting you with error after
error in this one :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bill Findlay <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-24 21:54 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <CF31700D.42E86%yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk> |
| In reply to | #56987 |
On 24/02/2014 21:52, in article
530bbf06$0$1415$c3e8da3$b1356c67@news.astraweb.com, "JF Mezei"
<jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> On 14-02-23 23:35, Bill Findlay wrote:
>
>> How does this grab you?
>>
>> if bar(foo) then
>> brat(tat);
>> stat(a,v);
>> else
>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>> end if;
>
>
> The C compiler would get a field day insulting you with error after
> error in this one :-)
But the OS X Ada 2012 compiler is perfectly happy with it. 8-)
--
Bill Findlay
with blueyonder.co.uk;
use surname & forename;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-24 17:44 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <Ls-dnW01lJP-VpbOnZ2dnUVZ_oOdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #56989 |
On 2014.02.24, 16:54 , Bill Findlay wrote:
> On 24/02/2014 21:52, in article
> 530bbf06$0$1415$c3e8da3$b1356c67@news.astraweb.com, "JF Mezei"
> <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>
>> On 14-02-23 23:35, Bill Findlay wrote:
>>
>>> How does this grab you?
>>>
>>> if bar(foo) then
>>> brat(tat);
>>> stat(a,v);
>>> else
>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>>> end if;
>>
>>
>> The C compiler would get a field day insulting you with error after
>> error in this one :-)
>
> But the OS X Ada 2012 compiler is perfectly happy with it. 8-)
Doesn't Ada require begin/end after the then, since there are two
statements?
(I tool an Ada course about 25 years ago, so it's not fresh in my noggin)
--
... it may be that "in the cloud" really isn't the best term
for the services these companies offer. What they really
want is to have us "on the leash."
-David Pogue, Scientific American, 2014.02
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bill Findlay <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-25 00:19 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <1028711886414980134.989923yaldnif.w-blueyonder.co.uk@news.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #57012 |
Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> On 2014.02.24, 16:54 , Bill Findlay wrote:
>> On 24/02/2014 21:52, in article
>> 530bbf06$0$1415$c3e8da3$b1356c67@news.astraweb.com, "JF Mezei"
>> <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> On 14-02-23 23:35, Bill Findlay wrote:
>>>
>>>> How does this grab you?
>>>>
>>>> if bar(foo) then
>>>> brat(tat);
>>>> stat(a,v);
>>>> else
>>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>>>> end if;
>>>
>>>
>>> The C compiler would get a field day insulting you with error after
>>> error in this one :-)
>>
>> But the OS X Ada 2012 compiler is perfectly happy with it. 8-)
>
> Doesn't Ada require begin/end after the then, since there are two statements?
>
No. All statement sequences have explicit terminators, so no role for
compound statements.
begin ... end is used only for blocks (scopes).
--
Bill Findlay
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-24 19:26 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <O5OdnbPwcpq-fpbOnZ2dnUVZ_qGdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #57028 |
On 2014.02.24, 19:19 , Bill Findlay wrote:
> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>> On 2014.02.24, 16:54 , Bill Findlay wrote:
>>> On 24/02/2014 21:52, in article
>>> 530bbf06$0$1415$c3e8da3$b1356c67@news.astraweb.com, "JF Mezei"
>>> <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 14-02-23 23:35, Bill Findlay wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> How does this grab you?
>>>>>
>>>>> if bar(foo) then
>>>>> brat(tat);
>>>>> stat(a,v);
>>>>> else
>>>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>>>>> end if;
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The C compiler would get a field day insulting you with error after
>>>> error in this one :-)
>>>
>>> But the OS X Ada 2012 compiler is perfectly happy with it. 8-)
>>
>> Doesn't Ada require begin/end after the then, since there are two statements?
>>
>
> No. All statement sequences have explicit terminators, so no role for
> compound statements.
> begin ... end is used only for blocks (scopes).
Got it. I tried to install Ada a couple years ago. Either it wouldn't
install or it wouldn't compile - don't recall which. I would like to
try it again.
--
Privacy has become an essential personal chore that most
people are not trained to perform.
- Jaron Lanier, Scientific American, 2013.11.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bill Findlay <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-25 00:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2116066512414981581.610674yaldnif.w-blueyonder.co.uk@news.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #57030 |
Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> On 2014.02.24, 19:19 , Bill Findlay wrote:
>> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>> On 2014.02.24, 16:54 , Bill Findlay wrote:
>>>> On 24/02/2014 21:52, in article
>>>> 530bbf06$0$1415$c3e8da3$b1356c67@news.astraweb.com, "JF Mezei"
>>>> <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 14-02-23 23:35, Bill Findlay wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> How does this grab you?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> if bar(foo) then
>>>>>> brat(tat);
>>>>>> stat(a,v);
>>>>>> else
>>>>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>>>>>> end if;
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The C compiler would get a field day insulting you with error after
>>>>> error in this one :-)
>>>>
>>>> But the OS X Ada 2012 compiler is perfectly happy with it. 8-)
>>>
>>> Doesn't Ada require begin/end after the then, since there are two statements?
>>>
>>
>> No. All statement sequences have explicit terminators, so no role for
>> compound statements.
>> begin ... end is used only for blocks (scopes).
>
> Got it. I tried to install Ada a couple years ago. Either it wouldn't
> install or it wouldn't compile - don't recall which. I would like to try it again.
Try here http://libre.adacore.com/download/
--
Bill Findlay
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-24 19:46 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <zdednaiYZ4FmepbOnZ2dnUVZ_tsAAAAA@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #57033 |
On 2014.02.24, 19:40 , Bill Findlay wrote:
> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>> On 2014.02.24, 19:19 , Bill Findlay wrote:
>>> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>>> On 2014.02.24, 16:54 , Bill Findlay wrote:
>>>>> On 24/02/2014 21:52, in article
>>>>> 530bbf06$0$1415$c3e8da3$b1356c67@news.astraweb.com, "JF Mezei"
>>>>> <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 14-02-23 23:35, Bill Findlay wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How does this grab you?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> if bar(foo) then
>>>>>>> brat(tat);
>>>>>>> stat(a,v);
>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>>>>>>> end if;
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The C compiler would get a field day insulting you with error after
>>>>>> error in this one :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> But the OS X Ada 2012 compiler is perfectly happy with it. 8-)
>>>>
>>>> Doesn't Ada require begin/end after the then, since there are two statements?
>>>>
>>>
>>> No. All statement sequences have explicit terminators, so no role for
>>> compound statements.
>>> begin ... end is used only for blocks (scopes).
>>
>> Got it. I tried to install Ada a couple years ago. Either it wouldn't
>> install or it wouldn't compile - don't recall which. I would like to try it again.
>
> Try here http://libre.adacore.com/download/
That's where I got it. Say... Do I have to install that from the Admin
account and not my usual user account?
I seem to recall a really long install script running...
--
Those who have reduced our privacy, whether they are state
or commercial actors, prefer that we do not reduce theirs.
- Jaron Lanier, Scientific American, 2013.11.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bill Findlay <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-25 00:57 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <673423828414982474.699869yaldnif.w-blueyonder.co.uk@news.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #57036 |
Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> On 2014.02.24, 19:40 , Bill Findlay wrote:
>> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>> On 2014.02.24, 19:19 , Bill Findlay wrote:
>>>> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>>>> On 2014.02.24, 16:54 , Bill Findlay wrote:
>>>>>> On 24/02/2014 21:52, in article
>>>>>> 530bbf06$0$1415$c3e8da3$b1356c67@news.astraweb.com, "JF Mezei"
>>>>>> <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 14-02-23 23:35, Bill Findlay wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How does this grab you?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> if bar(foo) then
>>>>>>>> brat(tat);
>>>>>>>> stat(a,v);
>>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>>>>>>>> end if;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The C compiler would get a field day insulting you with error after
>>>>>>> error in this one :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But the OS X Ada 2012 compiler is perfectly happy with it. 8-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Doesn't Ada require begin/end after the then, since there are two statements?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No. All statement sequences have explicit terminators, so no role for
>>>> compound statements.
>>>> begin ... end is used only for blocks (scopes).
>>>
>>> Got it. I tried to install Ada a couple years ago. Either it wouldn't
>>> install or it wouldn't compile - don't recall which. I would like to try it again.
>>
>> Try here http://libre.adacore.com/download/
>
> That's where I got it. Say... Do I have to install that from the Admin
> account and not my usual user account?
> I seem to recall a really long install script running...
>
That is what I would do.
--
Bill Findlay
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-24 17:43 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <Ls-dnXI1lJNnV5bOnZ2dnUVZ_oMAAAAA@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #56950 |
On 2014.02.23, 23:35 , Bill Findlay wrote:
> On 24/02/2014 04:21, in article slrnlgli63.fcb.g.kreme@amelia.local, "Lewis"
> <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>
>> In message <ItGdnd5-bfmfB5fOnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
>> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>> if bar(foo) then
>>> begin
>>> brat (tat);
>>> stat (a,v)
>>> end
>>> else
>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>>
>> Is how I would space that. However, that else is something I
>> particularly dislike. That, to me, is terrible obtuse code.
>>
>> if bar(foo) {
>> brat(tat);
>> stat(a,v);
>> } else {
>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>> }
>>
>> That is much clearer and more concise that the code above.
>>
>> I don't like putting {'s on empty lines for no reason, but the last
>> close bracket matches up the else and if showing the block has ended.
>
> How does this grab you?
>
> if bar(foo) then
> brat(tat);
> stat(a,v);
> else
> faggetaboutit("I object!");
> end if;
Not Pascal compliant, that's for sure. Compiler would quit on the else
as there is no begin for it.
As I said to Lewis, in my block I should have moved everything right a bit:
>>> if bar(foo) then
>>> begin
>>> brat (tat);
>>> stat (a,v)
>>> end
>>> else
>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
So it's clear everything belongs to the if.
--
... it may be that "in the cloud" really isn't the best term
for the services these companies offer. What they really
want is to have us "on the leash."
-David Pogue, Scientific American, 2014.02
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bill Findlay <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-25 00:19 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <1029870320414980002.971581yaldnif.w-blueyonder.co.uk@news.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #57011 |
Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> On 2014.02.23, 23:35 , Bill Findlay wrote:
>> On 24/02/2014 04:21, in article slrnlgli63.fcb.g.kreme@amelia.local, "Lewis"
>> <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>>
>>> In message <ItGdnd5-bfmfB5fOnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
>>> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>>> if bar(foo) then
>>>> begin
>>>> brat (tat);
>>>> stat (a,v)
>>>> end
>>>> else
>>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>>>
>>> Is how I would space that. However, that else is something I
>>> particularly dislike. That, to me, is terrible obtuse code.
>>>
>>> if bar(foo) {
>>> brat(tat);
>>> stat(a,v);
>>> } else {
>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>>> }
>>>
>>> That is much clearer and more concise that the code above.
>>>
>>> I don't like putting {'s on empty lines for no reason, but the last
>>> close bracket matches up the else and if showing the block has ended.
>>
>> How does this grab you?
>>
>> if bar(foo) then
>> brat(tat);
>> stat(a,v);
>> else
>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>> end if;
>
> Not Pascal compliant, that's for sure. Compiler would quit on the else
> as there is no begin for it.
There is life beyond Pascal, you know. that is written in Pascal's beloved
daughter, Ada.
>
> As I said to Lewis, in my block I should have moved everything right a bit:
>
>>>> if bar(foo) then
>>>> begin
>>>> brat (tat);
>>>> stat (a,v)
>>>> end
>>>> else
>>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>
> So it's clear everything belongs to the if.
As it is in Ada without playing about with whitespace.
--
Bill Findlay
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-24 19:29 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <x5GdnQrGo8lDfpbOnZ2dnUVZ_sGdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #57029 |
On 2014.02.24, 19:19 , Bill Findlay wrote:
> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>> On 2014.02.23, 23:35 , Bill Findlay wrote:
>>> On 24/02/2014 04:21, in article slrnlgli63.fcb.g.kreme@amelia.local, "Lewis"
>>> <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In message <ItGdnd5-bfmfB5fOnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
>>>> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>>>> if bar(foo) then
>>>>> begin
>>>>> brat (tat);
>>>>> stat (a,v)
>>>>> end
>>>>> else
>>>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>>>>
>>>> Is how I would space that. However, that else is something I
>>>> particularly dislike. That, to me, is terrible obtuse code.
>>>>
>>>> if bar(foo) {
>>>> brat(tat);
>>>> stat(a,v);
>>>> } else {
>>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> That is much clearer and more concise that the code above.
>>>>
>>>> I don't like putting {'s on empty lines for no reason, but the last
>>>> close bracket matches up the else and if showing the block has ended.
>>>
>>> How does this grab you?
>>>
>>> if bar(foo) then
>>> brat(tat);
>>> stat(a,v);
>>> else
>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>>> end if;
>>
>> Not Pascal compliant, that's for sure. Compiler would quit on the else
>> as there is no begin for it.
>
> There is life beyond Pascal, you know. that is written in Pascal's beloved
> daughter, Ada.
My reply to an other post (Lewis) refers.
As I say elsewhere, I could not get the Ada compiler to actually
install. (Or it wouldn't compile - I don't recall which). Must try
again. (GNAT).
>>
>> As I said to Lewis, in my block I should have moved everything right a bit:
>>
>>>>> if bar(foo) then
>>>>> begin
>>>>> brat (tat);
>>>>> stat (a,v)
>>>>> end
>>>>> else
>>>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>>
>> So it's clear everything belongs to the if.
>
> As it is in Ada without playing about with whitespace.
I just meant in terms of sight reading the code without head-compiling.
--
... it may be that "in the cloud" really isn't the best term
for the services these companies offer. What they really
want is to have us "on the leash."
-David Pogue, Scientific American, 2014.02
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bill Findlay <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-25 00:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <1937809039414981444.812908yaldnif.w-blueyonder.co.uk@news.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #57031 |
Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> On 2014.02.24, 19:19 , Bill Findlay wrote:
>> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>> On 2014.02.23, 23:35 , Bill Findlay wrote:
>>>> On 24/02/2014 04:21, in article slrnlgli63.fcb.g.kreme@amelia.local, "Lewis"
>>>> <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In message <ItGdnd5-bfmfB5fOnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
>>>>> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>>>>> if bar(foo) then
>>>>>> begin
>>>>>> brat (tat);
>>>>>> stat (a,v)
>>>>>> end
>>>>>> else
>>>>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>>>>>
>>>>> Is how I would space that. However, that else is something I
>>>>> particularly dislike. That, to me, is terrible obtuse code.
>>>>>
>>>>> if bar(foo) {
>>>>> brat(tat);
>>>>> stat(a,v);
>>>>> } else {
>>>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> That is much clearer and more concise that the code above.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't like putting {'s on empty lines for no reason, but the last
>>>>> close bracket matches up the else and if showing the block has ended.
>>>>
>>>> How does this grab you?
>>>>
>>>> if bar(foo) then
>>>> brat(tat);
>>>> stat(a,v);
>>>> else
>>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>>>> end if;
>>>
>>> Not Pascal compliant, that's for sure. Compiler would quit on the else
>>> as there is no begin for it.
>>
>> There is life beyond Pascal, you know. that is written in Pascal's beloved
>> daughter, Ada.
>
> My reply to an other post (Lewis) refers.
>
> As I say elsewhere, I could not get the Ada compiler to actually install.
> (Or it wouldn't compile - I don't recall which). Must try again. (GNAT).
>
>>>
>>> As I said to Lewis, in my block I should have moved everything right a bit:
>>>
>>>>>> if bar(foo) then
>>>>>> begin
>>>>>> brat (tat);
>>>>>> stat (a,v)
>>>>>> end
>>>>>> else
>>>>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>>>
>>> So it's clear everything belongs to the if.
>>
>> As it is in Ada without playing about with whitespace.
>
> I just meant in terms of sight reading the code without head-compiling.
>
Sure. I was just emphasising that the Ada syntax had been carefully
designed to completely avoid the problems that {} languages rush into
headlong.
--
Bill Findlay
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-24 19:45 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <zdednamYZ4EmepbOnZ2dnUVZ_tudnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #57034 |
On 2014.02.24, 19:40 , Bill Findlay wrote:
> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>> On 2014.02.24, 19:19 , Bill Findlay wrote:
>>> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>>> On 2014.02.23, 23:35 , Bill Findlay wrote:
>>>>> On 24/02/2014 04:21, in article slrnlgli63.fcb.g.kreme@amelia.local, "Lewis"
>>>>> <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In message <ItGdnd5-bfmfB5fOnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
>>>>>> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>>>>>> if bar(foo) then
>>>>>>> begin
>>>>>>> brat (tat);
>>>>>>> stat (a,v)
>>>>>>> end
>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is how I would space that. However, that else is something I
>>>>>> particularly dislike. That, to me, is terrible obtuse code.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> if bar(foo) {
>>>>>> brat(tat);
>>>>>> stat(a,v);
>>>>>> } else {
>>>>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is much clearer and more concise that the code above.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't like putting {'s on empty lines for no reason, but the last
>>>>>> close bracket matches up the else and if showing the block has ended.
>>>>>
>>>>> How does this grab you?
>>>>>
>>>>> if bar(foo) then
>>>>> brat(tat);
>>>>> stat(a,v);
>>>>> else
>>>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>>>>> end if;
>>>>
>>>> Not Pascal compliant, that's for sure. Compiler would quit on the else
>>>> as there is no begin for it.
>>>
>>> There is life beyond Pascal, you know. that is written in Pascal's beloved
>>> daughter, Ada.
>>
>> My reply to an other post (Lewis) refers.
>>
>> As I say elsewhere, I could not get the Ada compiler to actually install.
>> (Or it wouldn't compile - I don't recall which). Must try again. (GNAT).
>>
>>>>
>>>> As I said to Lewis, in my block I should have moved everything right a bit:
>>>>
>>>>>>> if bar(foo) then
>>>>>>> begin
>>>>>>> brat (tat);
>>>>>>> stat (a,v)
>>>>>>> end
>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>>>>
>>>> So it's clear everything belongs to the if.
>>>
>>> As it is in Ada without playing about with whitespace.
>>
>> I just meant in terms of sight reading the code without head-compiling.
>>
>
> Sure. I was just emphasising that the Ada syntax had been carefully
> designed to completely avoid the problems that {} languages rush into
> headlong.
Yep - as part of the course I took, all the evils of such were discussed
at the start (mystified half the engineers/programmers there who worked
in assembler, fortran and BASIC).
--
Privacy has become an essential personal chore that most
people are not trained to perform.
- Jaron Lanier, Scientific American, 2013.11.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bill Findlay <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-25 00:57 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <31046789414982552.326960yaldnif.w-blueyonder.co.uk@news.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #57035 |
Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> On 2014.02.24, 19:40 , Bill Findlay wrote:
>> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>> On 2014.02.24, 19:19 , Bill Findlay wrote:
>>>> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>>>> On 2014.02.23, 23:35 , Bill Findlay wrote:
>>>>>> On 24/02/2014 04:21, in article slrnlgli63.fcb.g.kreme@amelia.local, "Lewis"
>>>>>> <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In message <ItGdnd5-bfmfB5fOnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
>>>>>>> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>>>>>>> if bar(foo) then
>>>>>>>> begin
>>>>>>>> brat (tat);
>>>>>>>> stat (a,v)
>>>>>>>> end
>>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is how I would space that. However, that else is something I
>>>>>>> particularly dislike. That, to me, is terrible obtuse code.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> if bar(foo) {
>>>>>>> brat(tat);
>>>>>>> stat(a,v);
>>>>>>> } else {
>>>>>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That is much clearer and more concise that the code above.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't like putting {'s on empty lines for no reason, but the last
>>>>>>> close bracket matches up the else and if showing the block has ended.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How does this grab you?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> if bar(foo) then
>>>>>> brat(tat);
>>>>>> stat(a,v);
>>>>>> else
>>>>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>>>>>> end if;
>>>>>
>>>>> Not Pascal compliant, that's for sure. Compiler would quit on the else
>>>>> as there is no begin for it.
>>>>
>>>> There is life beyond Pascal, you know. that is written in Pascal's beloved
>>>> daughter, Ada.
>>>
>>> My reply to an other post (Lewis) refers.
>>>
>>> As I say elsewhere, I could not get the Ada compiler to actually install.
>>> (Or it wouldn't compile - I don't recall which). Must try again. (GNAT).
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> As I said to Lewis, in my block I should have moved everything right a bit:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> if bar(foo) then
>>>>>>>> begin
>>>>>>>> brat (tat);
>>>>>>>> stat (a,v)
>>>>>>>> end
>>>>>>>> else
>>>>>>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>>>>>
>>>>> So it's clear everything belongs to the if.
>>>>
>>>> As it is in Ada without playing about with whitespace.
>>>
>>> I just meant in terms of sight reading the code without head-compiling.
>>>
>>
>> Sure. I was just emphasising that the Ada syntax had been carefully
>> designed to completely avoid the problems that {} languages rush into
>> headlong.
>
> Yep - as part of the course I took, all the evils of such were discussed
> at the start (mystified half the engineers/programmers there who worked
> in assembler, fortran and BASIC).
8-)
--
Bill Findlay
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-24 05:04 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <bn026nFe8lqU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #56947 |
On 2014-02-24, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> In message <ItGdnd5-bfmfB5fOnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>> if bar(foo) then
>> begin
>> brat (tat);
>> stat (a,v)
>> end
>> else
>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>
> Is how I would space that. However, that else is something I
> particularly dislike. That, to me, is terrible obtuse code.
>
> if bar(foo) {
> brat(tat);
> stat(a,v);
> } else {
> faggetaboutit("I object!");
> }
>
> That is much clearer and more concise that the code above.
>
> I don't like putting {'s on empty lines for no reason, but the last
> close bracket matches up the else and if showing the block has ended.
>
> That said, I can't stand writing in python because of its reliance of
> using white space for block control. That seems like the stupidest idea
> any language designer ever had.
White space isn't the enemy. Far from it.
--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.
JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-24 06:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnlglo0i.fcb.g.kreme@amelia.local> |
| In reply to | #56951 |
In message <bn026nFe8lqU1@mid.individual.net>
Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
> On 2014-02-24, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>> In message <ItGdnd5-bfmfB5fOnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
>> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>> if bar(foo) then
>>> begin
>>> brat (tat);
>>> stat (a,v)
>>> end
>>> else
>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>>
>> Is how I would space that. However, that else is something I
>> particularly dislike. That, to me, is terrible obtuse code.
>>
>> if bar(foo) {
>> brat(tat);
>> stat(a,v);
>> } else {
>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>> }
>>
>> That is much clearer and more concise that the code above.
>>
>> I don't like putting {'s on empty lines for no reason, but the last
>> close bracket matches up the else and if showing the block has ended.
>>
>> That said, I can't stand writing in python because of its reliance of
>> using white space for block control. That seems like the stupidest idea
>> any language designer ever had.
> White space isn't the enemy. Far from it.
SIGNIFICANT white space is *an* enemy.
--
S is for SUSAN who perished of fits
T is for TITUS who flew into bits
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-24 16:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <bn1988Fmd88U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #56955 |
On 2014-02-24, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> In message <bn026nFe8lqU1@mid.individual.net>
> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>> On 2014-02-24, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>>> In message <ItGdnd5-bfmfB5fOnZ2dnUVZ_qmdnZ2d@giganews.com>
>>> Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>>> if bar(foo) then
>>>> begin
>>>> brat (tat);
>>>> stat (a,v)
>>>> end
>>>> else
>>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>>>
>>> Is how I would space that. However, that else is something I
>>> particularly dislike. That, to me, is terrible obtuse code.
>>>
>>> if bar(foo) {
>>> brat(tat);
>>> stat(a,v);
>>> } else {
>>> faggetaboutit("I object!");
>>> }
>>>
>>> That is much clearer and more concise that the code above.
>>>
>>> I don't like putting {'s on empty lines for no reason, but the last
>>> close bracket matches up the else and if showing the block has ended.
>>>
>>> That said, I can't stand writing in python because of its reliance of
>>> using white space for block control. That seems like the stupidest idea
>>> any language designer ever had.
>
>> White space isn't the enemy. Far from it.
>
> SIGNIFICANT white space is *an* enemy.
I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with your definition of
significant if it includes placing brackets on their own lines. And
that's okay. As I said earlier, getting developers to agree on minutia
is like herding cats. ; ) I'm happy we have the freedom of choice.
--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.
JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-02-24 12:15 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <_dadnQGhF7aH45bOnZ2dnUVZ_t2dnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #56967 |
While I have to admit to be fascinated by this, I have but one
question. Please explain to a person whose only exposure to programming
was a single FORTRAN class in the mid-70s, is this something I should be
concerned about and, if so, WHEN should I be concerned about it?
--
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital."
-- Aaron Levenstein
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 … 10 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system
csiph-web