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

Groups > sci.physics > #565930 > unrolled thread

Eternal-September Motzarella Aioe Dizum Albasani

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

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.

Contents

  Eternal-September  Motzarella  Aioe  Dizum  Albasani Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2016-03-27 09:21 -0700
    Re: Eternal-September  Motzarella  Aioe  Dizum  Albasani Nobody <nobody@nowhere.net> - 2016-03-27 12:25 -0400
    Eternal-September Motzarella Aioe Dizum Albasani Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2016-03-27 09:51 -0700
      Usenet, eMail, CraigsList, WikiPedia, etc. allow <PRE>. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2016-03-27 10:13 -0700
        Re: Usenet, eMail, CraigsList, WikiPedia, etc. allow <PRE>. benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-03-28 00:55 -0400
          Re: Usenet, eMail, CraigsList, WikiPedia, etc. allow <PRE>. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-03-28 05:57 +0000
    Re: Eternal-September Motzarella Aioe Dizum Albasani Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-03-27 22:04 +0200
    Re: Eternal-September  Motzarella  Aioe  Dizum  Albasani tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2016-03-27 19:53 -0400
      Re: Eternal-September  Motzarella  Aioe  Dizum  Albasani chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-03-28 07:23 -0500
    Re: Eternal-September  Motzarella  Aioe  Dizum  Albasani Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-03-28 01:59 +0200
      Re: Eternal-September  Motzarella  Aioe  Dizum  Albasani chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-03-28 07:44 -0500
        My code only does what _I_ want, not what "you" want. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2016-03-28 06:15 -0700
        My code only does what _I_ want, not what "you" want. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2016-03-28 06:17 -0700
          Re: My code only does what _I_ want, not what "you" want. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-03-28 19:33 +0000
          Re: My code only does what _I_ want, not what "you" want. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-03-28 23:41 +0200
            How could defining a variable, and not using it, be a problem ? Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2016-03-28 14:52 -0700
              Re: How could defining a variable, and not using it, be a problem ? Somebody <somebody@nowhere.net> - 2016-03-28 18:01 -0400
              Re: How could defining a variable, and not using it, be a problem ? Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-03-29 00:25 +0200
                Re: How could defining a variable, and not using it, be a problem ? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-03-28 18:30 -0400
                  Re: How could defining a variable, and not using it, be a problem ? Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-03-29 00:50 +0200
                    Re: How could defining a variable, and not using it, be a problem ? Somebody <somebody@nowhere.net> - 2016-03-28 18:54 -0400
                    Re: How could defining a variable, and not using it, be a problem ? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-03-28 21:10 -0400
                Peter Kohlmann has brain damage, I think. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2016-03-28 15:53 -0700
                  Re: Peter Kohlmann has brain damage, I think. owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-03-28 23:32 +0000
            Re: My code only does what _I_ want, not what "you" want. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-03-29 07:24 -0500

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#565930 — Eternal-September Motzarella Aioe Dizum Albasani

I drop posts from the following servers:

  Eternal-September  Motzarella  Aioe  Dizum  Albasani

Still, I see all replies to me, no matter who/where from.

My servers are the best:

  http://glorb.com/usenet.php
  http://usenet.blueworldhosting.com

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#565933

On Sun, 27 Mar 2016 09:21:15 -0700 (Seattle), Jeff-Relf.Me wrote:

> I drop posts from the following servers:
> 
>   Eternal-September  Motzarella  Aioe  Dizum  Albasani
> 
> Still, I see all replies to me, no matter who/where from.
> 
> My servers are the best:
> 
>   http://glorb.com/usenet.php
>   http://usenet.blueworldhosting.com

alt.mental.health is this way ----->>>>>>>

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

#565940 — Eternal-September Motzarella Aioe Dizum Albasani

You (MrDFS) asked me:
> I rarely see your posts.  Why am I seeing this one?

Eternal-September censors simple markup.
When my "Content-Type:" field, in the header,
is "Text/plain", instead of "Text/HTML", you can see it.

I've been enjoying Usenet much more, since dropping posts from:

  Eternal-September Motzarella Aioe Dizum Albasani 

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

#565947 — Usenet, eMail, CraigsList, WikiPedia, etc. allow <PRE>.

You (MrDFS) asked me:
> Why are you posting HTML to a plain-text medium in the first place?

Usenet, like eMail, is a text; HTML is text.

Usenet, eMail, CraigsList, WikiPedia, etc. allow <PRE>.
<PRE> allows for a FixedWidth font and userControlled whiteSpace.

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

#566079 — Re: Usenet, eMail, CraigsList, WikiPedia, etc. allow <PRE>.

On 03/27/2016 01:13 PM, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote:
> You (MrDFS) asked me:
>> Why are you posting HTML to a plain-text medium in the first place?
>
> Usenet, like eMail, is a text; HTML is text.
>
> Usenet, eMail, CraigsList, WikiPedia, etc. allow <PRE>.
> <PRE> allows for a FixedWidth font and userControlled whiteSpace.

Answer: Rolf is an idiot

Comment: Just be glad he's no longer posting HTML with a dark red font 
on a brown background.



-- 

       ___           ___           ___            ___
      /\  \         /\  \         /\__\          /\  \
     /::\  \       /::\  \       /::|  |         \:\  \
    /:/\:\  \     /:/\:\  \     /:|:|  |     ___ /::\__\
   /::\~\:\__\   /::\~\:\  \   /:/|:|  |__  /\  /:/\/__/
  /:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/  /
  \:\~\:\/:/  / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/  /  \::/  /
   \:\ \::/  /   \:\ \:\__\       |:/:/  /    \/__/
    \:\/:/  /     \:\ \/__/       |::/  /
     \::/__/       \:\__\         /:/  /
      ~~            \/__/         \/__/

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

#566235 — Re: Usenet, eMail, CraigsList, WikiPedia, etc. allow <PRE>.

In sci.physics benj <none@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 03/27/2016 01:13 PM, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote:
>> You (MrDFS) asked me:
>>> Why are you posting HTML to a plain-text medium in the first place?
>>
>> Usenet, like eMail, is a text; HTML is text.
>>
>> Usenet, eMail, CraigsList, WikiPedia, etc. allow <PRE>.
>> <PRE> allows for a FixedWidth font and userControlled whiteSpace.
> 
> Answer: Rolf is an idiot
> 
> Comment: Just be glad he's no longer posting HTML with a dark red font 
> on a brown background.
 
Doesn't matter to me; I use a real news server that dumps his shit so most
of his inane posts are never seen.
 

-- 
Jim Pennino

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

#565966 — Re: Eternal-September Motzarella Aioe Dizum Albasani

Dne 27/03/2016 v 18:21 Jeff-Relf.Me napsal(a):
> I drop posts from the following servers:
> 
>   Eternal-September  Motzarella  Aioe  Dizum  Albasani
> 
> Still, I see all replies to me, no matter who/where from.
> 
> My servers are the best:
> 
>   http://glorb.com/usenet.php
>   http://usenet.blueworldhosting.com
> 
I suggest to filter msgs with occurrence of the letter "e"
as it is used by most of the spammers.

-- 
Poutnik ( The Wanderer )
Knowledge makes great men humble, but small men arrogant.

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

#566023

On Sun, 27 Mar 2016 09:21:15 -0700 (Seattle), Jeff-Relf.Me wrote:

> I drop posts from the following servers: ...

Sorry, can't help you with that problem. Cheers, -- tlvp

FU: news.software.readers dropped from distribution list.
-- 
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.

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

#566126

tlvp wrote:

>On Sun, 27 Mar 2016 09:21:15 -0700 (Seattle), Jeff-Relf.Me wrote:

*plonk*

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

#566024

 wrote:

> I drop posts from the following servers:
> 
>   Eternal-September  Motzarella  Aioe  Dizum  Albasani
> 
> Still, I see all replies to me, no matter who/where from.
> 
> My servers are the best:

Idiot

If you are dropping posts from a number of servers, you will not see them if 
your software is working correctly

Except your "drop mechanism" is programmed by you. Then it will work like 
the rest of your dimbulbs software: Not like anything expected

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

#566127

Peter Köhlmann wrote:

> wrote:
>> 
>> My servers are the best:
>
> Idiot

Heh.  Reminds me of when Relf claimed that his code was the "finest
you'll ever see".  Yeah, right.

-- 
"Testing is how you know if the code works or not, not compile-time
warnings."  -  Jeff Relf (the trolling fsckwit "Ezekiel" supports
Relf, on this issue)

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

#566131 — My code only does what _I_ want, not what "you" want.

MrChrisV wrote:
> Relf claimed that his code was the "finest you'll ever see".

No.  I'd never say such a thing !
My code only does what _I_ want, not what "you" want.

> "Testing is how you know if the code works or not, not compile-time
> warnings."  -  Jeff Relf (the trolling fsckwit "Ezekiel" supports
> Relf, on this issue)

Disabling certain warnings is best, I've found.
Sometime I want unreference variables, for example, just because.
I'm using my code, so I know that it works the way I want.

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

#566133 — My code only does what _I_ want, not what "you" want.

MrChrisV wrote:
> Relf claimed that his code was the "finest you'll ever see".

No.  I'd never say such a thing !
My code only does what _I_ want, not what "you" want.

> "Testing is how you know if the code works or not, not compile-time
> warnings."  -  Jeff Relf (the trolling fsckwit "Ezekiel" supports
> Relf, on this issue)

Disabling certain warnings is best, I've found.
Sometimes I want unreferenced variables, for example, just because.
I'm using my code, so I know that it works the way I want.

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

#566259 — Re: My code only does what _I_ want, not what "you" want.

In comp.os.linux.advocacy Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> wrote:
> MrChrisV wrote:
>> Relf claimed that his code was the "finest you'll ever see".
> 
> No.  I'd never say such a thing !
> My code only does what _I_ want, not what "you" want.
> 
>> "Testing is how you know if the code works or not, not compile-time
>> warnings."  -  Jeff Relf (the trolling fsckwit "Ezekiel" supports
>> Relf, on this issue)
> 
> Disabling certain warnings is best, I've found.
> Sometimes I want unreferenced variables, for example, just because.
> I'm using my code, so I know that it works the way I want.

Apparently you wanted it to post the same message twice.

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

#566315 — Re: My code only does what _I_ want, not what "you" want.

 wrote:

> MrChrisV wrote:
>> Relf claimed that his code was the "finest you'll ever see".
> 
> No.  I'd never say such a thing !
> My code only does what _I_ want, not what "you" want.
> 
>> "Testing is how you know if the code works or not, not compile-time
>> warnings."  -  Jeff Relf (the trolling fsckwit "Ezekiel" supports
>> Relf, on this issue)
> 
> Disabling certain warnings is best, I've found.
> Sometimes I want unreferenced variables, for example, just because.
> I'm using my code, so I know that it works the way I want.

using "unreferenced variables" is a way for disaster, and every programmer 
better than DumbFullSnit should know that
Doing idiocy like that knowingly only shows that you know jack shit about 
programming

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

#566318 — How could defining a variable, and not using it, be a problem ?

PeterKöhlmann wrote:
> > Disabling certain warnings is best, I've found.
> > Sometimes I want unreferenced variables, for example, just because.
> > I'm using my code, so I know that it works the way I want.
> 
> using "unreferenced variables" is a way for disaster, 
> and every programmer better than DumbFullSnit should know that

How could defining a variable, and not using it, be a problem ?

Quoting WikiPedia: ＜＜

  An "unreferenced variable" in the source code of a computer program
  is a variable that is defined but which is never used.  ＞＞

C4700 is: uninitialized local variable 'XYZ' used.

I don't disable "C4700" warnings.

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

#566320 — Re: How could defining a variable, and not using it, be a problem ?

On Mon, 28 Mar 2016 14:52:02 -0700 (Seattle), Jeff-Relf.Me wrote:

> PeterKöhlmann wrote:
>>> Disabling certain warnings is best, I've found.
>>> Sometimes I want unreferenced variables, for example, just because.
>>> I'm using my code, so I know that it works the way I want.
>> 
>> using "unreferenced variables" is a way for disaster, 
>> and every programmer better than DumbFullSnit should know that
> 
> How could defining a variable, and not using it, be a problem ?
> 
> Quoting WikiPedia: ＜＜
> 
>   An "unreferenced variable" in the source code of a computer program
>   is a variable that is defined but which is never used.  ＞＞
> 
> C4700 is: uninitialized local variable 'XYZ' used.
> 
> I don't disable "C4700" warnings.

Do you toke?

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

#566323 — Re: How could defining a variable, and not using it, be a problem ?

 wrote:

> PeterKöhlmann wrote:
>> > Disabling certain warnings is best, I've found.
>> > Sometimes I want unreferenced variables, for example, just because.
>> > I'm using my code, so I know that it works the way I want.
>> 
>> using "unreferenced variables" is a way for disaster,
>> and every programmer better than DumbFullSnit should know that
> 
> How could defining a variable, and not using it, be a problem ?

It is because the warnings cloak other warnings. And why on earth would 
someone with more than 2 braincells define variables only to never use them?

And worse: it can mean that you in reality meant to use the unreferenced 
variable, but did not and used instead another one, which may lead to 
faulty/unexpected behaviour. 

It can also occur because some part of the code has been rewritten and the 
variable is "no longer" used. In that case it should be removed

Masking that compiler warning will even deprave you of that knowledge, which 
can lead to difficult error searches. After all, the code compiles and runs. 
Just maybe not like you intended.

It is *never* a good idea to use unreferenced variables, and I remove them 
always instead of masking the warning

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

#566326 — Re: How could defining a variable, and not using it, be a problem ?

Peter Köhlmann wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> It is *never* a good idea to use unreferenced variables, and I remove them 
> always instead of masking the warning

Unfortunately, many "programmers" suffer from a lack of the necessary
attention to details.

-- 
Lady Luck brings added income today.  Lady friend takes it away tonight.

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

#566331 — Re: How could defining a variable, and not using it, be a problem ?

Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> Peter Köhlmann wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
> 
>> It is *never* a good idea to use unreferenced variables, and I remove
>> them always instead of masking the warning
> 
> Unfortunately, many "programmers" suffer from a lack of the necessary
> attention to details.
> 

I never accept a compiler warning by just "ignoring" it. The compiler issues 
warnings for a reason, and I have to be absolutely certain that it is the 
compile which is wrong. It extremely rarely is. Most of the time there is 
some problem in the code. In may current project (nearly 200.000 lines of 
(real) source code (comments not counted) I have exactly one occurence of 
compiler warning (and then for the current linux GCC only, not for the 
windows one and also not for the OSX compiler) where I get a warning which 
could be ignored. Better is to simply rewrite the code in a fashion where 
the compiler does not warn, because it was ambiguish from the start

Since I compile my program for linux, windows and OSX (from the same source) 
I get different kinds of warnings, depending on environment. And I aspire to 
remove warnings for all of them, not just for the substandard windows 
compiler

It takes the Relf idiots of this world to assume that they know better

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

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web