Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #401212
| From | Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: this girl calls c ugly |
| Date | 2026-08-15 09:37 -0700 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <86y0e749xs.fsf@linuxsc.com> (permalink) |
| References | (16 earlier) <10vnlgu$382un$2@kst.eternal-september.org> <86bjdpayv0.fsf@linuxsc.com> <10vv49k$1aoa2$4@kst.eternal-september.org> <86y0gp82pd.fsf@linuxsc.com> <11079cs$3grso$1@kst.eternal-september.org> |
Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:
> Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> writes:
>
>> Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:
[...]
>>> You made a statement, "gcc disagrees with you". I demonstrated,
>>> in text that you snipped, that gcc does in fact agree with me.
>>
>> No, you didn't.
>
> Yes, I did.
>
>>> You were wrong.
>>
>> No, I wasn't. Your testing was faulty.
>
> Yes, you were. My testing was not faulty.
Oddly enough, your response reminds me of an observation
reportedly attributed to Leonaro da Vinci.
~ $ cd demo
~/demo $ /bin/ls
ce.c
~/demo $ cat ce.c
#include <limits.h>
int
main(){
switch(1){
case (INT_MAX+1)*0: return 1;
default: return 0;
}
}
~/demo $ gcc -std=c99 -pedantic-errors -Wno-overflow -o gcc-ce ce.c
~/demo $ clang -std=c99 -pedantic-errors -Wno-integer-overflow -o clang-ce ce.c
~/demo $ /bin/ls
ce.c clang-ce gcc-ce
~/demo $ ./gcc-ce
~/demo $ echo $?
0
~/demo $ ./clang-ce
~/demo $ echo $?
0
~/demo $
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: this girl calls c ugly Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-08-15 09:37 -0700
csiph-web