Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #163751
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' |
| Date | 2021-12-09 21:26 +0000 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <87h7bhjwr9.fsf@bsb.me.uk> (permalink) |
| References | (4 earlier) <11efb602-293a-4a90-b0bd-832617377f57n@googlegroups.com> <86fsr28ns3.fsf@linuxsc.com> <5e1ba862-156c-4b1d-93a4-661ef66aadedn@googlegroups.com> <87sfv1kbl9.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <sotf3g$72r$1@dont-email.me> |
Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: > On 09/12/2021 16:05, Ben Bacarisse wrote: >> Dave Dunfield <dave.dunfield@gmail.com> writes: >> >>> There's no guaranteed that other feeds/readers won't also corrupt source code >>> format, and "BASE64" might be great, but I don't know how/if every reader >>> handles it and converts to text in the original format. >>> (like mentioned above : it's been years since I've accessed groups) >> Do you have any reason to think that Tim does not know how all this >> stuff works? If base64 won't work, there's no reason to suppose your >> encoding will work. In fact, you know that your encoding does not work, >> without extra effort, for the vast majority of newsreaders. I can view >> base64 with a few key presses. >> >>> I thought it was "simple enough", all you have to do was grab the >>> archive mentioned and see the (.TXT format) documents for lots more >>> information. >> There is a conventional way to link to many kinds of resource. Your >> instructions might be "simple enough", but a direct link is simpler. >> >>> Ah.. disadvantage of having "formative years" in the 70's/80's, not >>> thinking "complex enough" for "modern" computing! >> Simple is a URL. That's hardly modern (nearly three decades old) nor >> complex! >> >>> (What is the TEXT format ... what do I have to install to be able to >>> view it!) >> No one here has given you any reason to think we are that ignorant. >> I was curious, so I went hunting. I found the zip file[1] (though it >> might not be the right one) but the included decoding program would not >> compile on my system. But that was because I believed the comment in >> the zip file: it's not C++ source (as the comment says), it's C99 (or >> C90 with C99 comments). > > I didn't see any such comments in DECTXT.C. The comment was from my unzip program, caused by the capital C extension. I don't use zip files, so I thought it was a comment in the archive itself. > It compiled for me with no problems on gcc/tcc. gcc thought is was C++ as well (again the capital C) and the warnings that most C compilers will let pass are hard errors in C++. (I thought you liked hard errors.) > bcc required stdlib.h, string.h, but also it didn't like 'unsigned > char*' types being passed to functions expecting 'char*'; the other > compilers are more lax. > > But program worked (I posted the decoded C file). Yup, that was handy, but the OP could have done that. Or posted a link to the decoded C file. Or posted a link to a portable ANSI C decoder. Or posted a link to the zip archive with the decoder in it. -- Ben.
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Meredith Montgomery <mmontgomery@levado.to> - 2021-11-19 15:57 -0300
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-11-19 12:21 -0800
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Meredith Montgomery <mmontgomery@levado.to> - 2021-11-19 18:14 -0300
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-11-19 14:10 -0800
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Meredith Montgomery <mmontgomery@levado.to> - 2021-11-20 17:30 -0300
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-11-21 16:01 +0000
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2021-11-22 11:23 +0100
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-11-22 12:55 -0800
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2021-11-23 17:04 +0100
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-11-23 09:43 -0800
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2021-11-24 11:26 +0100
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2021-12-10 01:41 -0800
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-12-10 14:40 +0100
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@delq.com> - 2021-11-19 12:22 -0800
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Meredith Montgomery <mmontgomery@levado.to> - 2021-11-19 18:10 -0300
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-11-20 13:24 +0100
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Meredith Montgomery <mmontgomery@levado.to> - 2021-11-20 17:32 -0300
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Mark Bluemel <mark.bluemel@gmail.com> - 2021-11-22 00:27 -0800
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Mark Bluemel <mark.bluemel@gmail.com> - 2021-11-22 00:34 -0800
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-11-22 02:04 -0800
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Mark Bluemel <mark.bluemel@gmail.com> - 2021-11-22 02:46 -0800
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2021-11-22 21:22 -0800
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-11-22 22:03 -0800
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-11-23 14:52 +0000
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Dave Dunfield <dave.dunfield@gmail.com> - 2021-11-26 07:31 -0800
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Dave Dunfield <dave.dunfield@gmail.com> - 2021-12-08 07:26 -0800
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-12-08 12:16 -0800
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Dave Dunfield <dave.dunfield@gmail.com> - 2021-12-08 18:59 -0800
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2021-12-08 19:23 -0800
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Dave Dunfield <dave.dunfield@gmail.com> - 2021-12-09 06:30 -0800
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-12-09 16:10 +0100
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-12-09 16:05 +0000
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-12-09 17:41 +0000
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Dave Dunfield <dave.dunfield@gmail.com> - 2021-12-09 12:24 -0800
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-12-09 22:59 +0000
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-12-09 21:26 +0000
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-12-09 22:37 +0000
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-12-09 23:09 +0000
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2021-12-10 01:58 -0800
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-12-10 10:46 -0800
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2021-12-12 08:21 -0800
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2021-12-09 10:31 -0500
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2021-12-09 13:32 -0800
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2021-12-09 17:08 -0800
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Dave Dunfield <dave.dunfield@gmail.com> - 2021-12-10 12:45 -0800
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2021-12-11 19:17 +0100
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-12-11 23:19 +0000
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2021-12-15 00:31 -0800
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Mark Bluemel <mark.bluemel@gmail.com> - 2021-12-09 02:26 -0800
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-12-09 11:20 +0000
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Dave Dunfield <dave.dunfield@gmail.com> - 2021-12-09 06:50 -0800
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2021-12-08 20:00 -0800
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' Kaz Kylheku <480-992-1380@kylheku.com> - 2021-12-12 18:55 +0000
Re: K&R, 2nd edition, Brian's concerns with ``char c = EOF'' James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2021-12-12 14:38 -0500
csiph-web