Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: C language paradox |
| Date | 2012-02-28 18:52 -0600 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <jijss7$2qu$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <jijh7o$i5c$1@speranza.aioe.org> <4F4D576D.3000105@verizon.net> |
On 28-Feb-12 16:38, James Kuyper wrote: > In principle, printf() has to do a lot more work than puts(), even if > only to figure out that the format string it's been given doesn't > require it to do anything special. ... unless the compiler is smart enough to recognize that case and substitute a call to puts() instead. GCC, for instance, has been doing that for ages. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
C language paradox pembed2012 <once@was.enough.invalid> - 2012-02-28 21:33 +0000
Re: C language paradox Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2012-02-28 21:41 +0000
Re: C language paradox Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-29 10:44 +1300
Re: C language paradox Shao Miller <sha0.miller@gmail.com> - 2012-02-28 16:51 -0500
Re: C language paradox Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-02-28 22:16 +0000
Re: C language paradox Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-29 01:34 -0800
Re: C language paradox James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-02-29 07:18 -0500
Re: C language paradox "Scott Fluhrer" <sfluhrer@ix.netcom.com> - 2012-02-29 13:39 -0500
Re: C language paradox Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2012-03-03 16:23 -0500
Re: C language paradox James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-03-03 19:47 -0500
Re: C language paradox Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2012-03-03 18:05 -0800
Re: C language paradox Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2012-03-05 15:41 -0500
Re: C language paradox Robert Miles <milesrf@Usenet-News.net> - 2012-04-14 00:26 -0500
Re: C language paradox James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-02-28 17:38 -0500
Re: C language paradox Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-28 18:52 -0600
Re: C language paradox James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-02-28 22:14 -0500
Re: C language paradox James Dow Allen <jdallen2000@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-28 15:08 -0800
Re: C language paradox "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-02-29 03:42 +0100
Re: C language paradox Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-29 01:37 -0800
Re: C language paradox jgharston <jgh@arcade.demon.co.uk> - 2012-03-03 16:17 -0800
Re: C language paradox nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com - 2012-03-04 02:54 -0800
Re: C language paradox "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-03-04 11:43 +0000
Re: C language paradox Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-03-04 04:01 -0800
Re: C language paradox Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2012-03-04 14:34 +0100
Re: C language paradox Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-03-04 17:01 +0000
Re: C language paradox Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2012-03-05 15:45 -0500
Re: C language paradox Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-02-28 17:45 -0800
Re: C language paradox army1987 <army1987@ask-for-it.invalid> - 2012-03-05 10:42 +0000
Re: C language paradox army1987 <army1987@ask-for-it.invalid> - 2012-03-05 10:48 +0000
Re: C language paradox Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-03-05 09:35 -0800
Re: C language paradox 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2012-04-16 13:01 -0700
Re: C language paradox China Blue Water Navy <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-05 04:24 -0800
Re: C language paradox Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-03-05 07:49 -0500
Re: C language paradox "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-02-29 03:42 +0100
Re: C language paradox Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-02-28 21:46 -0500
csiph-web