Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | Don Y <this@isnotme.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: things i would ban from clc |
| Date | 2012-03-15 20:40 -0700 |
| Organization | Aioe.org NNTP Server |
| Message-ID | <jjucml$ds0$1@speranza.aioe.org> (permalink) |
| References | (9 earlier) <jjmvbb$pu2$1@speranza.aioe.org> <jjn07n$rv2$1@speranza.aioe.org> <0.3fccdd7a3b34d81383a0.20120315163651GMT.87sjh93joc.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <jjtf6k$4ia$1@speranza.aioe.org> <0.7b7f5f5010dece6e9e62.20120316001356GMT.87wr6lxv0b.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
Hi Ben,
On 3/15/2012 5:13 PM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> Don Y<this@isnotme.com> writes:
>
>> Hi Ben,
>>
>> On 3/15/2012 9:36 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>> Don Y<this@isnotme.com> writes:
>>> <snip>
>>>> When was the last time you used:
>>>>
>>>> digits = INT_MAX
>>>> decimals = INT_MAX
>>>> printf("The answer is %*.*e", value, digits, decimals)
>>>
>>> Never! It needs semi-colons, and it needs the printf arguments to be in
>>> the right order! Also, making the field width equal to the precision is
>>> a little odd for the 'e' conversion.
>>>
>>>> In fact, when was the last time you used the '*' flag in printf??
>>>
>>> I use it quite a lot, but that may just be that I like to parametrise my
>>> code a lot. By the way, it's not a "flag". printf specifiers do have
>>> flags (there are +, -, #, ' ' and 0) so using the wrong term might be
>>> confusing.
>>
>> Wow, I am *so* relieved! With all your criticisms, I was
>> afraid you might not have UNDERSTOOD WHAT I INTENDED! Whew!
>> Glad I won't have to worry about *that*!
>>
>> [If you have some EXTRA free time, how about checking my past
>> posts for spelling and grammatical errors. It might help
>> others who are confused by a typo here or there... e.g., my
>> recent use of 'int' in place of 'age'... There might be
>> *other* folks who would also welcome your attention to this
>> level of detail!]
>
> I'm sorry. I have no desire to annoy you with details that don't
> interest you. Some people are interested in details and some are not
> and I made the wrong call. I will try not to do it again.
No, I apologize for "jumping down your throat". I understand
the point(s) you were trying to make.
OTOH, it is very annoying to have little "distractions" that
don't address the *substance* of the argument being made.
Too often, a thread wanders into totally arcane territory
at the expense of the original subject matter. Lots of
text flows back and forth but very little information
gets added to the actual discussion.
If someone posts a code fragment or makes a statement that
"doesn't look right" (to me), I *assume* they are intelligent
and wonder what *my* problem might be in grasping what they
are trying to convey. Am I not seeing some issue that *they*
have (and are trying to draw my attention to)? Has some
previous comment of mine been misinterpreted/unclear? Is
there a typographical error that could explain the confusion
on my part? Is natural *language* a problem? etc.
I'm not a teacher "grading papers". Nor do I have a desire to
be. And, unless the comments/code/etc. are *clearly* off the
mark, I suspect the other person isn't interested in my
corrections -- if they re-read their post, chances are, they
will find them independently. Nor do I want folks feeling they
have to quickly update their posts to correct piddly errors
to avoid having others correct them on their behalf.
E.g., in a discussion with "io_x", I have to consider if the
code he (?) presented glossed over a key feature of my
example -- or, if it addressed that feature in a different
manner. *Not* whether his code would compile without errors.
Or whether it would achieve the intended results. (a compiler
and debugger can comment more authoritatively on those issues
WITHOUT my involvement).
Instead, my focus is on "do you understand what this
*mechanism* is and what it does *for* you?" I.e., do you
understand what *I* am saying and do I understand what
*you* are saying...
Again, my apologies.
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
things i would ban from clc jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2012-03-11 23:05 +0000
Re: things i would ban from clc Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-03-12 10:33 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2012-03-12 23:57 +0000
Re: things i would ban from clc jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-03-12 18:44 +0100
Re: things i would ban from clc Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2012-03-12 12:26 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc "osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2012-03-12 14:36 -0600
Re: things i would ban from clc Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2012-03-12 13:57 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-03-12 17:34 -0400
Re: things i would ban from clc Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2012-03-12 15:00 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-03-12 18:21 -0400
Re: things i would ban from clc Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2012-03-12 15:43 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-03-12 23:53 +0100
Re: things i would ban from clc Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2012-03-12 17:17 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-03-13 09:09 +0100
Re: things i would ban from clc Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2012-03-13 01:24 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-03-13 05:59 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2012-03-13 10:55 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc blp@cs.stanford.edu (Ben Pfaff) - 2012-03-13 11:07 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2012-03-13 11:25 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc blp@cs.stanford.edu (Ben Pfaff) - 2012-03-13 11:32 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-03-13 12:18 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2012-03-13 16:13 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2012-03-13 13:49 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-03-13 17:14 -0400
Re: things i would ban from clc Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2012-03-13 14:35 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-03-13 18:09 -0400
Re: things i would ban from clc Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2012-03-13 16:06 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-03-14 08:18 +0100
Re: things i would ban from clc "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-03-14 10:07 +0100
Re: things i would ban from clc Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2012-03-14 12:41 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-03-14 21:53 +0100
Re: things i would ban from clc Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2012-03-15 14:16 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-03-18 07:14 +0100
Re: things i would ban from clc Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-03-14 10:39 +0100
Re: things i would ban from clc Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> - 2012-03-13 14:33 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2012-03-13 14:40 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-03-13 16:25 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2012-03-14 00:51 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-03-14 14:25 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2012-03-15 13:40 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-03-18 17:05 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2012-03-23 11:59 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-23 17:02 -0500
Re: things i would ban from clc Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2012-03-23 16:51 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-03-24 07:16 +0100
Re: things i would ban from clc Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-03-27 11:26 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-03-23 19:43 +0000
Re: things i would ban from clc Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2012-03-23 19:45 +0000
Re: things i would ban from clc Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-03-23 23:49 +0100
Re: things i would ban from clc Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-24 11:54 +1300
Re: things i would ban from clc Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-03-24 09:26 +0100
Re: things i would ban from clc gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2012-03-26 07:31 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-03-24 05:45 +0000
Re: things i would ban from clc Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-03-24 09:31 +0100
Re: things i would ban from clc James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-03-13 14:34 -0400
Re: things i would ban from clc Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-03-13 16:18 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-03-14 08:18 +0100
Re: things i would ban from clc Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-03-14 14:06 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-03-15 15:22 +0000
Re: things i would ban from clc Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2012-03-15 12:26 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-03-15 21:28 +0100
Re: things i would ban from clc Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2012-03-15 13:49 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-03-15 16:36 +0000
Re: things i would ban from clc Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2012-03-15 12:16 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-03-16 00:13 +0000
Re: things i would ban from clc Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2012-03-15 20:40 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2012-03-13 01:52 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-03-13 11:31 +0100
Re: things i would ban from clc jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-03-13 11:41 +0100
Re: things i would ban from clc gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2012-03-13 06:06 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-03-13 15:06 +0100
Re: things i would ban from clc ImpalerCore <jadill33@gmail.com> - 2012-03-13 07:46 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2012-03-13 19:08 +0100
Re: things i would ban from clc Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-03-13 13:20 +0000
Re: things i would ban from clc Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-03-13 20:41 +0100
Re: things i would ban from clc Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-03-13 19:34 +0000
Re: things i would ban from clc Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2012-03-13 16:14 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-03-13 23:28 +0000
Re: things i would ban from clc Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2012-03-13 21:18 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-13 20:19 +1300
Re: things i would ban from clc Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2012-03-13 01:09 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-03-13 21:32 +1300
Re: things i would ban from clc nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com - 2012-03-13 01:52 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-03-13 11:31 +0100
Re: things i would ban from clc nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com - 2012-03-14 01:18 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2012-03-14 12:09 -0700
Re: things i would ban from clc ArifulHossain tuhin <etothepowerpi@gmail.com> - 2012-03-14 13:01 -0700
csiph-web