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

Groups > comp.lang.c > #141277

Re: C is not a low level language

From "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com>
Newsgroups comp.lang.c, comp.programming, comp.sys.raspberry-pi
Subject Re: C is not a low level language
Date 2019-02-25 08:46 +0100
Organization Informatimago
Message-ID <m24l8s8g40.fsf@despina.home> (permalink)
References (9 earlier) <q4ug9o$q6j$1@gioia.aioe.org> <q4un6q$5bo$1@dont-email.me> <q4upp6$5k2$1@gioia.aioe.org> <q4ur5a$v7v$1@dont-email.me> <q4uv8j$v0m$1@gioia.aioe.org>

Cross-posted to 3 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

"R.Wieser" <address@not.available> writes:

> Richard,
>
>> But my code protected against that possibility by [snip]
>
> Thats why I said "In this simple example it will work".
>
>> The only way this could break would be if the source string grew between 
>> two consecutive lines of code that did not grow that string.
>
> In your example ?  Yes (and the same as I was thinking).
>
> Now imagine that you're programming and you /could/ be working on a 
> single-thread string, but as easily on a multi-thread one.  Wouldn't it be 
> easier to use a method which will work in either circumstance ?
>
>> If these circumstances are at all likely, it seems to me that it is better 
>> to protect against them than to succumb blindly to them.
>
> True.  But that only goes as far as the programmer can imagine such attacks. 
> "strncpy" is ment as a "last ditch" effort to safeguard against the 
> /unforseen/ circumstances which could lead to memory/stack being clobbered. 
> My suggestion to provide it an argument that is one less than what the 
> buffer can actually hold is just an extension on that.
>
> Personally I would not mind at all when it would throw or return an error 
> when the target buffer was found to be too small for the source string.   It 
> should never happen, and for that reason should not be silently ignored 
> either.   But thats just my take on it, YMMV.

Sorry to interject this important argument so deep in an unrelated
thread, but

In case you didn't notice, the terminating null is not stored or
transmitted to external devices.  When you display the string on a
screen, print it in a printer, transmit it to a remote terminal, etc,
the null byte should not be displayed, printed, transmitted.  It is NOT
part of the string.

So why C uses a null terminating byte for string literals?
The alternatives are:

- pascal strings: a length prefix (but is it a byte,
  a word, a long? In "modern" pascal implementations all those variants
  are possisble.

- no length, but a different type, and a stringly typed language that
  let you copy the literal only to an array of the same size
  (eg. Modula-2, IIRC).

- a designated string class used to implement strings (eg. Objective-C;
  it's even customizable in Objective-C, since the specific string class
  can be specified as argument to the compiler).

you can notice that 1960's C solution of using a terminating null byte
looked as the simpliest solution, and provided also the safety that if
you lost a null byte, there should be another null byte in memory not
too far away, so everything would be ok.  But that was before paged
memory existed! (well not chronologically, but on the PDP-7/11).
Ie. basically the argument was: we're ok with buffer overflows because
they're benign on our PDP-7 in 1969.

Obviously this only argument for null-terminated strings should be
revised!


This is a place where C could be improved, and I like Objective-C
solution of providing a class (a "plug-in") to implement the
representation of string literals.

-- 
__Pascal J. Bourguignon__
http://www.informatimago.com

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

C is not a low level language jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2019-02-23 21:59 +0100
  Re: C is not a low level language "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2019-02-23 22:02 +0100
    Re: C is not a low level language Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2019-02-23 16:05 -0500
      Re: C is not a low level language "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2019-02-24 08:37 +0100
    Re: C is not a low level language "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 12:12 +0800
  Re: C is not a low level language "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 12:11 +0800
    Re: C is not a low level language "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 12:40 +0800
      Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 05:16 +0000
        Re: C is not a low level language "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 13:20 +0800
          Re: C is not a low level language "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 13:24 +0800
          Re: C is not a low level language "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 19:45 +0800
          Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-02-24 13:09 +0000
            Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 14:38 +0000
              Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-02-24 15:18 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-24 17:21 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 17:43 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-24 20:17 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-02-24 18:19 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-24 20:02 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-02-24 19:26 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-24 21:36 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-02-24 20:47 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 21:10 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-25 08:25 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-02-25 12:24 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-25 17:04 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-02-25 16:52 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-24 17:59 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-25 09:19 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2019-02-25 09:41 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Mateusz Viste <mateusz@wont.tell> - 2019-02-25 09:01 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-25 01:55 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-02-25 10:24 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2019-02-25 08:46 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-25 09:36 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2019-02-25 10:13 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-26 09:56 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-25 14:12 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-02-25 10:31 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 12:20 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-25 13:36 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 22:57 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-25 10:29 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-25 09:41 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-25 10:55 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-25 10:24 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-02-25 10:46 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-26 12:34 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 21:03 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-25 08:58 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2019-02-25 09:40 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-25 10:01 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-24 12:55 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-25 08:31 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 17:42 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-02-24 18:19 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Bill Findlay <findlaybill@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2019-02-24 17:56 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-02-24 18:23 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 20:58 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 20:52 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Bill Findlay <findlaybill@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2019-02-25 16:31 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language already5chosen@yahoo.com - 2019-02-25 08:48 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-25 14:01 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2019-02-25 23:04 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-25 15:53 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language already5chosen@yahoo.com - 2019-02-26 00:29 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-26 01:33 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Bill Findlay <findlaybill@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2019-02-28 16:07 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Björn Lundin <b.f.lundin@gmail.com> - 2019-02-25 20:50 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Bill Findlay <findlaybill@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2019-02-28 16:04 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2019-02-28 16:25 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2019-02-28 11:56 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language "NY" <me@privacy.net> - 2019-02-28 19:45 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-25 17:55 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Bill Findlay <findlaybill@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2019-02-28 16:03 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-28 11:25 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-28 19:30 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2019-02-28 13:18 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-28 21:48 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2019-02-28 17:54 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-03-01 20:19 +1300
                Re: C is not a low level language "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2019-03-01 03:05 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-03-01 11:29 +0000
                The extent of Rick's experience (Was: C is not a low level language) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2019-03-01 12:19 +0000
                Re: The extent of Rick's experience (Was: C is not a low level language) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-03-01 04:28 -0800
                Re: The extent of Rick's experience (Was: C is not a low level language) "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2019-03-01 04:34 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2019-03-01 04:32 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-03-01 14:28 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-03-01 15:57 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2019-03-01 06:24 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-03-04 09:21 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-03-04 11:23 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2019-03-04 14:47 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-03-04 15:58 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2019-03-04 07:02 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2019-03-05 06:36 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2019-03-05 05:14 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language jadill33@gmail.com - 2019-03-05 05:44 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2019-03-05 16:47 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-03-01 14:02 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-03-01 15:50 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2019-03-01 06:11 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-03-01 16:50 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2019-03-01 07:22 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2019-03-01 07:24 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-03-03 19:55 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-03-02 08:39 +1300
                Re: C is not a low level language Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-03-02 08:37 +1300
                Re: C is not a low level language "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2019-03-01 11:43 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2019-03-02 07:20 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2019-03-02 04:18 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-03-02 12:28 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2019-03-02 05:19 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-03-02 23:47 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2019-03-02 18:24 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2019-03-02 16:02 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-03-03 06:53 +1300
                Yep, I'm not surprised.  (Was: C is not a low level language) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2019-03-01 07:31 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Wes Newell <w.newell@tx.rr.com> - 2019-03-01 06:13 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Wes Newell <w.newell@tx.rr.com> - 2019-03-01 06:11 +0000
              Re: C is not a low level language Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2019-02-24 20:47 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 21:29 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2019-02-25 20:16 +0000
          Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-24 12:53 -0800
          Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-25 09:49 +0200
        Re: C is not a low level language Björn Lundin <b.f.lundin@gmail.com> - 2019-02-25 21:07 +0100
          Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 22:59 +0000
            Re: C is not a low level language Björn Lundin <b.f.lundin@gmail.com> - 2019-02-26 09:57 +0100
              Re: C is not a low level language already5chosen@yahoo.com - 2019-02-26 01:35 -0800
              Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-26 09:59 +0000
              Re: C is not a low level language fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2019-02-27 07:20 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2019-02-27 07:36 -0800
      Re: C is not a low level language Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2019-02-24 19:54 +1300
        Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-24 07:56 +0000
          Re: C is not a low level language Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2019-02-24 21:58 +1300
            Re: C is not a low level language "A. Dumas" <alexandre@dumas.fr.invalid> - 2019-02-24 10:57 +0100
            Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-24 10:13 +0000
            Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 10:47 +0000
              Re: C is not a low level language "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2019-02-24 08:48 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 14:42 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 07:15 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language already5chosen@yahoo.com - 2019-02-25 02:43 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2019-02-25 09:25 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 15:03 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2019-02-25 12:10 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 17:58 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Axel Berger <Spam@Berger-Odenthal.De> - 2019-02-25 17:44 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-25 19:18 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-25 10:35 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2019-02-25 10:44 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-02-25 12:29 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 14:26 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "NY" <me@privacy.net> - 2019-02-25 17:08 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-25 20:08 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 18:00 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-27 22:37 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-28 02:25 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Diesel <nobody@haph.org> - 2019-03-05 04:29 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 12:27 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2019-02-25 09:36 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 15:05 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-25 19:20 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 23:02 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-26 06:52 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-26 12:41 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-26 12:20 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-26 14:01 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2019-02-26 08:48 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Björn Lundin <b.f.lundin@gmail.com> - 2019-02-26 19:20 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2019-02-25 10:04 -0500
            Re: C is not a low level language fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 04:33 -0800
            Re: C is not a low level language lonelydad <lonelydad58@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 14:44 +0000
              You were not meant to undersand this  was: C is not a low level language pyotr filipivich <phamp@mindspring.com> - 2019-02-26 09:47 -0800
                Re: You were not meant to undersand this  was: C is not a low level language pjp <pjpoirier_is_located@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-26 16:05 -0400
            Re: C is not a low level language luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2019-02-26 20:16 -0800
            Re: C is not a low level language "U-laptop\\Norah" <Norah@laptop.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> - 2019-02-27 16:16 -0600
              Re: C is not a low level language Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2019-03-01 12:12 +1300
                Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-03-01 00:19 +0000
          Re: C is not a low level language fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 04:57 -0800
            Re: C is not a low level language fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 05:15 -0800
          Re: C is not a low level language Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2019-02-24 19:59 -0800
            Re: C is not a low level language Bill Findlay <findlaybill@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2019-02-25 16:10 +0000
              Re: C is not a low level language already5chosen@yahoo.com - 2019-02-25 09:00 -0800
            Re: C is not a low level language Björn Lundin <b.f.lundin@gmail.com> - 2019-02-25 21:02 +0100
              Re: C is not a low level language Lars Enderin <lars.enderin@telia.com> - 2019-02-26 00:37 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2019-02-25 19:09 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-26 06:52 +0000
        Re: C is not a low level language T <T@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 00:30 -0800
          Re: C is not a low level language T <T@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 00:31 -0800
          Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-24 10:16 +0000
        Re: C is not a low level language "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2019-02-24 11:22 +0000
          Re: C is not a low level language "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2019-02-24 08:51 -0500
            Re: C is not a low level language pyotr filipivich <phamp@mindspring.com> - 2019-02-24 07:20 -0800
              Re: C is not a low level language "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2019-02-24 15:35 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2019-02-24 11:05 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language pyotr filipivich <phamp@mindspring.com> - 2019-02-24 14:39 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-24 19:11 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2019-02-25 09:41 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2019-02-25 14:53 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2019-02-25 10:19 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-25 16:38 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2019-02-25 11:20 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2019-02-25 17:49 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-26 09:18 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-25 12:17 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-25 20:25 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-25 13:40 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-26 12:45 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-26 08:02 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2019-02-26 09:11 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Diesel <nobody@haph.org> - 2019-03-05 04:29 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-26 09:23 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-26 08:02 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-26 17:57 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language Diesel <nobody@haph.org> - 2019-03-05 04:29 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-25 17:42 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-25 22:33 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-26 09:30 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language already5chosen@yahoo.com - 2019-02-26 01:58 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-26 12:19 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-25 12:17 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-25 13:52 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language "NY" <me@privacy.net> - 2019-02-25 15:20 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-25 12:17 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-25 18:47 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-25 13:50 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-25 18:59 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-25 20:15 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2019-02-25 18:38 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-26 12:49 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-25 13:40 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-26 12:55 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2019-02-26 16:29 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Diesel <nobody@haph.org> - 2019-03-05 04:29 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-03-04 23:43 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language already5chosen@yahoo.com - 2019-02-25 10:01 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language "NY" <me@privacy.net> - 2019-02-25 18:16 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "NY" <me@privacy.net> - 2019-02-25 17:44 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-25 13:05 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2019-02-26 00:51 -0600
                Re: C is not a low level language "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2019-02-26 10:58 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2019-02-26 10:53 -0600
                Re: C is not a low level language already5chosen@yahoo.com - 2019-02-26 09:04 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2019-02-26 13:25 -0600
                Re: C is not a low level language Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2019-02-26 09:16 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-26 17:49 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2019-02-26 18:11 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-26 18:24 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language already5chosen@yahoo.com - 2019-02-26 10:29 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2019-02-26 19:24 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2019-02-26 19:44 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language already5chosen@yahoo.com - 2019-02-27 03:29 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language already5chosen@yahoo.com - 2019-02-26 10:26 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language already5chosen@yahoo.com - 2019-02-26 12:41 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language nobody@example.org (Scott) - 2019-02-26 06:33 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language mark.bluemel@gmail.com - 2019-02-25 07:24 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-25 12:17 -0500
            Re: C is not a low level language Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2019-02-24 20:03 -0800
          Re: C is not a low level language pyotr filipivich <phamp@mindspring.com> - 2019-02-24 14:56 -0800
      Re: C is not a low level language Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2019-02-24 20:43 +0000
        Re: C is not a low level language "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2019-02-25 14:14 +0800
          Re: C is not a low level language "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2019-02-25 10:45 +0000
            Re: C is not a low level language "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2019-02-25 19:04 +0800
  Re: C is not a low level language jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2019-02-24 09:51 +0100
    Re: C is not a low level language Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2019-02-24 09:37 +0000
    Re: C is not a low level language Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-24 22:52 +1300
      Re: C is not a low level language Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-24 11:13 +0000
        Re: C is not a low level language jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2019-02-24 16:30 +0100
          Re: C is not a low level language fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 07:50 -0800
            Re: C is not a low level language fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 08:14 -0800
              Re: C is not a low level language fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 08:29 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 09:00 -0800
          Re: C is not a low level language David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-24 17:16 +0100
            Re: C is not a low level language fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 08:42 -0800
              Re: C is not a low level language bart4858@gmail.com - 2019-02-24 09:38 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 10:09 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 10:13 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 10:23 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 10:48 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-24 19:07 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 11:10 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-24 19:19 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2019-02-25 10:32 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2019-02-24 20:49 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-24 12:59 -0800
            Re: C is not a low level language jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2019-02-24 18:02 +0100
              Re: C is not a low level language David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-24 21:56 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2019-02-24 23:00 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2019-02-28 17:07 -0600
          Re: C is not a low level language Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-24 20:34 +0000
            Re: C is not a low level language jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2019-02-24 23:04 +0100
              Re: C is not a low level language already5chosen@yahoo.com - 2019-02-24 14:29 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2019-02-25 07:12 +0100
    Re: C is not a low level language Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2019-02-24 10:41 +0000
      Re: C is not a low level language fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 06:47 -0800
        Re: C is not a low level language Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2019-02-24 17:30 +0000
      Re: C is not a low level language jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2019-02-24 16:32 +0100
    Re: C is not a low level language "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 03:19 -0800
    Re: C is not a low level language fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 04:29 -0800
    Re: C is not a low level language Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2019-02-24 11:11 -0500
  Re: C is not a low level language Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-25 12:57 +0100
  Re: C is not a low level language "l.s." <l.s@cryptolab.net> - 2019-02-28 19:17 +0100
    Re: C is not a low level language jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2019-02-28 21:09 +0100
      Re: C is not a low level language "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2019-02-28 13:20 -0800
      Re: C is not a low level language David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-03-01 10:27 +0100
        Re: C is not a low level language jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2019-03-01 14:18 +0100
          Re: C is not a low level language David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-03-01 15:10 +0100
            Re: C is not a low level language jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2019-03-01 19:30 +0100

csiph-web