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

Groups > comp.lang.c > #61930

Re: Understandability

From David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>
Newsgroups comp.lang.c
Subject Re: Understandability
Date 2015-05-13 08:53 +0200
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <miusbt$hio$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References (9 earlier) <611c75e6-443d-425b-93b9-67b35c207220@googlegroups.com> <mipj9b$4gd$1@dont-email.me> <e95d749c-15ca-408c-8419-7d0df53c338f@googlegroups.com> <mis8ap$dsq$1@dont-email.me> <9ae7e6d2-f4ec-49f9-9a8f-276403ac1ef3@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 12/05/15 17:37, David Kleinecke wrote:
> On Monday, May 11, 2015 at 11:59:46 PM UTC-7, David Brown wrote:
>> On 11/05/15 19:06, David Kleinecke wrote:
>>> On Sunday, May 10, 2015 at 11:48:20 PM UTC-7, David Brown wrote:
>>>> On 10/05/15 20:05, David Kleinecke wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not sure exactly what "program" means these days. Normally I would
>>>>> speak of applications (of which gcc is one). Perhaps "program" means a 
>>>>> "main" function. But I think that is a poor idea for reasons we might 
>>>>> discuss. 
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think I am also missing the point here.  You haven't really said /why/
>>>> you want to make a distinction between a standalone single-executable
>>>> program and a collection of executables such as gcc.  If we understood
>>>> why this matters to you, it might be possible to give suggestions or ideas.
>>>>
>>>> As for what a "program" or "application" means, I am not sure that one
>>>> can make a concrete definition in this sense.  In particular, it depends
>>>> on your viewpoint.  From a user's viewpoint, gcc is clearly a program -
>>>> you run the "gcc" command on your source files, and hopefully get a
>>>> useful result.  From a compiler developer's viewpoint, gcc is a
>>>> collection of programs, libraries, headers, target run-time code, linker
>>>> scripts, etc.
>>>
>>> I don't think in terms of command lines any more (having gone as GUI as
>>> possible) but I remember them. I think you are using "program" to mean
>>> a possible first word in a valid command line. I also remember shell
>>> scripts. These days a user clicks on a button and expects something to
>>> happen - maybe what happens is a command line is executed. 
>>
>> Programmers - especially C programmers (or "real" programmers :-) expect
>> that compilation is done using a command-line program such as "gcc",
>> typically under the control of "make".  Much of this may be hidden by an
>> IDE and it's "build" button, but it's not far below the surface - you
>> can just watch the terminal output window in the IDE.
>>
>> In the context of compiling, the compiler is a program.  Whether you
>> view it as a single program on its own, or are concerned with the other
>> programs it calls along the way, is a matter of perspective.
>>
>> Your IDE or editor is also a program, which calls other programs as
>> needed.  Whether you start the programs by command line, clicking on a
>> start menu, or from within another program, is incidental.
>>
>>>
>>> As a compiler writer myself I am very aware that gcc is a collection. You
>>> name "programs" as part of the collection - just what is a "program" here?
>>>
>>
>> /You/ are the one making wild statements about what everyone else things
>> of gcc and whether it is a free-standing or "simple" program, and who is
>> concerned about a definition of "program" - I believe that you should be
>> the one to come up with an exact specification.  The rest of us seem
>> quite happy with a somewhat rough and vague notion.
> 
> This all started when I called gcc a program and somebody objected. I am
> perfectly happy not having a precise definition of program.
> 

If I remember the history of this thread correctly (and perhaps I
remember /incorrectly/), the key objection was that you wrote "Gnu is
right to call their work a collection.  It is really a fiction that gcc
is a free-standing program."  You followed this with a series of
misconceptions about gcc and the way it works.

I don't think anyone objects to calling gcc a "program", and we can all
be happy with only a vague definition of "program".  (I doubt that this
group could ever agree on a precise definition of "program" !)

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

Thread

Understandability David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-01 17:55 -0700
  Re: Understandability Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-01 19:41 -0700
  Re: Understandability wssimms@gmail.com - 2015-05-01 20:45 -0700
  Re: Understandability Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-02 10:38 +0100
    Re: Understandability David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-02 09:15 -0700
      Re: Understandability David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-04 09:26 +0200
        Re: Understandability David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-04 12:52 -0700
  Re: Understandability Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-05-02 14:21 +0200
    Re: Understandability David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-02 09:13 -0700
      Re: Understandability Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-05-03 08:07 +1200
      Re: Understandability Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-02 13:11 -0700
        Re: Understandability David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-03 10:50 -0700
          Re: Understandability Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-03 13:26 -0700
            Re: Understandability David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-04 12:29 -0700
              Re: Understandability Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-05 05:47 -0700
        Re: Understandability raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-05-08 21:10 +0000
          Re: Understandability Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-05-09 09:17 +1200
          Re: Understandability Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-08 14:32 -0700
            Re: Understandability David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-09 09:13 -0700
              Re: Understandability Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-09 16:48 -0700
                Re: Understandability David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-10 11:05 -0700
                Re: Understandability David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-11 08:48 +0200
                Re: Understandability David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-11 09:55 -0700
                Re: Understandability James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-11 17:52 -0400
                Re: Understandability glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-11 22:54 +0000
                Re: Understandability David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-12 08:49 +0200
                Re: Understandability Morris Dovey <mrdovey@iedu.com> - 2015-05-12 02:15 -0500
                Re: Understandability Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> - 2015-05-25 03:15 +0300
                Re: Understandability James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-25 00:45 -0400
                Re: Understandability David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-25 10:26 -0700
                Re: Understandability David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-11 10:06 -0700
                Re: Understandability David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-12 08:59 +0200
                Re: Understandability David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-12 08:37 -0700
                Re: Understandability David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-13 08:53 +0200
                Re: Understandability Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-13 08:16 -0700
                Re: Understandability David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-13 09:49 -0700
                Re: Understandability Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-13 10:53 -0700
                Re: Understandability David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-14 10:35 -0700
                Re: Understandability David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-13 09:31 -0700
                Re: Understandability James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-13 13:10 -0400
                Re: Understandability David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-14 10:27 -0700
                Re: Understandability James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-14 22:51 -0400
                Re: Understandability David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-15 10:02 -0700
                Re: Understandability James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-15 13:37 -0400
                Re: Understandability David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-16 09:18 -0700
                Re: Understandability David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-16 23:56 +0200
                Re: Understandability gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-05-17 12:45 +0000
                Re: Understandability David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-17 09:16 -0700
                Re: Understandability James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-17 12:47 -0400
                Re: Understandability David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-18 10:54 -0700
                Re: Understandability James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-18 15:00 -0400
                Re: Understandability David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-19 09:49 -0700
                Re: Understandability James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-19 13:10 -0400
                Re: Understandability James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-16 19:01 -0400
                Re: Understandability David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-17 09:30 -0700
                Re: Understandability James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-17 12:58 -0400
                Re: Understandability David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-18 10:54 -0700
                Re: Understandability James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-18 14:56 -0400
                Re: Understandability David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-05-19 09:46 -0700
                Re: Understandability James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-19 13:16 -0400
                Re: Understandability Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-05-19 18:23 +0100
                Re: Understandability James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-19 14:02 -0400
                Re: Understandability David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-19 00:11 +0200
                Re: Understandability James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-05-18 18:28 -0400
                Re: Understandability Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-05-15 10:52 -0700
                Re: Understandability David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-13 21:53 +0200
          Re: Understandability David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-09 16:18 +0200
          Re: Understandability Noob <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-05-09 18:31 +0200
            Re: Understandability raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-05-17 10:44 +0000
              Re: Understandability glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-17 15:53 +0000
      Re: Understandability David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-05-04 09:15 +0200
        Re: Understandability Waldek Hebisch <hebisch@math.uni.wroc.pl> - 2015-05-16 00:28 +0000
  Re: Understandability Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-05-03 10:58 -0700

csiph-web