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

Groups > comp.lang.c > #66537

Re: SQL filesortcc question

From Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk>
Newsgroups comp.lang.c
Subject Re: SQL filesortcc question
Date 2015-07-29 21:07 +0100
Organization go, ion artisan!
Message-ID <mpbbnm$nca$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References (8 earlier) <mp6pio$kku$1@dont-email.me> <mp6ufs$vuj$1@dont-email.me> <mp71ks$7f3$1@dont-email.me> <mp7621$ii2$1@dont-email.me> <55B8FC02.8090800@verizon.net>

Show all headers | View raw

On 29/07/15 17:14, James Kuyper wrote:
> On 07/28/2015 02:06 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> On 28/07/15 05:51, James Kuyper wrote:
>>> On 07/27/2015 11:57 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>>> ... If we're going to make a whizzy new language that has exciting
>>>> features like BCPL-style comments and an absence of gets() and dozens of
>>>> other very splendid and worthwhile wossnames, that's brilliant! But
>>>> let's find a new name for it, and let's use this new language to /add/
>>>> to the number of available languages, not to replace something that has
>>>> a very important part still to play.
>>>
>>> Are you trying to imply that you might have actually started writing
>>> some programs in C99, if it had, instead, been given a name that
>>> distinguished it completely from C90? If so, I don't believe you.
>>
>> No, I'm not trying to imply anything. I'll be quite candid about it.
>> Would I have found a use for this new language? No, certainly not. Would
>> others? Apparently so. And that's fine by me. I'm all for people being
>> able to program in the language in which they wish to program. Me, I
>> favour C90, for reasons stated over and over again. What surprises me is
>> that so many people are seemingly so determined that I shouldn't be
>> allowed to, at least not without being treated like some kind of Luddite.
>
> No one's saying you shouldn't be allowed to choose which version of
> which language you want to use. I'm just saying that your recent
> explanations for your choice are unreasonable. You're not a Luddite, but
> only because Luddites used violence and destruction of property to
> advance their goals. Otherwise, the term is a pretty good fit.

It's all about getting the job done. How important is portability to 
you? If it's very, very important, then you will be wary of using any 
feature that might not be implemented on all the machines where your 
code will be compiled. If it's not at all important, you will feel free 
to use any feature you like, including even compiler-specific features. 
And of course, in between, there is a gamut.

For me, portability is very, very important, and it's far /more/ 
important than trivial new features. If that makes me a Luddite, so be it.

<snip>

> It's not clear from your objections that there is any possible
> modification to the list of features which were added since C90, which
> would have led to you accepting the latest version as a replacement for
> C90.

Oh, I apologise. I do not believe there is any such modification 
(except, perhaps, for the removal of gets() and implicit int).

> Each of those changes occurred precisely because a solid majority
> (and in most cases a super-majority) of a bunch of C experts thought,
> after considerable debate, that they were a good ideas. They've made
> mistakes, and they may have made many more than I'm personally aware of
> - but the idea that every single one of those decisions was a mistake
> just isn't plausible (particularly since I know what those particular
> decisions were).

I don't think for a moment that they were mistakes /from the perspective 
of ISO/, but they resulted in a language that isn't portable enough when 
I *most* need portability, and not powerful enough when I *most* need power.

<snip>

> That strikes me as so implausible that I must favor a different
> explanation: you're simply prejudiced against making any changes to C
> whatsoever. And that must indeed be a prejudice, not a reasoned
> judgment, because the idea that C as originally standardized was so
> perfect that it could not be improved upon is just plain ridiculous.

I would argue that it is a reasoned judgement *even though* C90 isn't 
perfect. C90 /must/ remain, for the *practical* reason that it works 
everywhere. For me, the ability to write /*this*/ like //this
isn't sufficient compensation for one of my users no longer being able 
to compile my code.

So yes, I'm against making changes to C. If it weren't so darn 
ubiquitous, I wouldn't care. You can make all the changes you like to, 
say, Haskell, and I won't bat an eyelid. But it is precisely because C90 
/is/ ubiquitous that it is unique. No other language is so widely 
implemented on so many different machine types.

If you could *guarantee* that you could get C99 or C11 implemented on 
every single machine type that C90 is implemented on, then - well, I'd 
believe it when I saw it, but yes, that would work.

> I'm sure you'll deny the prejudice, and deny believing that C can't be
> improved upon - but your rejection of every single new feature of C is
> in conflict with those denials.

Do I deny the prejudice? I'm not sure. I think it's a rational attitude 
based on portability criteria. I write for what's out there, not for 
what ISO says ought to be out there. And what's out there, *everywhere*, 
is C90.

It isn't because C90 is perfect that it shouldn't be changed (C90 is far 
from perfect); it is because you can't just wave a magic wand and 
upgrade every implementation currently in use.

> Alternatively, since you've admitted to
> being prone to exaggeration,

No, I've never done that. Never. Ever. Not even once.

Well, maybe once.

Or perhaps twice. Tops.

> perhaps you do approve of a few features,
> but are unwilling to admit it.

No, I don't think so. I really can't think of any that are actually 
worth anything *to me*. I don't find myself thinking "Darn it! If only I 
didn't have to be portable, I could use an int_least32_t here!" I just 
don't. I see all you folks using these features all the time, and you 
all seem to think they're terribly important, and that's fine, but not 
everybody holds that view. I think they're trivial and pointless. And, 
when push comes to shove, let's face it - if portability *isn't* a 
concern, why use C at all? C++ has more toys.

> But if you approve of so few of the new
> features that you're willing to claim to approve of none of them, you
> should wear the label "Luddite" with pride.

I'll get a badge made up.

-- 
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Chairman, C90 Luddites Association ("Bring Your Own Hammer")

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

Thread

SQL filesortcc question doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The Doctor) - 2015-07-15 20:40 +0000
  Re: SQL filesortcc question Paavo Helde <myfirstname@osa.pri.ee> - 2015-07-15 16:08 -0500
  Re: SQL filesortcc question James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-15 17:15 -0400
    Re: SQL filesortcc question doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The Doctor) - 2015-07-15 23:22 +0000
    Re: SQL filesortcc question jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2015-07-16 18:35 +0200
      Re: SQL filesortcc question Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-16 17:48 +0100
        Re: SQL filesortcc question jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2015-07-16 19:38 +0200
          Re: SQL filesortcc question doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The Doctor) - 2015-07-16 19:48 +0000
            Re: SQL filesortcc question jacobnavia <jacob@jacob.remcomp.fr> - 2015-07-16 22:17 +0200
              Re: SQL filesortcc question Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-16 21:44 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The Doctor) - 2015-07-16 23:51 +0000
              Re: SQL filesortcc question Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-17 09:05 +1200
                Re: SQL filesortcc question doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The Doctor) - 2015-07-16 23:52 +0000
                Re: SQL filesortcc question James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-17 11:36 -0400
                Re: SQL filesortcc question The Doctor <doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca> - 2015-07-17 22:22 +0000
                Re: SQL filesortcc question James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-17 18:44 -0400
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-18 11:13 +1200
              Re: SQL filesortcc question Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-16 22:06 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The Doctor) - 2015-07-16 23:52 +0000
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-17 01:24 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The Doctor) - 2015-07-17 00:26 +0000
              Re: SQL filesortcc question doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The Doctor) - 2015-07-16 23:50 +0000
          Re: SQL filesortcc question John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2015-07-31 13:39 -0700
        Re: SQL filesortcc question doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The Doctor) - 2015-07-16 19:48 +0000
        Re: SQL filesortcc question Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-17 09:07 +1200
        Re: SQL filesortcc question Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2015-07-16 16:05 -0700
        Re: SQL filesortcc question David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-16 17:28 -0700
        Re: SQL filesortcc question Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-20 11:13 -0700
          Re: SQL filesortcc question Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-20 19:27 +0100
            Re: SQL filesortcc question Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-21 08:46 +1200
              Re: SQL filesortcc question raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-07-22 15:12 +0000
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-26 11:55 +1200
              Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-25 15:01 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-26 11:51 +1200
            Re: SQL filesortcc question Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-25 10:02 -0700
              Re: SQL filesortcc question Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-27 23:35 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-28 14:16 +1200
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-28 04:49 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Martin Shobe <martin.shobe@yahoo.com> - 2015-07-27 23:25 -0500
                Re: SQL filesortcc question raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-07-28 09:32 +0000
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-28 10:22 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-27 22:33 -0400
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-28 04:57 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-28 16:38 +1200
                Re: SQL filesortcc question James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-28 00:51 -0400
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-28 07:06 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-28 20:32 +1200
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-28 10:02 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-28 22:08 +1200
                Re: SQL filesortcc question David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-28 18:17 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-29 12:14 -0400
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Martin Shobe <martin.shobe@yahoo.com> - 2015-07-29 11:27 -0500
                Re: SQL filesortcc question James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-29 13:01 -0400
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-29 17:33 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-29 21:07 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-29 16:33 -0400
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-29 22:12 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-29 23:50 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-30 00:13 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-30 01:49 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-30 02:07 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-30 03:04 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-30 08:25 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-30 09:15 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-30 17:17 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-30 17:00 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-30 17:12 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-30 15:12 -0400
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-30 23:13 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-31 10:29 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-31 08:10 -0400
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-31 11:12 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-31 22:56 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-31 18:34 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-08-01 13:55 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-01 07:13 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-08-01 15:36 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-01 09:19 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-08-01 18:16 -0400
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-01 15:30 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-08-02 09:00 -0400
                Re: SQL filesortcc question James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-08-02 09:19 -0400
                Re: SQL filesortcc question raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-08-09 14:23 +0000
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-02 06:35 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-08-02 19:11 +0200
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-02 10:28 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-08-03 09:04 +0200
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-03 00:19 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-08-03 13:55 +0200
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-03 07:03 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-08-03 16:53 +0200
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-09-06 09:19 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-06 21:20 +0200
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-09-05 14:07 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-06 12:24 +0200
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-09-06 13:49 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-06 15:41 +0200
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-09-07 07:24 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-09-07 17:04 +0200
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-02 06:48 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-04 08:00 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-04 08:52 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-09-05 11:56 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-08-04 23:45 -0400
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-05 08:45 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-09-05 12:00 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-01 13:17 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-08-01 16:11 -0400
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-01 14:00 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-02 10:40 +1200
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-01 16:20 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> - 2015-08-22 08:24 +0200
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-22 19:26 +1200
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-22 05:39 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-01 13:51 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-02 10:38 +1200
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-01 16:14 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-08-02 01:15 +0200
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-01 16:24 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-08-02 02:32 +0200
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-08-02 12:57 +1200
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-08-01 22:23 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-02 01:21 -0500
                Re: SQL filesortcc question David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-08-02 19:21 +0200
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-02 14:05 -0500
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-02 01:24 -0500
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-01 23:56 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-08-09 14:25 +0000
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-30 14:19 +1200
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-29 19:53 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-29 23:45 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-30 04:22 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-30 13:13 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-30 13:27 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-30 13:57 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-30 14:11 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-30 14:39 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-07-30 15:05 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-30 14:03 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-30 11:22 -0400
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-29 18:32 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-30 14:38 +1200
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-07-30 10:56 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-30 22:28 +1200
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-07-30 10:57 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-03 08:02 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-03 08:33 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2015-08-03 20:50 -0400
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-04 04:52 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-04 06:08 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-08-04 14:20 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-08-04 06:45 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-09-05 12:15 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-08-03 19:09 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-08-04 06:09 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-08-04 14:40 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-09-05 13:24 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-09-05 21:51 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-09-05 17:16 -0400
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-09-05 19:59 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-09-06 07:51 +0100
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-09-06 17:32 -0700
            Re: SQL filesortcc question Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-25 10:04 -0700
        Re: SQL filesortcc question David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2015-07-21 13:23 +0200
          Re: SQL filesortcc question raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-07-22 15:14 +0000
          Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-25 15:25 -0700
            Re: SQL filesortcc question Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-26 11:31 +1200
              Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-25 17:10 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-26 13:29 +1200
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-25 23:51 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-26 20:24 +1200
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-26 03:02 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-27 09:22 +1200
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-26 15:04 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-27 10:32 +1200
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-26 16:49 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-27 21:46 +1200
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-27 04:53 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-26 14:58 -0700
                Re: SQL filesortcc question Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-07-26 15:15 -0700
      Re: SQL filesortcc question doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The Doctor) - 2015-07-16 19:47 +0000
  Re: SQL filesortcc question Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-07-16 09:55 +1200

csiph-web