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

Groups > comp.lang.c > #98456

Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops

From Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk>
Newsgroups comp.lang.c
Subject Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops
Date 2016-12-09 08:26 +0000
Organization Fix this later
Message-ID <o2dppj$1m6$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References (6 earlier) <o2bpmt$2rv$2@jstuckle.eternal-september.org> <o2bq80$5lc$1@dont-email.me> <o2bv1i$lp0$1@jstuckle.eternal-september.org> <o2c0uf$srs$1@dont-email.me> <o2d5te$i66$1@jstuckle.eternal-september.org>

Show all headers | View raw

On 09/12/16 02:47, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> On 12/8/2016 11:16 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> On 08/12/16 15:44, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>> On 12/8/2016 9:22 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>>> On 08/12/16 14:13, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>>>> On 12/7/2016 6:33 PM, jameskuyper@verizon.net wrote:
>>>>>> On Wednesday, December 7, 2016 at 3:13:27 PM UTC-5, Jerry
>>>>>> Stuckle wrote:
>>>>>>> On 12/7/2016 12:40 PM, Keith Thompson wrote:
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>> Most C compilers are not conforming by default, and require
>>>>>>>> some added options to make them (atte
>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why do you say that?  There is nothing that says a compiler
>>>>>>> can't add features, as long as it does everything the
>>>>>>> standard says it does.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ... and doesn't do anything the standard says is shouldn't do.
>>>>>> However, it turns out that most compilers do in fact fail to do
>>>>>> something required by the standard, or do something prohibited
>>>>>> by the standard, when invoked in their default mode. The
>>>>>> compilers I've used most frequently over the past couple of
>>>>>> decades all take an -ansi option that puts them in C90 mode;
>>>>>> without that option, they don't fully conform to any version of
>>>>>> the C standard. Most of them also require the -lm option to
>>>>>> correctly handle code that uses <math.h>, and gcc also requires
>>>>>> -pedantic. There was an extended discussion of this issue a few
>>>>>> years ago in this newsgroup. In the end, only two very obscure
>>>>>> compilers were identified that supposedly fully conformed in
>>>>>> their default mode - and given how obscure they were, that
>>>>>> conclusion might have simply been the result of nobody being
>>>>>> aware of the the ways that they failed to conform.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> When they support multiple versions of the standard, they need to
>>>>> know which version of the standard to use.
>>>>
>>>> And so they require a switch, without which they are non-conforming
>>>> to any standard (or at least that's the case for gcc).
>>>>
>>>>> But -lm is a linker parameter, not compiler.
>>>>
>>>> Yes. Since we have been using the word "compiler" it's a
>>>> reasonable objection. Nevertheless, if we take the linker out of
>>>> the equation, *no* compiler is conforming, because to leave out the
>>>> linker necessarily means leaving out TP8!
>>>>
>>>> And if we put the linker back into the equation, gcc fails to
>>>> conform even when told to by -std=c??, unless the additional magic
>>>> rune -lm is added, just as James explained to you already.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The C standard doesn't say anything about the linker (although it
>>> does extensively discuss linkage) or how libraries are linked in.
>>
>> The C Standard has this to say about linking: "8. All external object
>> and function references are resolved. Library components are linked to
>> satisfy external references to functions and objects not defined in the
>> current translation. All such translator output is collected into a
>> program image which contains information needed for execution in its
>> execution environment."
>>
>> So it says that linking *must happen*, conceptually at the very least
>> (as with an interpreter). If the linking step is omitted, the
>> implementation is not a conforming implementation. In other words, the
>> program must be able to execute, or there's no point.
>>
>
> It doesn't say there has to be a link step.

See the above paragraph, which says that "library components are linked 
to satisfy external references". TP8 is describing a link step, in fact.

> It just states that the
> external references must be resolved - not how the resolution is done.
> It could be done by the compiler, for instance.

Yes, but gcc /fails/ (in default mode) to resolve those external 
references for math library functions, and therefore it doesn't do what 
the standard says must be done, and therefore it doesn't conform (in 
default mode).

> But then the linker is not part of C - it is common to all languages, so
> a C standard could not define it.

We're talking about what the standard requires, and the standard 
requires that external references are resolved, which gcc (in default 
mode) does not do for math functions, and therefore gcc is a 
counter-example to your claim.

>
>>> But I would guess the reason for the -lm flag would be you might want
>>> to use libm, or you might have another library you want for the math
>>> functions. But I didn't write the compiler, so I don't know what they
>>> were thinking.
>>
>> The reason, for the purposes of this discussion, *doesn't matter*. What
>> matters is that gcc is an example of a compiler that is not conforming
>> by default.
>>
>
> The standard also doesn't say it has to be conforming "by default".
> Just that it has to be conforming.

As James rightly points out, it doesn't even say that. There's nothing 
to stop you writing a non-conforming C implementation. But your claim 
was that most compilers are conforming in default mode.

> The standard also doesn't say the compiler must have a means of
> compiling only (-c in gcc).  But all compilers do.

The Standard doesn't even say there must be a compiler. C interpreters 
exist. But the claim that you made is that most compilers conform when 
invoked in default mode. For a compiler to be conforming, it must meet 
all the requirements of the standard for conforming implementations. If 
it fails to meet any of those requirements in default mode, it does not 
conform in default mode.

>>>>> And I always thought gcc was -pedantic.  I didn't realize it
>>>>> needed a flag to make it even more so.
>>>>
>>>> gcc in default mode is remarkably forgiving, as long as you don't
>>>> sin (or cos, or tan, or anything else math.h-y).
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, sometimes too forgiving.
>>
>> Again, this is in direct contrast to your claim that "being conforming
>> doesn't mean they have to flag non-conforming code". In fact, it
>> certainly does mean that, and if gcc is too forgiving, then gcc is again
>> failing to conform.
>>
>
> I already agreed that you would have to specify which standard would be
> followed for a compiler which supports multiple standards.

James has already pointed out why that isn't true, so I won't bother. 
But that isn't the point at issue. The point at issue is your claim that 
most compilers are conforming in default mode. You have yet to produce a 
single example to support your case, and it has been shown in some 
detail how gcc, probably the most widely-installed compiler in the 
world, is a counter-example.

> But you
> can't get by that, can you?  Reading comprehension problems?

Is it really so terribly hard to admit error that you have to hurl 
insults left, right and centre in a desperate but by now rather familiar 
misguided attempt to throw sand in people's eyes? Do you really think 
that all this nonsense about singing pigs fools anyone?

> But then the standard also doesn't say the compiler must be conforming
> in its default mode, does it?

No, the standard imposes no requirements on non-conforming 
implementations. But that isn't the point at issue. The claim you made 
was that most compilers /are/ conforming in default mode.

>> You claimed that most compilers are conforming in their default mode,
>> but so far you have not produced the names of any compilers that do
>> conform in their default mode.
>>
>
> I already agreed that you would have to specify which standard would be
> followed for a compiler which supports multiple standards.

Not so, as James has already explained so I won't repeat it. It isn't 
the point at issue. What you actually claimed was that most compilers, 
when invoked in default mode, are conforming. Clearly a compiler that 
requires a switch in order to conform is not conforming in its default 
mode (i.e. without the switch being activated).

> But you
> can't get by that, can you?  Reading comprehension problems?

I'll try to make myself clearer. Here is the relevant history:

Keith Thompson wrote: "Most C compilers are not conforming by default, 
and require some added options to make them (attempt to) conform to 
(some version of) the standard."
You replied: "Why do you say that? There is nothing that says a compiler 
can't add features, as long as it does everything the standard says it 
does."
I replied with a comment about a requirement to support scanf (which the 
OP claimed his implementation did not).
You replied: "The question wasn't about whether VS compiled a program 
with scanf() or not.  The question was why he stated "Most C compilers 
are not conforming by default"." And later in the same article you 
added: "I was responding to an over-generalized statement."

When I then asked you whether any C compilers conform by default, you 
replied: "I think most of them do."

So far we have seen evidence to the contrary but no evidence in support. 
Instead, you seem to be psyching yourself up for your usual ad hominem 
attacks in the hope that nobody will notice that you got it wrong again. 
The rest of us deal with "getting it wrong again" by apologising and 
retracting, not by hurling personal insults. It is a course that I can 
recommend to you.

> But then the standard also doesn't say the compiler must be conforming
> in its default mode, does it?

Surely you *cannot* be this stupid? The claim you made, the claim that 
is being challenged, is that most compilers /are/ conforming in their 
default mode.

-- 
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within

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

Thread

Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Potomac <ravine557@gmail.com> - 2016-12-05 06:32 -0800
  Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2016-12-05 08:34 -0700
    Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-12-05 15:43 +0000
      Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2016-12-05 10:41 -0700
  Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-12-05 15:37 +0000
  Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2016-12-05 10:43 -0800
    Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops potomac <ravine557@gmail.com> - 2016-12-07 01:13 -0800
      Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-12-07 10:55 +0000
        Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2016-12-07 20:34 -0800
          Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-12-08 11:08 +0000
    Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-08 08:23 +1300
  Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops potomac <ravine557@gmail.com> - 2016-12-07 01:07 -0800
    Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2016-12-07 08:46 -0700
      Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-12-07 16:23 +0000
  Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops potomac <ravine557@gmail.com> - 2016-12-07 01:12 -0800
    Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2016-12-07 08:49 -0700
    Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2016-12-07 15:07 -0800
  Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops potomac <ravine557@gmail.com> - 2016-12-07 03:46 -0800
    Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-12-07 11:59 +0000
    Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-12-07 12:05 +0000
      Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-12-07 09:40 -0800
        Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-12-07 15:13 -0500
          Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-12-07 20:24 +0000
            Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-12-07 16:28 -0500
              Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-12-07 21:48 +0000
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-12-07 17:02 -0500
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-12-07 22:19 +0000
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-12-07 17:27 -0500
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-12-07 22:51 +0000
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-12-08 09:10 -0500
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-12-08 14:13 +0000
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-12-08 15:57 +0100
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-08 18:02 +1300
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-12-08 08:48 -0800
          Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2016-12-07 15:33 -0800
            Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-12-08 09:13 -0500
              Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-12-08 14:22 +0000
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-12-08 16:03 +0100
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-12-08 10:44 -0500
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2016-12-08 15:48 +0000
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-12-08 21:41 -0500
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-12-08 16:16 +0000
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-12-08 21:47 -0500
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2016-12-08 20:16 -0800
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-12-09 11:19 +0100
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-12-09 08:00 -0800
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-12-13 13:10 -0800
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2016-12-13 13:55 -0800
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-12-15 01:13 -0800
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2016-12-15 07:02 -0800
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-12-15 19:56 -0800
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-12-18 10:00 -0800
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-12-14 11:45 -0800
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-12-14 12:14 -0800
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-12-15 01:24 -0800
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-12-15 08:02 -0800
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-12-15 12:10 -0800
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2016-12-16 20:00 -0800
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-12-09 11:05 -0500
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-12-09 16:21 +0000
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2016-12-09 13:10 -0800
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-12-09 23:44 -0500
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-12-10 10:18 -0800
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-12-11 16:18 -0500
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-12-09 08:26 +0000
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-12-09 11:15 -0500
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-12-09 16:31 +0000
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-12-09 23:47 -0500
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-12-11 16:05 +0000
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-12-11 16:21 -0500
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-12-11 23:15 +0000
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-12-11 18:57 -0500
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-12-12 00:05 +0000
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-12-11 21:09 -0500
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-12-12 08:25 +0000
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2016-12-10 07:59 -0800
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2016-12-08 13:51 -0800
              Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2016-12-08 13:34 -0800
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-12-08 21:52 -0500
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2016-12-08 19:33 -0800
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-12-09 11:20 -0500
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops jameskuyper@verizon.net - 2016-12-09 13:28 -0800
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-12-09 23:51 -0500
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-12-09 16:46 +0000
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2016-12-09 13:55 -0500
        Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-12-07 20:17 +0000
          Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-12-07 12:23 -0800
    Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops twalker470@googlemail.com - 2016-12-07 05:50 -0800
    Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2016-12-07 08:55 -0700
      Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-12-07 16:23 +0000
        Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2016-12-07 10:56 -0700
  Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops potomac <ravine557@gmail.com> - 2016-12-07 04:14 -0800
    Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2016-12-07 11:03 -0800
  Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2016-12-09 08:06 -0800
    Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-12-09 09:23 -0800
      Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-12-09 17:38 +0000
        Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2016-12-09 14:01 -0500
          Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2016-12-09 19:09 +0000
            Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2016-12-09 12:38 -0700
        Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-12-10 00:08 -0500
          Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-12-10 00:16 -0500
      Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-12-09 23:59 -0500
        Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-12-10 11:51 +0000
          Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-12-11 16:22 -0500
            Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-12-11 21:52 +0000
              Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2016-12-11 22:32 -0500
                Re: Stumped on the role of a particular statement in a program with Arrays & Nested For Loops Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-12-12 04:18 +0000

csiph-web