Has ANSI Approved ISO/IEC 9899:1999?

[Marjancek]

No use - whenever you change anything, some moron who thinks he knows
better will revert it. or worse yet, replace it with garbage and place
the page in contention mode (or whatever wikinarians call it) so you
can't fix it again.

People at wikipedia demand for Quotations even to fix something that
is clearly wrong, and ignore egos, titles and curricula all together.
But all in all it's not that hard to fix something if you prove your
point, and keep your manners (something not everyone in lcl has)

Marjancek

 

[Mark McIntyre]

To me wikipedia is the greates thing since sliced bread...

Please see a doctor.

Smiley deliberately omitted...
--
Mark McIntyre

"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it."
--Brian Kernighan

 

[Keith Thompson]

Please see a doctor.

Smiley deliberately omitted...

If you had been *either* off-topic *or* gratuitously insulting, I
wouldn't bother to post. As it is, please post to alt.flame.wikipedia
(the fact that it doesn't exist is your own problem).

 

[Mark McIntyre]

If you had been *either* off-topic *or* gratuitously insulting, I
wouldn't bother to post. As it is, please post to alt.flame.wikipedia
(the fact that it doesn't exist is your own problem).

My apologies if this offended you, but I was being neither insulting
nor mocking - IMHO anyone who takes Wikipedia seriously has a problem.

Offtopic I cop to.

--
Mark McIntyre

"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it."
--Brian Kernighan

 

[Richard]

My apologies if this offended you, but I was being neither insulting
nor mocking - IMHO anyone who takes Wikipedia seriously has a problem.

Don't be so bloody ridiculous. Wikipedia is a great resource for the
greater majority of its contents. It was found to be as accurate as
Brittania in the majority of subjects compared.

Yes, there can be problems but its a wonderful resource.

The bottom line is "trust nothing" if the results are really, really,
important. Always double and triple check.

 

[Kenny McCormack]

If you had been *either* off-topic *or* gratuitously insulting, I
wouldn't bother to post. As it is, please post to alt.flame.wikipedia
(the fact that it doesn't exist is your own problem).

It is so refreshing to see honest dissension amongst the regulars.

When I started posting to clc (in the current incarnation), there was
absolutely no (public) disagreement among the regulars; they presented a
unified front. Very nice to see that things have loosened up.

 

[Richard]

It is so refreshing to see honest dissension amongst the regulars.

When I started posting to clc (in the current incarnation), there was
absolutely no (public) disagreement among the regulars; they presented a
unified front. Very nice to see that things have loosened up.

There was never any united front. But the fact is that there is now
tension as to who can be first to state that a pointer is not really the
same as an array yet again, or that "adding integers together can cause
overflow" or that "gets must not be used" or that "we do not talk about
that". It's like death by a 1000 echos half the time in here.

 

[Kenny McCormack]

When I started posting to clc (in the current incarnation), there was
absolutely no (public) disagreement among the regulars; they presented a
unified front. Very nice to see that things have loosened up.

There was never any united front.[/QUOTE]

I'm going to say that you've not been here long enough to know.
And I'm not talking about ancient history (like decades or whatever);
just like the last 3 years or so. As far as I know, you've only been
posting here for about a year.

But the fact is that there is now tension as to who can be first to
state that a pointer is not really the same as an array yet again, or
that "adding integers together can cause overflow" or that "gets must
not be used" or that "we do not talk about that". It's like death by a
1000 echos half the time in here.

So very true.

 

[Richard]

There was never any united front.

I'm going to say that you've not been here long enough to know.[/QUOTE]

I was. But rarely posted. Only when things got ridiculous did I decide
enough was enough. I believe it was CBFalconer who pushed me over the
limit a while back when he told someone off for something he was as
guilty of. He really seemed to think, in conjunction with some others,
that he was part of some elite Usenet mega group of C Gods.

What I meant was that there was never a united front - more an apparent
united front as the current incumbents tried to establish their
position in the pecking order. Some even invented special affectations
to put themselves one over the other. Think of proceeding names with
"Mr" and saying "Indeed" a lot. You know the type of thing.

The endless word games and petty bickering make this group almost unique
in all the years I have used such resources. Only in this group would
someone play such a word game as to suggest that there are "no such
things as global variables" in C.

And I'm not talking about ancient history (like decades or whatever);
just like the last 3 years or so. As far as I know, you've only been
posting here for about a year.

It was the past 3 years that things got out of control. A bit of
rudeness is not so bad, but totally way out net nannying and preening
seemed to become the order of the day. I counted 9 "This is OT" replies
to one fairly reasonable question. And the replies were added more than
24 hours after the first. I don't buy this "I never saw the other
replies" excuse. Sometimes, maybe. But there are some here who just like
to see their name in print. "Mr" McIntyre seems to enjoy, for example,
being the newsgroups hypocrite by replying to all trolls by telling
others not to reply to them. But a special place is in my heart for
CBFalconer. The only man in the history of C programming who would
openly admit to ignoring maintainability issues in coding since he,
personally, never needs to use a debugger. Can you spell "teamwork"?
What on earth is a man who openly advocates not using a debugger doing
attempting to teach anything about coding? His rather amusing use of two
signatures while lecturing people on snipping them in replies is also
something which has a special place in my heart. It is rare indeed to
find such characters in the wild - I thought they had been extinct for
years.

So very true.

"Indeed"

 

[jacob navia]

The endless word games and petty bickering make this group almost unique
in all the years I have used such resources. Only in this group would
someone play such a word game as to suggest that there are "no such
things as global variables" in C.

Heathfield said that strncpy wasn't a function to copy strings.
When presented with the evidence from the standard he waved
at it, and went on arguing nonsense.

I got tired of this group.

Mark McIntyre started writing anonymous posts at a very
"low" level, proposing solutions to the "jacob's problem".

A certain "old wolf" accused my daughter of being addicted to
pornography. Evidence? I mentioned that my daughter uses a broad
band connection to watch japanese comics "mangas".

I dared to answer him, starting my message with
"anonymous coward".

That was too much for McIntyre. I was "insulting old wolf" what an
heresy. He wrote immediately an anonymous posts accusing
my daughter of being a thief because she watches films without
paying...

And a long "etcetera" of insults, lies, etc.

Why?

I have developed a compiler system that tries to solve some of the
problems with the C language. It is being distributed for free
since 10 years.

But I am not GNU, and I use windows, and my code is not GPL, and many
other "very relevant" issues. There was never a technical discussion
because those people aren't able to discuss anything technical.

Their reaction to the efforts of creating a library of abstract
data types is typical of their frame of mind. Nothing really substantive
but just "it will not work", each one should develop his own library
forever.

But as I said, I got tired of the endless polemic. Sadly, there is no
forum where people can discuss about the language, its shortcomings,
how to improve it, etc.

 

[santosh]

jacob navia wrote:

But as I said, I got tired of the endless polemic. Sadly, there is no
forum where people can discuss about the language, its shortcomings,
how to improve it, etc.

There are quite a number of web based forums. Granted they probably
don't have anywhere near the expertise of this group and the topic in
such places tend to be very "liberal", (parallel discussions, for
example, of C, C++, C# etc.), but they _are_ an alternative for those
who don't like the atmosphere of this group, or comp.std.c.

PS. Once again, don't let the trolls get you down. Despite
whatever "faults" you and your compiler may have, you are still
interesting to have around.

 

[Richard]

jacob navia wrote:



There are quite a number of web based forums. Granted they probably
don't have anywhere near the expertise of this group and the topic in
such places tend to be very "liberal", (parallel discussions, for
example, of C, C++, C# etc.), but they _are_ an alternative for those
who don't like the atmosphere of this group, or comp.std.c.

PS. Once again, don't let the trolls get you down. Despite
whatever "faults" you and your compiler may have, you are still
interesting to have around.

Seconded.

 

[Richard]

Heathfield said that strncpy wasn't a function to copy strings.
When presented with the evidence from the standard he waved
at it, and went on arguing nonsense.

I got tired of this group.

Mark McIntyre started writing anonymous posts at a very
"low" level, proposing solutions to the "jacob's problem".

It is not wise to say such things without proof. Do you have proof?

 

[jacob navia]

It is not wise to say such things without proof. Do you have proof?

Obvious. He is the only one that posted an approval. He was the
only one that approved the insults campaign to my daughter.

 

[Keith Thompson]

Heathfield said that strncpy wasn't a function to copy strings.
When presented with the evidence from the standard he waved
at it, and went on arguing nonsense.

strncpy(), unlike any other string function, does not necessarily
zero-terminate the target array. It's designed to operate on a highly
specialized data format, *not* on C strings. (Yes, this specialized
format *sometimes* happens to be a C string.)

I got tired of this group.

Mark McIntyre started writing anonymous posts at a very
"low" level, proposing solutions to the "jacob's problem".

You're referring to <[email protected]>, yes? I don't believe
you. People have sometimes made unfounded accusations against you;
don't do the same.

A certain "old wolf" accused my daughter of being addicted to
pornography. Evidence? I mentioned that my daughter uses a broad
band connection to watch japanese comics "mangas".

Yes, and he was criticized for that. One person said something
stupid; that doesn't reflect anything about the newsgroup.

And Old Wolf later apologized to you; see Message-ID
<[email protected]>.

Incidentally, "Old Wolf" is pseudonymous, not anonymous. He
consistently posts using that name, just as I consistently post using
the name "Keith Thompson" and you consistently post using the name
"jacob navia". (I suppose the same could be said for

I dared to answer him, starting my message with
"anonymous coward".

That was too much for McIntyre. I was "insulting old wolf" what an
heresy.

He took issue with your use of the phrase "anonymous coward". I don't
recall him defending Old Wolf's original statement, just criticizing
your reaction to it. Possibly he misunderstood the common use of the
phrase. In my opinion Mark overreacted, but it's hardly worth
worrying about this long after the event.

He wrote immediately an anonymous posts accusing
my daughter of being a thief because she watches films without
paying...

Prove it!

[snip]

But I am not GNU, and I use windows, and my code is not GPL, and many
other "very relevant" issues. There was never a technical discussion
because those people aren't able to discuss anything technical.

There's been plenty of technical discussion. I recall a fairly
lengthy one in comp.std.c not long ago.

Their reaction to the efforts of creating a library of abstract
data types is typical of their frame of mind. Nothing really substantive
but just "it will not work", each one should develop his own library
forever.

Yes, people expressed their opinions.

But as I said, I got tired of the endless polemic. Sadly, there is no
forum where people can discuss about the language, its shortcomings,
how to improve it, etc.

We discuss the language here in comp.lang.c. Suggestions for how to
improve it are discussed in comp.std.c.

 

[Peter Pichler]

Sadly, there is no
forum where people can discuss about the language, its shortcomings,
how to improve it, etc.

comp.std.c?

Admittedly, I have not followed it for *years*, so I may be way off.

 

[CBFalconer]

.... snip ...

But as I said, I got tired of the endless polemic. Sadly, there
is no forum where people can discuss about the language, its
shortcomings, how to improve it, etc.

Of course there is. However use of it, without arousing
irritation, involves some slight discipline, including attempting
to remain on topic. It is also advisable to avoid misconstruing
all comments.

The group is called "comp.lang.c".

 

[Mark McIntyre]

You're referring to <[email protected]>, yes? I don't believe
you.

For the record, JN's claim is absolutely and totally false.

He took issue with your use of the phrase "anonymous coward". ...
Possibly he misunderstood the common use of the
phrase.

I don't read slashdot, and intensely dislike the Register copying that
method of identifying those readers who prefer to remain anonymous.

Deciding to post anonymously is not cowardice (consider if you were
posting information critical of your military govermnent, or
whistleblowing on your employer's illegal practices). On the other
hand where I come from an accusation of cowardice is on a par with one
of prefererence for kiddies. YMMV of course.
--
Mark McIntyre

"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it."
--Brian Kernighan

 

[Francine.Neary]

Mark McIntyre started writing anonymous posts at a very
"low" level, proposing solutions to the "jacob's problem".

A certain "old wolf" accused my daughter of being addicted to
pornography. Evidence? I mentioned that my daughter uses a broad
band connection to watch japanese comics "mangas".

I dared to answer him, starting my message with
"anonymous coward".

That was too much for McIntyre. I was "insulting old wolf" what an
heresy. He wrote immediately an anonymous posts accusing
my daughter of being a thief because she watches films without
paying...

And a long "etcetera" of insults, lies, etc.

The first thing to say is that some of the anonymous posts directed
against you have exhibited the worst kind of school-ground bullying,
and whoever wrote them should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves.

But don't be upset by the bully! If you re-read the "Jacob problem"
thread, you'll find that almost unanimously the people here defended
you against the anonymous attacker - even (especially) the people who
often disagree with you. Isn't that a positive thing?

Finally, you should apologize for the comments quoted above in which
you make accusations against Mark McIntyre with no evidence. He seems
to me like a blunt sort of guy who's unlikely to feel the need to hide
behind anonymous sock-puppets to say what he wants to say. The way to
respond to "insults, lies, etc" is not with more insults, lies, etc.

But as I said, I got tired of the endless polemic. Sadly, there is no
forum where people can discuss about the language, its shortcomings,
how to improve it, etc.

Well, it cuts both ways... if you could keep calm when you post,
discussions here could be more fruitful.

 

[Kenny McCormack]

For the record, JN's claim is absolutely and totally false.

"I am not a crook."