need help..

[Christopher Benson-Manica]

(e-mail address removed) spoke thus:

(Chuck and Keith, it's going to sound like I'm trying to curry favor
with you, but I promise that's not the case!)

Well, except for you and Falconer who seem mostly concerned with litigating
a case against every posting that doesn't fit your ideal guidelines.

You do realize you're taking a confrontational stance toward two of
the most respected members of the comp.lang.c group, right?

Really... It's effing amazing to watch the self-appointed group leaders on
Usenet litigate their way to dominance and control, mostly by nitpicking
posts and defaming participants.

Self-appointed nothing - they got that way by consistently being both
deifically knowledgeable and unflaggingly helpful. The rules are
simple, and they aren't creations of a cabal of regular posters. As
smart as they are, they didn't invent netiquette.

I came here to discuss C ... so far I've been ruled off topic, ordered out
of the group, lectured about etiquette and now subjected to micro-analysis
of my ever word.

Why not learn from your mistakes rather than perpetuating them?

What's next?

Plonks?

 

[pete]

On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 03:16:55 GMT,

I came here to discuss C ...

We were just discussing how bad your coding style is.
It's very bad.

 

[Richard Bos]

So I have a little header I use with a bunch of defines...

#define is ==
#define lt <
#define gt >
#define ne !=
#define or ||
#define and &&
#define shiftl <<
#define shiftr >>

Blech. IYWPYKWTFI.

Richard

 

[Richard Bos]

That will make your code difficult to read.

So will the usual reversed-operand trick. The easy solution is learning
to pay attention.

Richard

 

[dot]

We were just discussing how bad your coding style is.
It's very bad.

And exactly when have you seen my source code?

Only an idiot pronounces judgement without evidence.

 

[pete]

And exactly when have you seen my source code?

I believe it was 2 April 2005. It looked like this:

Only an idiot pronounces judgement without evidence.

I don't see how that's relevant.

 

[CBFalconer]

And exactly when have you seen my source code?
Only an idiot pronounces judgement without evidence.

The following appeared in this thread earlier. Are we to conclude
they were either forged or the words of an idiot? They do seem to
describe some idiots programming style. They were combined with a
recommendation that legitimate C statements be flagged as syntax
errors.

 

[Keith Thompson]

So will the usual reversed-operand trick. The easy solution is learning
to pay attention.

I agree, but there are enough competent programmers who use the
reversed-operand trick, and who actually like it, that the rest of us
just have to learn to read it, even if we'd never write it.

 

[dot]

I believe it was 2 April 2005. It looked like this:

Ok, now I see... you're just an idiot looking for a fight.

 

[Christopher Benson-Manica]

(e-mail address removed) spoke thus:

Ok, now I see... you're just an idiot looking for a fight.

My sentiments exactly...

*plonk*

 

[Chris Croughton]

Given that in my learning phase this cut the number of errors I was making
to less than a third... not useless.

I remember many years ago some education theorists brought out the
Initial Teaching Alphabet, which was basically English spelt
phonetically. It was designed to make learning to write easier -- and
it worked, children who learnt ITA indeed made fewer mistakes and found
it easier.

There were just a few problems:

Other people couldn't understand ITA.
The children couldn't understand ordinary written English.
A large proportion of the children /never/ learnt ordinary English
spellings, they were fine at their own version but not at the "real
world" one.

Lately I don't use them all that much ... you see I'm learning... eventually
I'll most likely abandon them altogether.

Well, it depends why you are bothering to learn C. If it's only a
hobby, and you never need to understand what anyone else writes and they
never need to understand you, then that's fine, write in any language
you like (including ones you invent). But if you ever want to come out
into the real world and talk with the grown-ups, you need to bite the
bullet and learn the real language.

Chris C

 

[Keith Thompson]

Ok, now I see... you're just an idiot looking for a fight.

"dot": You are overreacting. I suggest we all drop this current
discussion and go back to talking about C, and I suggest that everyone
else refrain from responding to what might be perceived as trollish
behavior on dot's part. We don't need yet another interminable
argument about nothing in particular.

I'm not optimistic that my attempt to end this will be successful, but
I'm prepared to be pleasantly surprised.

 

[Mark McIntyre]

Well, except for you and Falconer who seem mostly concerned with litigating
a case against every posting that doesn't fit your ideal guidelines.

Actually CBF and Keith mostly help people round here. True, they can
sometimes be grumpy with persistently idiotic posters, but so can we
all. And a top tip: its a bad plan to start a fight with the regulars,
you find you get less help from them afterwards.

Really... It's effing amazing to watch the self-appointed group leaders on
Usenet litigate their way to dominance and control, mostly by nitpicking
posts and defaming participants.

There /.are/ no group leaders. Those who comment authoratively do so
by reason of being experienced and having knowledge.

I came here to discuss C ... so far I've been ruled off topic, ordered out
of the group, lectured about etiquette and now subjected to micro-analysis
of my ever word.

Then why not learn from your mistakes, stop posting offtopic, stop
being rude, and stop pushing your micro-style on everyone else?

What's next? Bamboo under my toenails?

Code review.

 

[Mark McIntyre]

And exactly when have you seen my source code?

Just what you've posted. And its bad. If there's better, please post
some of it so we may judge again

Only an idiot pronounces judgement without evidence.

Fatuous, but it is true that only an idiot expects to be treated with
consideration after hurling insults and invective.

 

[dot]

Well, it depends why you are bothering to learn C.

I already explained that.

If it's only a
hobby, and you never need to understand what anyone else writes and they
never need to understand you, then that's fine, write in any language
you like (including ones you invent).

Exactly... whatever gives me working code is what I will do.

But if you ever want to come out
into the real world and talk with the grown-ups, you need to bite the
bullet and learn the real language.

Ohhh... bad assumption. I've never said I wasn't about to learn C. I
merely talked about a learning tool I used while getting used to C... a
means of avoiding a lot of mistakes until I got my head around other parts
of the language. If you would take the time to read what I actually wrote,
you would see that *twice now* I've pointed out that my little "easy header"
was a learning tool that I don't use much anymore...

Now what part of "don't use much anymore" don't you understand?

 

[dot]

I'm not optimistic that my attempt to end this will be successful, but
I'm prepared to be pleasantly surprised.

Hey, I'll even make it easy... I can leave. I don't need this place. I
just thought it might be nice to chat about things.

C'ya!

 

[Mark McIntyre]

Ohhh... bad assumption. I've never said I wasn't about to learn C.

Then I think the consensus recommendation is to *learn* it, rather
than trying to make it into something its not, because either you
don't like or don't understand how it works.

you would see that *twice now* I've pointed out that my little "easy header"
was a learning tool that I don't use much anymore...

good. Perhaps you should have mentioned that at the outset, or said it
louder later on, but these things happen.

Now what part of "don't use much anymore" don't you understand?

The part where you didn't say that in any post I've seen (till this
one)

 

[Christopher Benson-Manica]

The part where you didn't say that in any post I've seen (till this
one)

In his defense, he did say it, although I couldn't tell you in which
post.

 

[dot]

Then I think the consensus recommendation is to *learn* it, rather
than trying to make it into something its not, because either you
don't like or don't understand how it works.

And you got a complete critique of my competence from a simple #define
showing a way to avoid beginner's mistakes?

WOW... now THAT is impressive. Can I borrow your crystal ball sometime?

 

[Mark McIntyre]

And you got a complete critique of my competence from a simple #define
showing a way to avoid beginner's mistakes?

no, from a combination of your initial posting, your belligerent
defense of it in the face of almost universal criticism, your
insistence that certain things should be errors which plainly should
not be, your insistence that its a way to avoid beginners mistakes and
so forth.

WOW... now THAT is impressive. Can I borrow your crystal ball sometime?

Certainly.