Printing the last item of a structure twice

[Rafael Anschau]

"Well, if he _is_ talking to me" which is false, so anything based,
or "anded" from here is false. Boolean logic is fun, isn´t it ?

I just hate this interface.

 

[Keith Thompson]

"Well, if he _is_ talking to me" which is false, so anything based,
or "anded" from here is false. Boolean logic is fun, isn´t it ?

I just hate this interface.

The Google Groups interface, several years ago, had a bug that made it
relatively difficult to quote previous articles properly. That bug
was corrected.

If you post a followup, you should keep enough quoted material from
the parent article to provide context. Your failure to do so is
unlikely to be Google's fault.

 

[Keith Thompson]

The above was written by RjY <[email protected]>. Rafael, please don't delete
attribution lines for quoted text.

And please don't top-post. See the following for more information:
http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html
http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/topposting.php

A still better style is:

while (fread(&teu, sizeof teu, 1, fp)) {

printf(......);
}

since C considers any non-zero integer to be true, and 0 to be false.

Yes, it does, and your revised code is valid, but I fail to see how
it's better style.

For one thing, just because C allows you to omit an explicit
comparison doesn't mean it's a good idea. Opinions differ on this,
but personally I prefer to use an explicit comparison unless the value
being tested is "boolean". The value returned by fread is a count,
not a true/false status, so I find an explicit comparison clearer.

Second, you've changed the meaning of the code. This:
fread(...)
is true if fread returns any non-zero value, whereas this:
fread(...) == 1
is true only if fread returns 1. As it happens, fread with the value
1 as its third argument can only return 1, so it doesn't matter in
this case. But consider what would happen if, rather than fread, you
were using fscanf, which can return either the number of items scanned
(possibly 0) or EOF.

 

[Keith Thompson]

Dear Mr. James The Clown,

Thanks for your presentation, though I hope *you* have enough money
to support yourself as programmer, because you haven´t shown great
talent as an enterteiner. If this doesn´t work out, please don´t try
the circus or customers would leave it more depressed than they got
in.

[...]

Have you found that insulting the people you're asking for help is an
effective strategy?

 

[Rafael Anschau]

Please point out where I said google had a bug. And I don´t know why
you keep behaving from an authority position, so I may just toppost
again.

 

[Rafael Anschau]

Now you asked kindly, so I bothered to avoid it. I promise to think
about it.

 

[Rafael Anschau]

I realized there were noise creators in the group as well as well
intended people willing to help. I answered nicely to people willing
to help, and gave back what the obnoxious noise creators deserved.
After that, some of them became nice enough for me to change my
attitude.

 

[Default User]

Please point out where I said google had a bug. And I don´t know why
you keep behaving from an authority position, so I may just toppost
again.

Regretfully, I have decided that your posts will not be ones that I
care to read in the future. As such, I will be availing myself of my
newsreaders feature that allows it to igore posts that originate from
you.




Brian

 

[Rafael Anschau]

Is it a default procedure here to have a fake profile and using it
when all else fails ? I thought about having one but it´s such a
hassle.

 

[jameskuyper]

I realized there were noise creators in the group as well as well
intended people willing to help. I answered nicely to people willing
to help, and gave back what the obnoxious noise creators deserved.
After that, some of them became nice enough for me to change my
attitude.

What you call "noise" was also helpful, it just sounds like noise to
you. I didn't become any "nicer", as you consider it, your later
messages just gave me no reason to reiterate those "noisy" issues.
Don't worry - you won't have to worry about hearing any more noise
from me.

It helps drive away the ones he considers "noisy". He probably
considers that to be an advantage.

 

[Rafael Anschau]

I love you too James.

 

[Beej Jorgensen]

Assuming, of course, that C++'s feof() behaves the same as C's.

You're right that I did rather brazenly make that assumption, but only
because it seemed to be the only one that fit the facts of this
particular case.

-Beej

 

[Keith Thompson]

Please point out where I said google had a bug. And I don´t know why
you keep behaving from an authority position, so I may just toppost
again.

You didn't say Google had a bug. I did.

I'm not "behaving from an authority position", I'm offering advice.

Top-posting makes it more difficult to read your articles.
The guidelines we follow here are not arbitrary. If you want
to communicate, I suggest you make some effort. If you're not
interested in communicating, that's fine; several people have
killfiled you already, and others will likely follow suit.

You're new here. You apparently don't understand the culture
very well. I suggest you lurk for a while and find out how things
work before telling us that we're doing it wrong.

 

[Keith Thompson]

Now you asked kindly, so I bothered to avoid it. I promise to think
about it.

You're still top-posting, and you're still snipping attribution
lines. The Google Groups interface doesn't force this; you must
be doing it deliberately. Are you being deliberately obnoxious,
or is there some other reason?

 

[Nick Keighley]

Is it a default procedure here to have a fake profile and using it
when all else fails ? I thought about having one but it´s such a
hassle.

No. Most people post under their real names

 

[Rafael Anschau]

You're still top-posting, and you're still snipping attribution
lines.  The Google Groups interface doesn't force this; you must
be doing it deliberately.  Are you being deliberately obnoxious,
or is there some other reason?

Actualy, it´s in my blood as an old BBS user from a time when top
posting was considered good etiquete. I do it automaticaly and haven´t
adapted to the cultural shift where posting at the bottom was the next
good thing.

Rafael

 

[Kenny McCormack]

I'm glad to see you're now making an effort.

Awwww. Isn't that sweet?

(I'm quoting your
article in its entirety so that those who have already killfiled you
can see it.)

IOW, you (the master killfiler of all time...) are deliberately
sabotaging other people's killfiles.

 

[Rafael Anschau]

I'm glad to see you're now making an effort.  (I'm quoting your
article in its entirety so that those who have already killfiled you
can see it.)

Frankly, I am starting to like this killfiling thing. My life has been
more peaceful
ever since that started. But if they really want to read what I write,
oh well, what can I do ?

Rafael

 

[Rafael Anschau]

It has little to do with culture, and it isn't "post at the top" or
"post at the bottom" - it's "post in the right place", in ergonomic
terms.

Well, see some people just don´t care about the form of the
information, they
just care about the contents. To me, this is "culture of the
ergonomic"

Rafael

 

[Keith Thompson]

Well, see some people just don´t care about the form of the
information, they
just care about the contents. To me, this is "culture of the
ergonomic"

W ll, f y d n't c r b t th f rm f nf rm t n, j st ts
e i ou o a e a ou e o o i o a io u i
c nt nt, y w n't m nd th xtr ff rt r q r d t r d th s.
o e ou o i e e a e o e ui e o ea i

Translation:

Well, if you don't care about the form of information, just its
content, you won't mind the extra effort required to read this.

Form does matter. When I write something to be read by other
people, I consider it my responsibility to make whatever reasonable
effort is necessary to make it easy to read.

I recently gave you a couple of links regarding top-posting:
http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html
http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/topposting.php
Did you read them?