what parallel C language does MIPS Pro C Compiler support?

[Kenny McCormack]

How about you just bugger off?

Pardon me, but if my memory serves...

Hmmm, let me think...

Yes, indeed. I do believe, yes I do, that 'twas you who was complaining
about Jordan's use of a non-profanity somewhat earlier on.

And yet, here's you, bringing anal sex into it...

 

[Kenny McCormack]

It will astound you to realise that 90% of most programmes doesn't
need to access the hardware at all.

We all realize that 92.7% of all statistics are made up.
Do you?

 

[Richard Heathfield]

Chris Torek said:

The cost, here in comp.lang.c, is obvious: a program that calls
adjSysIntObjPriority() will not even compile.

itym it won't *link*.

 

[Richard Heathfield]

jacob navia said:

Look:

You do not use directories in your programs?

Sometimes the platform I'm using doesn't even *have* directories, but has
instead a completely different method for file organisation. But sometimes
I do use directories, yes. When I do so, I am incurring a portability cost,
and I don't like doing that because it means more work down the line later
on, so I do it as little as possible. It's a cost.

You always work in the current directory?

Like I said, the concept of "current directory" is foreign to some
platforms.

Because that is not covered by standard C.

Stop. Think. Do you really believe I didn't know that?

You never do any other output to the screen but using printf/fwrite???

I don't use printf or fwrite to output to the screen. I use them to write to
streams. When I do output to the screen, it's a cost, because it means I'll
have to port the code later.

And so on and so on.

*ANY* useful program that DOES something MUST use the underlying OS in
some way or another.

Gosh. I'd better tell all those customers that the many thousands of lines
of code I've written for them over the years, which they've been using (in
some cases) for well over a decade, and for which they paid me quite a lot
of money, is in fact useless because it is written in ISO C. I'll tell 'em
you sent me, shall I?

 

[Richard Heathfield]

Mark McIntyre said:

Don't be an idiot.

You missed the joke, Mark.

I suggest, by the way, that you lighten up. Jordan may be new to the group,
but he's clearly not stupid and he's clearly not a troll. (Having said
that, I would suggest to Jordan that he too, could lighten up!)

 

[Richard Heathfield]

Mark McIntyre said:

How about subject flags

How about you just [expletive deleted]?

Mark - could you please moderate your language? My kids read this stuff.

 

[Dik T. Winter]

>
> No. C99 specified that the default value of main() is zero.
> Crazy isn't it?
>
> But it is standard C.

You know the distinction between C89 and C99?

 

[Mark McIntyre]

"bullying"?

Thats how it feels to me. You posted, got some answers, persisted, got
more answers, wanted to force a vote, got more answers.

All I did was question whether non-ISO-strict-c89-pure code was really
off-topic, as people claim. I've since dropped the subject, but now you
had to make it personal.

Your decision to drop it was seen by me after the above post.

I'm perfectly happy to apologise to you. Sorry.

On the other hand, I do now regard your posts with considerably more
suspicion than before, and will be much more inclined to jump down
your throat without cause. I suspect you're damaged your reputation
here.

 

[Mark McIntyre]

Mark McIntyre said:


You missed the joke, Mark.

Seems to me he wasnt making one. ICBW. Did he add a smiley that I
missed?

I suggest, by the way, that you lighten up.

I'm an astronomer, we hate when people lighten "up", its where we
want to point our scopes...

gd&r

 

[Mark McIntyre]

Mark McIntyre said:

How about subject flags

How about you just [expletive deleted]?

Mark - could you please moderate your language? My kids read this stuff.

Sorry, but frankly they'll have read much worse already, trust me.
Plus there's no way you should allow kids below the age of 14 near
usenet.

 

[Mark McIntyre]

What filenames, other than those returned by tmpnam(), does the standard
guarantee refer to accessible files?

Why should it have to guarantee any specific names? This isn't
necessary.

You seem to have decided you don't like me,

Incorrect - you I have no opinion on, I've never even met you. What I
don't like is your annoying persistence in flogging a dead horse, long
after everyone else has pretty much dissed the idea.

based on a week-long
conversation that you walked in on the end of

Actually I followed it from the beginning. I didn't respond at all at
first, because I assumed you'd take in what was being said to you and
I really find such threads tedious. Then I tried posting polite
responses. Then, when you showed zero ability to listen to others, I
got mad and started posting less polite messages, plus an occasional
burst of "smart ass quips".

and decided to respond
with smart-ass quips to every single one of my messages, even though i
had since changed my position.

Recall that usenet is not a synchronous medium. Your decision to drop
the thread arrived LONG after I saw most of your other posts .

You will need a much thicker skin.

 

[Michael Mair]

Thats how it feels to me. You posted, got some answers, persisted, got
more answers, wanted to force a vote, got more answers.

Hmmm, the tone and language you resorted to felt more like
bullying to me than Jordan's persistence.

Your decision to drop it was seen by me after the above post.

I'm perfectly happy to apologise to you. Sorry.

On the other hand, I do now regard your posts with considerably more
suspicion than before, and will be much more inclined to jump down
your throat without cause. I suspect you're damaged your reputation
here.

Considering that many people who are by now regular
participants ran into the "is topicality to be held up at
any cost" or the "do clc regulars have to be so grumpy when
responding to off-topic qestions or FAQ" discussion at some
point and that they are now contributing in ways benefiting
the newsgroup, I'd say this verdict is premature.

FTR, I do not share Jordan's opinion.


Cheers
Michael

 

[Mark McIntyre]

On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 00:59:43 +0000 (UTC), in comp.lang.c , Jordan Abe

From what does your authority to start bullying everyone derive

"bullying"

Thats how it feels to me. You posted, got some answers, persisted, go
more answers, wanted to force a vote, got more answers.

All I did was question whether non-ISO-strict-c89-pure code wa reall
off-topic, as people claim. I've since dropped the subject, but no yo
had to make it personal

Your decision to drop it was seen by me after the above post.

I'm perfectly happy to apologise to you. Sorry.

On the other hand, I do now regard your posts with considerably mor
suspicion than before, and will be much more inclined to jump dow
your throat without cause. I suspect you're damaged your reputatio
here.
--
Mark McIntyr
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
CLC readme: <http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usene
News==---
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World
120,000+ Newsgroup
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryptio
=---

 

[Richard Heathfield]

Mark McIntyre said:

Seems to me he wasnt making one.

Yeah, that's what I figured - you missed the joke.

ICBW. Did he add a smiley that I missed?

As far as I know, there is no requirement in this newsgroup that all jokes
must be flagged by smileys. Such a joke would not be strictly conforming,
but would almost certainly be acceptable to a considerable number of people
and could, therefore, be considered conforming at least. Certainly the
absence of a smiley is not a syntax error or a constraint violation, and
therefore doesn't require a diagnostic.

 

[Richard Heathfield]

Mark McIntyre said:

Mark McIntyre said:

How about you just [expletive deleted]?

Mark - could you please moderate your language? My kids read this stuff.

Sorry, but frankly they'll have read much worse already, trust me.
Plus there's no way you should allow kids below the age of 14 near
usenet.

We could fight about this for a bit, but there's no point. I asked you
nicely. I could have just killfiled you instead. If I do killfile you, you
will lose the opportunity to learn from my corrections to your incorrect
statements, and I will lose the opportunity to learn from your corrections
to my incorrect statements. So we will both come out worse off than before.
If that is the price of eliminating one source of expletives from my
newsfeed, it is a price I would not hesitate to pay.

 

[Mark B]

Mark McIntyre said:

Mark McIntyre said:

How about you just [expletive deleted]?

Mark - could you please moderate your language? My kids read this stuff.

Sorry, but frankly they'll have read much worse already, trust me.
Plus there's no way you should allow kids below the age of 14 near
usenet.

We could fight about this for a bit, but there's no point. I asked you
nicely. I could have just killfiled you instead. If I do killfile you, you
will lose the opportunity to learn from my corrections to your incorrect
statements, and I will lose the opportunity to learn from your corrections
to my incorrect statements. So we will both come out worse off than
before.
If that is the price of eliminating one source of expletives from my
newsfeed, it is a price I would not hesitate to pay.

Looking back to see what was said I'm surprised there is an issue...
if I heard one of my kids (ages 11 && 6) say [expletive deleted] I would
probably laugh... it sounds like a nice (childs) way of telling someone to
.... well, you know. Don't you brits use the 'F' bomb as well? Or is what
was posted the UK equivalent of the 'F' bomb in the states?

 

[Kenny McCormack]

Looking back to see what was said I'm surprised there is an issue...
if I heard one of my kids (ages 11 && 6) say [expletive deleted] I would
probably laugh... it sounds like a nice (childs) way of telling someone to
... well, you know. Don't you brits use the 'F' bomb as well? Or is what
was posted the UK equivalent of the 'F' bomb in the states?

To be fair, this (the 'b word') is a clear cut example of something that
considered normal/jocular in the UK, but is obscene in the states. I'm
sure there are examples in the other direction, but I can't give one now.

Normally, this would all be "no big deal", but what makes it so
funny/ironic is the fact that the idiot McIntyre is the one who first got
huffy about someone using a (slightly) off-color word. Then, he goes ahead
and does a lot worse. Funny.

 

[Jordan Abel]

Why should it have to guarantee any specific names? This isn't
necessary.

My point was there is no string "str" for which a strictly conforming
program can execute the statement fopen("str","w"). This is all I
intended by the original statement that you flagged as being 'wrong'.

Actually I followed it from the beginning. I didn't respond at all at
first, because I assumed you'd take in what was being said to you and
I really find such threads tedious. Then I tried posting polite
responses. Then, when you showed zero ability to listen to others, I
got mad and started posting less polite messages, plus an occasional
burst of "smart ass quips".

Oh. Nearly all your messages arrived at the same time for me. [I assume
this is the same reason you didn't get my statement that i'd dropped the
matter until after you'd posted them.] This left me feeling a bit
overwhelmed by the sheer number of responses, and I guess, not being
quite as familiar with usenet as you, I made the unwarrant assumption
that they were the product of an hour or so spent responding to every
single one of them [particularly since many of your responses didn't
seem like much time had been spent on them]. I'm sorry for my
misinterpretation.

 

[Richard Heathfield]

Jordan Abel said:

My point was there is no string "str" for which a strictly conforming
program can execute the statement fopen("str","w").

True enough. Nevertheless, we can shift the onus onto the user, with
fopen(filename, "w") - problem solved!

 

[Mark McIntyre]

We could fight about this for a bit, but there's no point. I asked you
nicely.

Indeed you did.

I could have just killfiled you instead.

indeed you can.

If that is the price of eliminating one source of expletives from my
newsfeed, it is a price I would not hesitate to pay.

No offense, but I have to say that the expletive I used is a ludicrous
one to get worked up about, and one needs to take great care not to
take righteous indignation at offense to one's sense of morality too
far. There are other codes of morality, other levels of offense which
differ from your own. You cannot expect the entire of usenet to fit
in with your code.

I work in the City where as I'm sure you're aware its commonplace for
traders to call their brokers the sort of thing that'd make a
boilermaker wince. The word I used earlier is one that is so
inoffensive in my line of work, and for that matter in my private
life, that its not even an expletive. One might casually say "its a
bit of a b***er isn't it?" referring to a bad footie result or having
to work late on a friday.

I fully appreciate you have a different moral code, and take offense
at such words. Thats unfortunate but this message *isn't* a private
email, nor is it a conversation in your house. Its a conversation in
the equivalent of a smoky pub, which you just happened to listen in
on. Would you actually tap someone on the shoulder in a pub or at the
railway station and tell them to mind their language? Perhaps you
would.

If, after all this, you choose to killfile me, thats your decision.
Frankly i'd consider it a shame. You may want to consider whether
you're doing precisely what I was doing earlier, vis overreacting.