Advacnced C

[Kenny McCormack]

....

Anyone else thinking that Thomson and Heathfield are playing good-cop
bad-cop with Jacob here? Either way, this last comment is horribly
patronizing.

Indeed. And yet it is so well crafted that, if you didn't know better,
you might think he was being sincere. And, in his head, he might be,
showing just how totally out of touch with reality Kiki is. I think he
honestly doesn't know the meaning of the word "patronizing". It's just
completely outside his sphere of reference.

 

[jacob navia]

Flash Gordon a écrit :

You provide no context for this quote, no subject line, no message ID
thus making it very hard for anyone to find the context. It could easily
be in response to you making posts of the type I described, rather than
making reasonable

Heathfield post:
http://www.archivum.info/comp.lang.c/2007-09/00066/Re:_Porting_C_software

Look at the thread around it...

And that was just one I took from a stupid google search...

 

[Flash Gordon]

Flash Gordon a écrit :


Heathfield post:
http://www.archivum.info/comp.lang.c/2007-09/00066/Re:_Porting_C_software

Look at the thread around it...

Yes, I've looked. Someone was caught out when trying to port code
written using your extensions. No one said it was inappropriate for you
to mention the Linux version of your compiler. There were definitely
negative comments about your compiler, but not about you mentioning it.

After a lot of discussion about operator overloading, Richard Heithfield
politely asked Ian to take the discussion somewhere it was topical.

Francine's comment does not seem to be appropriate in the context I can
find, but you were not complained at for initially mentioning your
compiler, you were complained at after a long thread discussion your
extensions.

And that was just one I took from a stupid google search...

Well, as I said, there have been a lot of criticisms about things you
have written, but that is NOT the same as saying you should not mention
your compiler when appropriate.