I need help please!

[Kenny McCormack]

You really have become another one of the pedantic arseholes who ruin
this group.

He has always been.

Why did you snip Jacob's pertinent points?

See above.

 

[Kenny McCormack]

jacob navia said:



When your standard debating technique is to insult your opponent, it must
be difficult for anyone to take you seriously.

Has it ever occurred to you to consider that the people you attack so
loudly might just know what they're talking about, and might just have a
reasonable point?

Considered, yes. Rejected, along with flat earth, geocentric universe,
alchemy, and most of the teachings of the Christian church.

All worthy of consideration, yes. All bunk as well.

 

[Kenny McCormack]

<shrug> That's merely my opinion. C99 is obviously topical here.

This is certainly true. However, not everyone agrees. In fact, even if
you grant all the silly assumptions and rules that are necessary in
order to post here, the fact remains that if you post something that
uses a C99 feature (e.g., VLAs) and fail to make copious assertions to
the effect that this is a "C99 only feature" and "not C89, etc, etc",
some twit will nitpick your post to that effect.

Even though C99 *is* the current standard. This fits in very well with
my general observation about religiosity in this NG - the obsession with
outdated texts.

....

So do I. And if I identify an area where C can improve, I'll raise the
matter in comp.std.c.

You need to go back and check your catechism. csc is for discussion of
the standards document(s) as written - i.e., things like "What does the
word shall on page 73, paragraph 7, sentence 2, mean?".

Jacob's criticism stands.

Rest of drivel deleted.

 

[Kenny McCormack]

The C language, for one. Manners, for two.

PKB. On all counts.

(heh heh - CBF of all people critiquing other people's manners...)

 

[Richard]

This is certainly true. However, not everyone agrees. In fact, even if
you grant all the silly assumptions and rules that are necessary in
order to post here, the fact remains that if you post something that
uses a C99 feature (e.g., VLAs) and fail to make copious assertions to
the effect that this is a "C99 only feature" and "not C89, etc, etc",
some twit will nitpick your post to that effect.

Even though C99 *is* the current standard. This fits in very well with
my general observation about religiosity in this NG - the obsession with
outdated texts.

...

You need to go back and check your catechism. csc is for discussion of
the standards document(s) as written - i.e., things like "What does the
word shall on page 73, paragraph 7, sentence 2, mean?".

It is? Shitola. I thought, from reading a few posts here, that that was
what c.l.c is for.

 

[Kenny McCormack]

My solution to the problem you posed is as correct as
Smullyan's recipe -- and equally useful. It solves the problem
you stated, while demonstrating that solving it is useless.
Didn't you notice that little drawback?

"Be careful what you ask for" may be the most important
maxim of the programmer's trade.

Don't be a prick is probably right up there as well.

 

[Kenny McCormack]

Ever heard that stereotypes are generally both insulting and wrong?

No. Stereotypes are generally (though not always) right. That's how
they get to be stereotypes.

 

[Bill Reid]

Do not get upset Bill.

I'm not upset.

Just read the thread I started with

"BUNCH OF PEDANTS"!

Too boring (unsurprisingly, given the subject!). I like learning
new things, trolls you will always have with ye...

These guys are just like predators.

They sense when somebody is not a member of their club and
will start laughing and making fun of him forever.

Little things for little minds. Though I've speculated this is
fear-driven behavior, considering first-world "professional programmers"
have been at and over the edge of having to learn a new job skill
in the last few years: "Would you like fries with that?"

 

[Kenny McCormack]

Thanks for the confirmation that you're just a worthless troll...

Did you need any?

 

[Bill Reid]

Oh, well, it's a slow religious holiday, just did my work-out,
I'll cool down by playing with the trolls; some of the following
IS actually funny, and you make me laugh, I'm yours
forever...and ever...and ever...

Bill Reid wrote, On 20/03/08 01:57:

Oh God, what did I say about this NEVER ends...

Bill Reid wrote, On 12/03/08 14:49:
Bill Reid wrote, On 12/03/08 01:54:
Bill Reid wrote:
Bill Reid wrote:
[...]
"Is it possible to write a totally 'portable'
function that will consume ALL the characters left in the standard
input
regardless of platform?"
Yes, barring I/O errors that disrupt the flow of control.

#include <stdio.h>
void eat_stdin(void) {
for (;;getchar());
}
Exactly, some code to that effect, I thought everybody knew this...so
why is it news to all the other posters to this thread but you and me?
If you know how to do the job correctly in one line then you have even
less excuse for posting a non-portable solution.
You trolls really need to coordinate your efforts better...you've got
about three different and mutually exclusive threads of insane troll
logic going here...the above is the "joke troll", and another troll is
now actually ENDORSING fflush(stdin)!!!
Your inability to understand the issues people point out does not make
the logic insane. Your claiming that everyone that disagrees with you is
a troll does not help your arguments.

Where have I displayed an "inability to understand the issues"?

Each time you have denied that they are real issues.

Panhandling the question? A solipistic soliloquey?

Ah, but it is only functional on your specific implementation, not
functional in general. Another example of you demonstrating a failure to
understand the issues.

Where did I say that the code was completely "portable" and
handled all possible error conditions for all possible uses on all
possible systems for all possible levels of idiotic users? Don't reply
until you find it, just keep looking and looking and looking...

And an example of your arrogance.

You embiggen me with your ignorance.

No, different people thing about and raise different issues. That is
human nature.

Yup, everything about this thread is "human nature", you got
that much right...my problem is that I approach technical issues
with logic, not emotion...

Thus showing again that you do not understand the issues.

Yup, if I disagree with you on anything, post anything you
find threatening, then I must not "understand the issues"...brilliant,
tell me, have you ever managed to catch your own tail, Fido?

Not all newbies are developing for the same platform as you. We have
seen people doing courses using Linux (where your code does not work)
and old versions of Turbo C (where you have probably not tested your
solution).

What's your point? MY point was about being INSULTING and
NON-INFORMATIVE, like "troll zero"...you seem to have major
problems making simple logical distinctions between different
forms of behavior and communication, though I've schooled you
on the topic multiple times. That's why I conclude with GOOD
evidence that you're a FRIGGIN' RETARD...unless you just
want to admit you're putting me on and just trolling...but
you CAN'T have it both ways...

if(yn_input[string_size-1]!='\n') {

fflush(stdin);
goto ReTry;
}

Which is an effective work-alike to:

if(yn_input[string_size-1]!='\n') {

while(getchar()!='\n') ;
goto ReTry;
}

Will that work, or is it too "platform-specific"?
Well, the second case definitely won't flush everything from the input
buffers for standard input on some systems (the buffers, which include
OS buffers, could have more than one line in it on some systems under
some conditions), but it is more likely to meet the real requirements
rather than the stated objective of flushing the buffer.
Well, semantics again, a real problem that I'm willing to let slide,
I wasn't talking about flushing a "buffer", just getting rid of any
unconsumed
characters input by the user.
The buffers I mentioned are where that input is stored. So substitute
"unconsumed characters input by the user" for "buffers" and it still
applies.

OK, then I'll just use fflush(stdin) because that has a shot of
working to YOUR specification on MY system, your anal-retentive
highness.

It was *your* stated requirement, not mine.

Good, so you admit that I wrote code that conforms to a requirement,
like a functional specification. Hell, what a beautiful world it would be
if that happened in "real life" more often...

I have no problem with you using anything you want in your own
unpublished code. If you publish code here using fflush(stdin) with it
marked as non-portable and what you expect it to do I also am unlikely
to comment on it.

I've made that comment before and didn't do it in this case. I feel
fairly confident that somebody else will do so, and if they do so in
an informative and helpful manner then that does NOT constitute
"trolling".

But that's not what happened (and continues to happen) here, now
is it? Again, if you behave like a troll, I'm gonna correctly call you a
troll, if you don't want to be called a troll, DROP THE TROLL
BEHAVIOR.

Simple enough?

Yet you show a lack of knowledge about the problems of real world
computing beyond your own system.

TROLL BEHAVIOR ALERT!

I have time to use Usenet because I am have demonstrated to my bosses
that I am knowledgeable, a fast learner, and able to do the jobs well
enough and fast enough.

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

This is where the troll gets funny! Who do you think you're kidding,
troll?!??!! EVERYTHING YOU'VE DONE IN THIS THREAD LEADS
ME TO BELIEVE YOU A LOW-LIFE THIEF OF OTHER PEOPLE'S
WORK, WHICH YOU CRITICIZE FOR NO REASON, THEN CLAIM
AS YOUR OWN AFTER DUPING YOUR BOSS THAT YOU NEED
TO "CORRECT" IT.

Every piece of behavior you so effortlessly display here would
be part of your "coping strategy" of keeping a job while having
no apparent job skills...you just wait for somebody to actually
do something, go beserk in "code review", and constantly
boast at the top of your lungs about how you're so friggin'
valuable because of your ability to criticize others.

In other words, there's a good possibility you're just a useless
fake creep...

You posting non-portable code for others to use and insisting that is
not clearly marked as such for the use of people who will not have the
experience to recognise it as such.

See above...you've got life-long behavior patterns coming into
play here, don't you? I haven't "insisted" on ANYTHING here
except CLEAR and HELPFUL communication, you're the friggin'
fascist creep who is screaming about what people should and
should not do.

Well, up above you said it took you two hours the first time.

Another job for you, find where I said it took me "two hours to
write code to consume characters"...don't bother to reply until
you find it, you "valuable" employee, you.

You lie about other people a lot, don't you?

Where as
it took me less than 5 minutes (I don't bother keeping track of how long
simple jobs take so I don't know how much less).

Probably somebody else wrote it...ever actually write code yourself,
fake-o?

Ah, so people well paid for there experience knowledge and skills are
not smart enough.

Well, yeah, and I'm including the former executives of Enron
in that group, as well as lower-level abusive fakes like you...

That would explain why there are aircraft flying around with a lot of my
code in it,

I KNEW I MADE THE RIGHT DECISION TO STOP FLYING AS
MUCH AS POSSIBLE A FEW YEARS AGO!!!

But truthfully, was it YOUR code or code you "stole" from
somebody else after you ran your big fat lying mouth about
how if it used fflush(stdin) EVERY PLANE IN THE WORLD
WOULD SIMULTANEOUSLY FALL FROM THE SKY!!!!!!

why my code has helped win large bids (including against
companies like Boeing), why my code is being used by large companies to
interface different systems etc.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...wake me when your boring
(and perhaps fantasy) resume is done...

I don't, I just do it correctly because my boss expects it to be done
correctly.

Ever criticize a co-worker?

Fortunately my boss does not insist on non-portable and/or
incorrect solutions being used or on ignoring error conditions.

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Now I KNOW you're a liar! Come on, in what fantasy world
are ALL bosses not clueless and occasionally "demand" pure
crap be "released" just to look good on a schedule?

In fact,
the putting in of traps for things people consider impossible has on a
number of occasions saved a lot of work and made us look good to the
customer, because those traps were triggered and the software either
handled it correctly or correctly reported what the problem was.

I like the word "us" above, keep up the "team work"...

I kept being asked about whether my software was Y2K compliant, the
answer was yes.

Wrong answer!!! What were trying to do, collapse the economy?

However, I did have to tell them that the OS on one of
the systems would have problems in 2028.

Yeah, this is true, but a "Y2028" bug just isn't all that "catchy"...

My own personal time-date library will run into problems in the
year 4096 or something like that, but I intend to die in 4095 and
let somebody else worry about it...

So I would say that real
programmers in 1996 were designing and implementing their systems so
that they would correctly handle Y2K, which for some systems can be done
with a 2 digit year (well, some of my software would fail if you put it
in a time machine and took it back to some time in the 1800's, but that
is unlikely enough not to worry about).

YOU ROTTEN STINKING HYPOCRITICAL BASTARD!!!

How DARE you post any of your worthless code that doesn't handle
dates in the 1800s? My brilliant software goes back the birth of Jesus
Christ, and I use dates in my programs going back to the 1800s and
earlier EVERY SINGLE DAY!!! Your crap-ware would be WORTHLESS
to ME, it fails to meet MY requirements, NEVER POST ANYTHING
HERE AGAIN!!!

People who were doing what you
describe after being made aware of the problem were people who should
not be working in IT.

Everybody who EVER wrote a Y2K non-compliant program knew
EXACTLY what the problem was WHEN THEY WROTE THE PROGRAM,
and they constitute the vast majority of "professional programmers"
IN EXISTENCE.

So you're in good company, member in good standing of the
"programmer's union"...

When it was pointed out that fflush(stdin) is non-portable you claimed
that it works and the portability problem 'ONLY EXISTS ON THIS NEWSGROUP
AND NOT IN "REAL LIFE"...'. Making claims like that in a maner generally
considered to be the equivalent of arguing certainly seems like arguing
to me.

Nope, that's not what I said, you're lying again...

You still fail to understand that posting code here in answer to a
question is *not* posting code for your limited purposes. At least, not
unless your purpose is to provide bad advice.

You're pathological...and a fascist...

You actually stated:
| For the "console" application, the code performs all possible error
| checking for fat-fingered idiotic input, and keeps prompting the user
| until it gets either 'y' or 'n', which it then returns to the calling
| function

This is clearly incorrect since you did not check for EOF which *can* be
generated in various ways.

OK, I shouldn't have used the word "all", I should have said "almost
all", so sue me. But the input that was proposed as exceptions to
"all" were so inane and insane and unlikely and pointless as to be
proof-positive of trolling behavior...

Only for your very limited usage. However for your limited usage it does
not have to be posted here.

Fascist. I won't even bring the hypocrisy and idiocy inherent in
that statement as well...whoops, I just did...

Well, as you don't want to address the requirements of anyone else why
post an answer? After all, to sensibly help someone with their code it
is *their* requirements not yours that matter.

I just called a troll a "troll"...it is a definite help for "newbies" to
know when they're being trolled...

No, you are here.

The "I am rubber, you are glue" logical fallacy...

You are also failing to address the point above that
failure *do* happen in real life on stdin.

Why should I address it? How should I address it?
Do you have an address for it, should I call it "Mr. (or Mrs.)
Standard Input Failure"?

No, what you are doing is applying arrogance and trolling behaviour.

"What you throw at me bounces off..."

Possibly you are doing this to try and hide the fact that your program
was erroneous

Yes, I am involved in a giant conspiracy to conceal the erroneousitude
of my program...

(the OP did not state the platform, so the only correct
answer would be one that was not platform dependant in undocumented ways).

Which of course is impossible, according to the trolls, so let's just
shut the whole group down (I'm for it!)...

You still don't know if it occurs in the OPs real life.

I know he's beset by trolls...

Some people do
learn programming on remote systems. Some people test interactive code
by piping in files to stdin (it makes it easy to replicate the test).

Yup, I've done that. I'm gonna tell you again, you keep talking like
an idiot, I'm just gonna assume you is one...

The OP could be tripped up by either quite easily.

OK, you're a moron...

Some instructors also
read the code to see if it has been properly written, and the OP could
fall foul of that as well.

Yeah, this WAS a homework problem originally, but I cautioned
him in the opposite fashion, that if he turned in my code, his teacher
would know he cheated, because it was so friggin' brilliant...

So your code was certainly not suitable for
the OP to use.

Precisely what I said in my post!!! Congratulations, you're a
total mongoloid!!!

No, a problem was pointed out and you claimed it was trolling, just as
you seem to claim every problem pointed out was a troll.

Nope, that's not what I said, and that's not what happened...

It would be appropriate. So would a number of other terms.

How about "cruddy"? You don't really hear the word "cruddy"
much these days, funny how the language changes...

So now you are insulting people for pointing out bad style in your code,
style likely to get points knocked off if it is handed in as homework.

Man, you must have spent HOURS on the bowl as a toddler...

Yes, for a start instructors knock off marks for bad coding style.

What makes you such a friggin' expert on the instructor's
"coding style"? Now we have to psychically divine that the
instructor is an effed-up feces-keeper too...

Then
there are the reviews at work that would reject it.

So you could then steal it and call it your own!

Then there is the
maintenance programmer who has to try and decipher needlessly complex

code.

My, what was it, about 12 lines? Too much for you, Spanky?

Now you are putting words in my mouth as well. I stated that it was the
use of goto to implement a retry use, not the use of goto in all

situations.

Just make sure you enforce this crap-holding "rule" rigorously
for all posts you read in this group, because I hate being "singled
out"...

Ah, so you want code that hangs instead of doing anything useful.

Just like when somebody makes the mistake of hiring you. They
must just want somebody who hangs around and criticizes others and
doesn't do anything useful...

You're not an employee, you're a "feature"...

Or,
more likely, you failed to see the deliberate problem in the code and
are trying to pretend that you did.

What, me fake it?

Well, at least we have an admission you are trolling.

When in Rome...

Now actually address the point rather than making obviously stupid
remarks. Unless you really are so stupid you think that Jurassic Park
was a documentary.

The hell you say!!!

Oh, BTW:

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

(you made me laugh again)

You being needlessly insulting probably in an attempt to draw attention
away from the glaring problems in code you posted.

YOU DID IT AGAIN!!! BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

I think you have demonstrated clearly to any newbie who stumbles across
this thread that you don't understand the issues, don't know how to
write code that would be acceptable on a programming course or in most
companies, and can't take any criticism of your work.

Yup, you "proved" it allright...just like you "proved" your imaginary
"worth" to your boss...

Thread-Plonk

Declare victory by running away!!!

Is this "Comic Book Guy" or just a think-alike?