Interesting discussions

[Paul]

In response to my quotation form BS, re:
<quote ref=http://www2.research.att.com/~bs/glossary.html>
"char* - pointer to a char or an array of char."
</quote>


Many people have said this is sloppy, or innacurate or incorrect.

I wonder if those people would be so fast to raise their hand and question
BS in a lecture room. They would porbably sit quietly in the back and keep
hush, perhaps thinking to themsleves they secretly know he is incorrect ,
innaccurate or sloppy.

This is one good thing about the internet as it allows true freedom of
speech.
Personally I would question BS, in a respectfull way, if i thought his
terminology was innaccurate. I think many others would not for fear of
making themsleves appear foolish or fear of insulting him or something like
that.

Whether this is sloppy terminology or not is being discussed in other
threads, I just find it interesting to think what BS's response would be if
you suggested to him somthing like:

Hello Mr BS. Is that terminology correct or is it just a loose term that is
not really accurate in a techinical sense.

I think he would probably say something along the lines of ,,,, To be more
technically precise it points to an nth element of the array, but it does
also point to the array.

What are your views on what his reply might be to such a question being
raised in a lecture room?





B

 

[Goran]

In response to my quotation form BS, re:
<quote ref=http://www2.research.att.com/~bs/glossary.html>
"char* - pointer to a char or an array of char."
</quote>

Many people have said this is sloppy, or innacurate or incorrect.

I wonder if those people would be so fast to raise their hand and question
BS in a lecture room. They would porbably sit quietly in the back and keep
hush, perhaps thinking to themsleves they secretly know he is incorrect ,
innaccurate or sloppy.

This is one good thing about the internet as it allows true freedom of
speech.
Personally I would question BS, in a respectfull way, if i thought his
terminology was innaccurate. I think many others would not for fear of
making themsleves appear foolish or fear of insulting him or something like
that.

Whether this is sloppy terminology or not is being discussed in other
threads, I just find it interesting to think what BS's response would be if
you suggested to him somthing like:

Hello Mr BS. Is that terminology correct or is it just a loose term that is
not really accurate in a techinical sense.

I think he would probably say something along the lines of ,,,, To be more
technically precise it points to an nth element of the array, but it does
also point to the array.

What are your views on what his reply might be to such a question being
raised in a lecture room?

The guy being a true expert and having no ax to grind, I believe he
would agree without a blink. E.g. "Yeah, technically, T* is a pointer
to the first element of an array; but for expedience, we simply say
pointer to the array".

Why d'you ask, do you think he's stupid or something?

Goran.

P.S. could you please take some more care of your typing? In this post
only, you had e.g. innacurate - inaccurate, porbably - probably,
themsleves - themselves, somthing - something, techinical - technical.
English is my second/third language, and even I manage better than
you. Constantly failing to spell pretty common words correctly like
that doesn't help in taking you seriously.

 

[gwowen]

Question:

"char* - pointer to a char or an array of char."

Doesn't that mean the same as

"char* - an array of char or pointer to a char"?

Answer:
It might do, easily. It might also mean the same as
"char* - pointer to a char or pointer to an array of char"

When spoken, which alternative is meant may be clear from vocal
cadence. Written down, the grouping is ambiguous. Anyone trying to
draw unambigous conclusions from it is a fool.

 

[Ian Collins]

P.S. could you please take some more care of your typing? In this post
only, you had e.g. innacurate - inaccurate, porbably - probably,
themsleves - themselves, somthing - something, techinical - technical.
English is my second/third language, and even I manage better than
you. Constantly failing to spell pretty common words correctly like
that doesn't help in taking you seriously.

But it may explain his problems with reading comprehension.

 

[Paul]

In response to my quotation form BS, re:
<quote ref=http://www2.research.att.com/~bs/glossary.html>
"char* - pointer to a char or an array of char."
</quote>

Many people have said this is sloppy, or innacurate or incorrect.

I wonder if those people would be so fast to raise their hand and question
BS in a lecture room. They would porbably sit quietly in the back and keep
hush, perhaps thinking to themsleves they secretly know he is incorrect ,
innaccurate or sloppy.

This is one good thing about the internet as it allows true freedom of
speech.
Personally I would question BS, in a respectfull way, if i thought his
terminology was innaccurate. I think many others would not for fear of
making themsleves appear foolish or fear of insulting him or something
like
that.

Whether this is sloppy terminology or not is being discussed in other
threads, I just find it interesting to think what BS's response would be
if
you suggested to him somthing like:

Hello Mr BS. Is that terminology correct or is it just a loose term that
is
not really accurate in a techinical sense.

I think he would probably say something along the lines of ,,,, To be more
technically precise it points to an nth element of the array, but it does
also point to the array.

What are your views on what his reply might be to such a question being
raised in a lecture room?

The guy being a true expert and having no ax to grind, I believe he
would agree without a blink. E.g. "Yeah, technically, T* is a pointer
to the first element of an array; but for expedience, we simply say
pointer to the array".

Why d'you ask, do you think he's stupid or something?

Goran.

P.S. could you please take some more care of your typing? In this post
only, you had e.g. innacurate - inaccurate, porbably - probably,
themsleves - themselves, somthing - something, techinical - technical.
English is my second/third language, and even I manage better than
you. Constantly failing to spell pretty common words correctly like
that doesn't help in taking you seriously.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Thx yuor view is taken into consideation

DO you think I am astupid or you are stupid or BS is stupid or anyone is
stupid?
..

 

[Peter Remmers]

Am 19.04.2011 13:59, schrieb cg_chas:

[..]
Given the fictitious case of this being a lecure room, you must fancy yourself
as the lecturer which gives me my very first laugh of the day.

Who said Paul was the lecturer?

And whether or not you are the teacher in your scenario, I think some of "those
people" who analogously have "raised there hands" have also pointed out simply,

-----

Mr. "English was one of my majors, and now I need to lecture you on how
the english language works" does not get it right. Don't tell me it's a
typo. First I though you put it in quotes because Paul did not get it
right, but he did.

Good laugh.


Peter

 

[Peter Remmers]

Am 19.04.2011 14:01, schrieb cg_chas:

[..]

Perhaps a better question is, "If somebody "in the lecture room" asked a Yes or
No question, how many do you think would bother raising there hand and fail to

oops typo should say "their hand" (don't want to rouse the pedants)

Too late... Clicked the send button and then read this.

Such is life.

Anyway, It is hard to accept that this can actually be a typo.

Call me a pedant.

Peter

 

[Goran]

The guy being a true expert and having no ax to grind, I believe he
would agree without a blink. E.g. "Yeah, technically, T* is a pointer
to the first element of an array; but for expedience, we simply say
pointer to the array".

Why d'you ask, do you think he's stupid or something?

Goran.

P.S. could you please take some more care of your typing? In this post
only, you had e.g. innacurate - inaccurate,  porbably - probably,
themsleves - themselves, somthing - something, techinical - technical.
English is my second/third language, and even I manage better than
you. Constantly failing to spell pretty common words correctly like
that doesn't help in taking you seriously.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Thx yuor view is taken into consideation

DO you think I am astupid or you are stupid or BS is stupid or anyone is
stupid?
.

No.