Re: [cpp] Is this valid?

Discussion in 'C Programming' started by copx, Jul 11, 2003.

  1. copx

    copx Guest

    "bd" <-ip.org> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:p-ip.org...
    > On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 23:17:36 +0200, copx wrote:
    >
    > > [cpp] is this valid?

    >
    > What is this 'cpp'?


    The C PreProcessor.
    It deals with stuff like #defines

    copx
    copx, Jul 11, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 04:02:45 +0200, in comp.lang.c , "copx"
    <> wrote:

    >
    >"bd" <-ip.org> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:p-ip.org...
    >> On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 23:17:36 +0200, copx wrote:
    >>
    >> > [cpp] is this valid?

    >>
    >> What is this 'cpp'?

    >
    >The C PreProcessor.
    >It deals with stuff like #defines


    FWIW "cpp" is not strictly part of C, its a tool in (probably) a unix
    implementation. Other implementations do the same thing differently.
    Although your question was topical I believe, its best not to think
    about it in terms of specific implementations in CLC.

    --
    Mark McIntyre
    CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
    CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.com/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc.html>


    ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
    ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
    Mark McIntyre, Jul 11, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. copx

    copx Guest

    "Mark McIntyre" <> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:...
    > On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 04:02:45 +0200, in comp.lang.c , "copx"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > >
    > >"bd" <-ip.org> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:p-ip.org...
    > >> On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 23:17:36 +0200, copx wrote:
    > >>
    > >> > [cpp] is this valid?
    > >>
    > >> What is this 'cpp'?

    > >
    > >The C PreProcessor.
    > >It deals with stuff like #defines

    >
    > FWIW "cpp" is not strictly part of C, its a tool in (probably) a unix
    > implementation. Other implementations do the same thing differently.
    > Although your question was topical I believe, its best not to think
    > about it in terms of specific implementations in CLC.


    In my (German) copy of K&R2 part 4.11 has
    the heading "Der C-Preprozessor" (The C-Preprocessor).
    So I guess cpp IS a part of the C standard.
    I don't have the ANSI/ISO papers, though.
    But K&R has more authority, anyway ;-)

    copx
    copx, Jul 11, 2003
    #3
  4. copx

    Default User Guest

    Mark McIntyre wrote:

    > >So I guess cpp IS a part of the C standard.

    >
    > ...but cpp is not it, cpp is a tool available on unix platforms.



    UNIX is off-topic here. Why can't the OP use a perfectly good acronym
    for a part of the standard language without you assuming he meant some
    other off-topic thing?

    I understood perfectly, because I assume first and foremost that people
    are discussing standard stuff here.




    Brian Rodenborn
    Default User, Jul 11, 2003
    #4
  5. copx

    Ben Pfaff Guest

    Mark McIntyre <> writes:

    > FWIW "cpp" is not strictly part of C, its a tool in (probably) a unix
    > implementation. Other implementations do the same thing differently.
    > Although your question was topical I believe, its best not to think
    > about it in terms of specific implementations in CLC.


    It depends on whether you think of cpp as the name of a program
    or an abbreviation for "C preprocessor". The former is
    off-topic, but the latter is perfectly on-topic.
    --
    "We put [the best] Assembler programmers in a little glass case in the hallway
    near the Exit sign. The sign on the case says, `In case of optimization
    problem, break glass.' Meanwhile, the problem solvers are busy doing their
    work in languages most appropriate to the job at hand." --Richard Riehle
    Ben Pfaff, Jul 11, 2003
    #5
  6. On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 16:07:33 GMT, in comp.lang.c , Default User
    <> wrote:

    >
    >
    >Mark McIntyre wrote:
    >
    >> >So I guess cpp IS a part of the C standard.

    >>
    >> ...but cpp is not it, cpp is a tool available on unix platforms.

    >
    >
    >UNIX is off-topic here. Why can't the OP use a perfectly good acronym
    >for a part of the standard language without you assuming he meant some
    >other off-topic thing?


    Because of the way they referred to it.

    >I understood perfectly, because I assume first and foremost that people
    >are discussing standard stuff here.


    Me too. Please reread my original posting before shooting from teh
    hip.

    "FWIW "cpp" is not strictly part of C, its a tool in (probably) a unix
    implementation. Other implementations do the same thing differently.
    Although your question was topical I believe, its best not to think
    about it in terms of specific implementations in CLC. !

    --
    Mark McIntyre
    CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
    CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.com/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc.html>


    ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
    ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
    Mark McIntyre, Jul 11, 2003
    #6
  7. copx

    Ben Pfaff Guest

    Mark McIntyre <> writes:

    > On 11 Jul 2003 09:33:47 -0700, in comp.lang.c , Ben Pfaff
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > >Mark McIntyre <> writes:
    > >
    > >> FWIW "cpp" is not strictly part of C, its a tool in (probably) a unix
    > >> implementation. Other implementations do the same thing differently.
    > >> Although your question was topical I believe, its best not to think
    > >> about it in terms of specific implementations in CLC.

    > >
    > >It depends on whether you think of cpp as the name of a program
    > >or an abbreviation for "C preprocessor". The former is
    > >off-topic, but the latter is perfectly on-topic.

    >
    > I agree, and said so in my original posting, which I requote for the
    > 2nd time:
    >
    > "FWIW "cpp" is not strictly part of C, its a tool in (probably) a unix
    > implementation. Other implementations do the same thing differently.
    > Although your question was topical I believe, its best not to think
    > about it in terms of specific implementations in CLC. "


    So if you also think of cpp as the standard C preprocessor, why
    did you say that cpp is not part of C?
    --
    int main(void){char p[]="ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz.\
    \n",*q="kl BIcNBFr.NKEzjwCIxNJC";int i=sizeof p/2;char *strchr();int putchar(\
    );while(*q){i+=strchr(p,*q++)-p;if(i>=(int)sizeof p)i-=sizeof p-1;putchar(p\
    );}return 0;}
    Ben Pfaff, Jul 12, 2003
    #7
  8. copx

    copx Guest

    "Ben Pfaff" <> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:...
    > Mark McIntyre <> writes:
    >
    > > FWIW "cpp" is not strictly part of C, its a tool in (probably) a unix
    > > implementation. Other implementations do the same thing differently.
    > > Although your question was topical I believe, its best not to think
    > > about it in terms of specific implementations in CLC.

    >
    > It depends on whether you think of cpp as the name of a program
    > or an abbreviation for "C preprocessor".


    I used it as an abbreviation for "C preprocessor"..
    So Marks complains are invalid.

    copx
    copx, Jul 12, 2003
    #8
  9. copx

    Micah Cowan Guest

    "copx" <> writes:

    > "Mark McIntyre" <> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:...
    > > On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 04:02:45 +0200, in comp.lang.c , "copx"
    > > <> wrote:
    > >
    > > >
    > > >"bd" <-ip.org> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:p-ip.org...
    > > >> On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 23:17:36 +0200, copx wrote:
    > > >>
    > > >> > [cpp] is this valid?
    > > >>
    > > >> What is this 'cpp'?
    > > >
    > > >The C PreProcessor.
    > > >It deals with stuff like #defines

    > >
    > > FWIW "cpp" is not strictly part of C, its a tool in (probably) a unix
    > > implementation. Other implementations do the same thing differently.
    > > Although your question was topical I believe, its best not to think
    > > about it in terms of specific implementations in CLC.

    >
    > In my (German) copy of K&R2 part 4.11 has
    > the heading "Der C-Preprozessor" (The C-Preprocessor).
    > So I guess cpp IS a part of the C standard.
    > I don't have the ANSI/ISO papers, though.
    > But K&R has more authority, anyway ;-)


    The C Preprocessor is part of the C Standard: but a C preprocessor is
    just a part of the entire implementation as far as the standard is
    concerned: it can be a part of the compiler. cpp is certainly not part
    of the C standard, it is (as Mark already said) a part of common UNIX
    C implementations.

    -Micah
    Micah Cowan, Jul 12, 2003
    #9
  10. copx

    Micah Cowan Guest

    Ben Pfaff <> writes:

    > Mark McIntyre <> writes:
    >
    > > FWIW "cpp" is not strictly part of C, its a tool in (probably) a unix
    > > implementation. Other implementations do the same thing differently.
    > > Although your question was topical I believe, its best not to think
    > > about it in terms of specific implementations in CLC.

    >
    > It depends on whether you think of cpp as the name of a program
    > or an abbreviation for "C preprocessor". The former is
    > off-topic, but the latter is perfectly on-topic.


    Maybe it's just me, but if I had thought it was readable as "the C
    preprocessor", it would be written "the cpp" rather than "cpp".

    -Micah
    Micah Cowan, Jul 12, 2003
    #10
  11. On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 23:25:25 GMT, in comp.lang.c , Default User
    <> wrote:

    >
    >
    >Mark McIntyre wrote:
    >
    >> Me too. Please reread my original posting before shooting from teh
    >> hip.

    >
    >
    >Where in the post that started this topic do you find the OP discussing
    >some UNIX utility?


    Frankly, and not offense Brian, you and the others arguing in this
    thread are starting to get right up yourselves with your remarks. In
    my original posting I said quite clearly that his question was topical
    but that "cpp" was a unix utility which was not, and that in CLC it
    was worth making sure you didn't phrase questions in such a way as to
    appear to be asking a platform specific question. If you want to carry
    on arguing with me then I suggest you do it in alt.anal,retentives.


    --
    Mark McIntyre
    CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
    CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.com/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc.html>


    ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
    ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
    Mark McIntyre, Jul 12, 2003
    #11
  12. On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 01:55:37 +0200, in comp.lang.c , "copx"
    <> wrote:

    >I used it as an abbreviation for "C preprocessor"..
    >So Marks complains are invalid.


    *sigh*.

    My "complaint", if you or any of the other folk responding in this
    thread had actually read it, was to point out that although your
    question was topical. cpp is the name of a unix utility and you could
    be confusing people

    --
    Mark McIntyre
    CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
    CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.com/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc.html>


    ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
    ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
    Mark McIntyre, Jul 12, 2003
    #12
  13. [snips]

    On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 13:29:55 +0100, Mark McIntyre wrote:

    > Frankly, and not offense Brian, you and the others arguing in this
    > thread are starting to get right up yourselves with your remarks. In
    > my original posting I said quite clearly that his question was topical
    > but that "cpp" was a unix utility which was not, and that in CLC it
    > was worth making sure you didn't phrase questions in such a way as to
    > appear to be asking a platform specific question. If you want to carry
    > on arguing with me then I suggest you do it in alt.anal,retentives.


    A good post, thesis clearly stated, issues well delineated. Two minor
    points, though; alt.anal,retentives doesn't seem to exist and, if it did,
    it would likely be spelled as alt.anal.retentives.

    ;)

    --
    http://rkc.silversapphire.com
    Managed Migration from Windows to Linux
    Kelsey Bjarnason, Jul 12, 2003
    #13
  14. copx

    Default User Guest

    Mark McIntyre wrote:

    > >
    > >Where in the post that started this topic do you find the OP discussing
    > >some UNIX utility?

    >
    > Frankly, and not offense Brian, you and the others arguing in this
    > thread are starting to get right up yourselves with your remarks.


    I am taking offense. You made a mistake.

    > In
    > my original posting I said quite clearly that his question was topical
    > but that "cpp" was a unix utility which was not, and that in CLC it
    > was worth making sure you didn't phrase questions in such a way as to
    > appear to be asking a platform specific question. If you want to carry
    > on arguing with me then I suggest you do it in alt.anal,retentives.



    No you did not say that. I'll post your own words again:

    FWIW "cpp" is not strictly part of C, its a tool in (probably) a unix
    implementation. Other implementations do the same thing differently.
    Although your question was topical I believe, its best not to think
    about it in terms of specific implementations in CLC.


    Show me where you say anything like your retcon up above.


    I'm starting to have real sympathy for Dan Pop right now.




    Brian Rodenborn
    Default User, Jul 12, 2003
    #14
  15. On Sat, 12 Jul 2003, copx wrote:
    >
    > "Ben Pfaff" <> schrieb ...
    > > Mark McIntyre <> writes:
    > >
    > > > FWIW "cpp" is not strictly part of C, its a tool in (probably) a unix
    > > > implementation. Other implementations do the same thing differently.
    > > > Although your question was topical I believe, its best not to think
    > > > about it in terms of specific implementations in CLC.

    > >
    > > It depends on whether you think of cpp as the name of a program
    > > or an abbreviation for "C preprocessor".

    >
    > I used it as an abbreviation for "C preprocessor"..
    > So Marks complains are invalid.


    I've seen people use "ect" as an abbreviation for "et cetera." Does
    that make "ect" correct usage? Of course not!

    Mark simply pointed out, before lots of people jumped on him, that
    'cpp' was NOT a standard name for the C preprocessor. In fact, on
    most systems 'cpp' is not the C preprocessor at all -- it's a
    non-standard macro processing utility with default support for things
    like line numbering. If you had used 'gcc' as an "abbreviation" for
    "C compiler", someone probably would have told you off too.

    Now everyone shut up and go back to work.

    -Arthur
    Arthur J. O'Dwyer, Jul 13, 2003
    #15
  16. copx

    Default User Guest

    "Arthur J. O'Dwyer" wrote:

    > Mark simply pointed out, before lots of people jumped on him, that
    > 'cpp' was NOT a standard name for the C preprocessor. In fact, on
    > most systems 'cpp' is not the C preprocessor at all -- it's a
    > non-standard macro processing utility with default support for things
    > like line numbering. If you had used 'gcc' as an "abbreviation" for
    > "C compiler", someone probably would have told you off too.


    No, Mark did NOT point that out. He assumed that's what the OP was
    talking about. It's fairly traditional for people to use acronyms in
    headers, and that's what MOST intelligent people were able to figure out
    once they read the damn post. Only Mark seemed to have trouble. If he'd
    said in his original post, "by the way, cpp isn't a typical abreviation
    for the C preprocessor, but a UNIX utility" nobody would have had a
    problem with him.


    > Now everyone shut up and go back to work.


    Likewise.



    Brian Rodenborn
    Default User, Jul 13, 2003
    #16
  17. On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 12:53:44 -0700, in comp.lang.c , Kelsey Bjarnason
    <> wrote:

    >
    >A good post, thesis clearly stated, issues well delineated. Two minor
    >points, though; alt.anal,retentives doesn't seem to exist and, if it did,
    >it would likely be spelled as alt.anal.retentives.


    >;)


    :) indeed !

    --
    Mark McIntyre
    CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
    CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.com/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc.html>


    ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
    ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
    Mark McIntyre, Jul 13, 2003
    #17
  18. On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 20:23:49 GMT, in comp.lang.c , Default User
    <> wrote:

    >> >
    >> >Where in the post that started this topic do you find the OP discussing
    >> >some UNIX utility?

    >>
    >> Frankly, and not offense Brian, you and the others arguing in this
    >> thread are starting to get right up yourselves with your remarks.

    >
    >I am taking offense.


    tough tits

    >You made a mistake.


    no, you did, in not bothering to read my post, and then in being
    sufficiently brass-necked not to know when to shut up.
    >
    >Show me where you say anything like your retcon up above.


    what the fsck is this "retcon" crapola.? don't bother to anwser ,this
    thread is plonked.

    >I'm starting to have real sympathy for Dan Pop right now.


    You're starting to turn into him, so I have no doubt about it.

    --
    Mark McIntyre
    CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
    CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.com/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc.html>


    ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
    ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
    Mark McIntyre, Jul 13, 2003
    #18
  19. On Sun, 13 Jul 2003 21:16:23 GMT, in comp.lang.c , Default User
    <> wrote:

    >
    >
    >"Arthur J. O'Dwyer" wrote:
    >
    >> Mark simply pointed out, before lots of people jumped on him, that
    >> 'cpp' was NOT a standard name for the C preprocessor. In fact, on
    >> most systems 'cpp' is not the C preprocessor at all -- it's a
    >> non-standard macro processing utility with default support for things
    >> like line numbering. If you had used 'gcc' as an "abbreviation" for
    >> "C compiler", someone probably would have told you off too.

    >
    >No, Mark did NOT point that out.


    Yes, I did. You're deliberately misrepresenting me. Stop it.

    --
    Mark McIntyre
    CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
    CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.com/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc.html>


    ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
    http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
    ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
    Mark McIntyre, Jul 14, 2003
    #19
  20. copx

    Default User Guest

    Mark McIntyre wrote:

    > because I dislike giving into bullies.



    I've had enough of him.


    *plonk*




    Brian Rodenborn
    Default User, Jul 14, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Ohad

    calling cpp file from c#

    Ohad, Jan 4, 2005, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    831
    Dino Chiesa [Microsoft]
    Jan 5, 2005
  2. DrUg13
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    465
    DrUg13
    Feb 10, 2004
  3. Alex Vinokur
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    402
    Greg Comeau
    Nov 15, 2004
  4. Vinu
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    615
  5. www.hitechskill.com
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,341
    www.hitechskill.com
    Apr 9, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page