things i would ban from clc

Discussion in 'C Programming' started by Joe keane, Mar 11, 2012.

  1. Joe keane

    Joe keane Guest

    1. it's not twos' complement

    2. an 'int' may have a trap value

    -who- -cares-
    go have sex with youselves
    Joe keane, Mar 11, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. (Joe keane) writes:
    > 1. it's not twos' complement
    >
    > 2. an 'int' may have a trap value
    >
    > -who- -cares-


    If you don't care, you don't have to participate in such discussions.
    They are certainly on topic for a group that discusses the C
    programming language. Would you suggest another forum to discuss
    such issues, or would you censor them entirely?

    > go have sex with youselves


    You are teetering on the edge of my killfile.

    --
    Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
    Will write code for food.
    "We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
    Keith Thompson, Mar 12, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Joe keane

    jacob navia Guest

    Le 12/03/12 00:05, Joe keane a écrit :
    > 1. it's not twos' complement
    >
    > 2. an 'int' may have a trap value
    >
    > -who- -cares-
    > go have sex with youselves


    As you have seen from the promoters of those sterile discussions
    (thompson for instance) they need to go on forever with those
    discussions...


    The prototype of main() is a hot topic for them too.

    At the same time, thompson and the others shun REAL discussions about
    REAL progress that can be done to improve the language.

    In all my discussions about the C containers library thompson and the
    other "clc regulars" were conspicuously ABSENT. Technically they have
    absolutely NOTHING to say.
    jacob navia, Mar 12, 2012
    #3
  4. Joe keane

    Don Y Guest

    Hi Jacob,

    On 3/12/2012 10:44 AM, jacob navia wrote:
    > Le 12/03/12 00:05, Joe keane a écrit :
    >> 1. it's not twos' complement
    >>
    >> 2. an 'int' may have a trap value
    >>
    >> -who- -cares-
    >> go have sex with youselves

    >
    > As you have seen from the promoters of those sterile discussions
    > (thompson for instance) they need to go on forever with those
    > discussions...
    >
    > The prototype of main() is a hot topic for them too.
    >
    > At the same time, thompson and the others shun REAL discussions about
    > REAL progress that can be done to improve the language.
    >
    > In all my discussions about the C containers library thompson and the
    > other "clc regulars" were conspicuously ABSENT. Technically they have
    > absolutely NOTHING to say.


    I can't comment re: your personality assessments as I
    have a short/transient tenure, here.

    And, I don't see the "containers" thread you mentioned
    (possibly old or something I marked as "read" without
    having actually *read* it).

    The "problem" with any public forum is that participants
    dome to it with different expectations and needs. Some
    might want to argue minutia of the language specification;
    or a particular implementation; etc. Others might want
    help understanding some *basic* feature of the language;
    still others might look for suggestions on techniques or
    algorithms to approach a particular problem.

    If you've ever dealt with a "building inspector", you've
    seen how they might (and *are*, LEGALLY!) be the epitome of
    what is allowed/expected in the construction of a building.
    But, chances are, you'd never hire any of them to *design*
    a building for you! Or, furnish it. Sure, it might meet
    all the structural, electrical, plumbing, etc. requirements
    of the current Codes... but that doesn't mean it would be a
    pleasant or *useful* place to live/work!

    E.g., an inspector can tell you whether you *must* have a
    dedicated electrical outlet for your refrigerator. *And*,
    the ampacity of that circuit. He can tell you if a single
    outlet is required or if a duplex outlet is sufficient.
    But, he probably won't explain (or know!) why you should or
    shouldn't (in your particular case) -- if you have a choice!

    I prepare a lot of formal documentation for my projects.
    I'll have an "English major" check my grammar, spelling,
    etc. But, I'd never trust any of them to *write* (or
    rewrite) the documents -- even if they were as knowledgeable
    about the material as I! E.g., they might not appreciate
    the choice and role of analogies used in the descriptions.
    Or, might write a "text book" that no one is inclined to
    *read*!

    If you're unhappy with a particular discussion -- or
    *aspect* of a discussion -- skip past it. Pick the fruit
    that is more to your liking!

    Of course, YMMV.
    Don Y, Mar 12, 2012
    #4
  5. Joe keane

    osmium Guest

    "Don Y" wrote:

    > I prepare a lot of formal documentation for my projects.
    > I'll have an "English major" check my grammar, spelling,
    > etc. But, I'd never trust any of them to *write* (or
    > rewrite) the documents -- even if they were as knowledgeable
    > about the material as I! E.g., they might not appreciate
    > the choice and role of analogies used in the descriptions.
    > Or, might write a "text book" that no one is inclined to
    > *read*!


    I assumed twos' complement was mentioned because of the way it was spelled.

    Who knows? And does anyone *really* care?
    osmium, Mar 12, 2012
    #5
  6. Joe keane

    Don Y Guest

    On 3/12/2012 1:36 PM, osmium wrote:
    > "Don Y" wrote:
    >
    >> I prepare a lot of formal documentation for my projects.
    >> I'll have an "English major" check my grammar, spelling,
    >> etc. But, I'd never trust any of them to *write* (or
    >> rewrite) the documents -- even if they were as knowledgeable
    >> about the material as I! E.g., they might not appreciate
    >> the choice and role of analogies used in the descriptions.
    >> Or, might write a "text book" that no one is inclined to
    >> *read*!

    >
    > I assumed twos' complement was mentioned because of the way it was spelled.
    >
    > Who knows? And does anyone *really* care?


    A language pedant might. :>

    Or, someone poking around at the edges of the language
    (strange things lurk in dark corners!)

    It's good to be *aware* that things aren't ever as *simple*
    as they seem -- so you aren't surprised, one day, when you
    stumble into one of these "dark corners". But letting that
    sort of preoccupation get in the way with "useful work"
    tends to be a waste of time, IMO (YMMV).

    (E.g., product starts running code at location 0x00..0.
    How do you dereference that address for a reset() routine?)
    Don Y, Mar 12, 2012
    #6
  7. Joe keane

    James Kuyper Guest

    On 03/12/2012 03:26 PM, Don Y wrote:
    > Hi Jacob,
    >
    > On 3/12/2012 10:44 AM, jacob navia wrote:

    ....
    >> At the same time, thompson and the others shun REAL discussions about
    >> REAL progress that can be done to improve the language.


    That's just how jacob perceives it when someone disagrees with him about
    whether or not one of his proposals counts as "progress" or an
    "improvement". He only wants to discuss how his proposals should be
    implemented. Any disagreement with the fundamental concept of his
    proposals is treated as a personal attack; which tends to discourage
    those who would otherwise be willing to engage in a "REAL" discussion of
    why they think the proposals should not be implemented.

    >> In all my discussions about the C containers library thompson and the
    >> other "clc regulars" were conspicuously ABSENT. Technically they have
    >> absolutely NOTHING to say.

    ....
    > And, I don't see the "containers" thread you mentioned
    > (possibly old or something I marked as "read" without
    > having actually *read* it).


    Google for clc and comp.std.c messages with "containers" in the
    Subject:; most of the messages after 2009 are part of the discussion
    he's referring to. As you'll see, a fair number of the messages are from
    Keith Thompson, though I agree that he's far from being the most active
    participant.

    That none of the more active participants in that discussion counts as a
    "clc regular" in jacob's eyes surprises me, but then the definition of
    that term has always been rather peculiar. The term is used, and
    therefore defined, almost exclusively by people who don't consider
    themselves a member of the group it describes - even though many of
    those people are among the ones who post to clc most regularly.
    Therefore, it certainly doesn't mean "people who post to clc regularly".
    James Kuyper, Mar 12, 2012
    #7
  8. Joe keane

    Don Y Guest

    Hi James,

    On 3/12/2012 2:34 PM, James Kuyper wrote:
    > On 03/12/2012 03:26 PM, Don Y wrote:
    >> On 3/12/2012 10:44 AM, jacob navia wrote:

    > ...
    >>> At the same time, thompson and the others shun REAL discussions about
    >>> REAL progress that can be done to improve the language.

    >
    > That's just how jacob perceives it when someone disagrees with him about
    > whether or not one of his proposals counts as "progress" or an
    > "improvement". He only wants to discuss how his proposals should be
    > implemented. Any disagreement with the fundamental concept of his
    > proposals is treated as a personal attack; which tends to discourage
    > those who would otherwise be willing to engage in a "REAL" discussion of
    > why they think the proposals should not be implemented.


    Again, I can't comment re: "personalities" as I don't
    know histories, etc.

    >>> In all my discussions about the C containers library thompson and the
    >>> other "clc regulars" were conspicuously ABSENT. Technically they have
    >>> absolutely NOTHING to say.

    > ...
    >> And, I don't see the "containers" thread you mentioned
    >> (possibly old or something I marked as "read" without
    >> having actually *read* it).

    >
    > Google for clc and comp.std.c messages with "containers" in the
    > Subject:; most of the messages after 2009 are part of the discussion


    ------------------------------------------^

    Yikes! Can you spell "ancient history"?

    > he's referring to. As you'll see, a fair number of the messages are from
    > Keith Thompson, though I agree that he's far from being the most active
    > participant.
    >
    > That none of the more active participants in that discussion counts as a
    > "clc regular" in jacob's eyes surprises me, but then the definition of
    > that term has always been rather peculiar. The term is used, and
    > therefore defined, almost exclusively by people who don't consider
    > themselves a member of the group it describes - even though many of
    > those people are among the ones who post to clc most regularly.
    > Therefore, it certainly doesn't mean "people who post to clc regularly".


    (sigh) Unfortunately, this is often the case when people
    "talk".

    As I said, each has his/her own motivations, goals, etc.
    which might not coincide with your own. One has to learn to
    "cherry pick" the useful (in your *own* assessment) from
    that which is "less" useful.

    In my case, I care little about the formal specification
    of the language and how it is (or will) evolving. I'll pick
    what aspects appeal to me and deprecate those that don't.
    (I can always fall back on any of the previous "versions").

    OTOH, others (Jacob?) concerned with standards efforts would
    have a far different outlook
    Don Y, Mar 12, 2012
    #8
  9. Joe keane

    James Kuyper Guest

    On 03/12/2012 06:00 PM, Don Y wrote:
    > Hi James,
    >
    > On 3/12/2012 2:34 PM, James Kuyper wrote:
    >> On 03/12/2012 03:26 PM, Don Y wrote:

    ....
    >>> And, I don't see the "containers" thread you mentioned
    >>> (possibly old or something I marked as "read" without
    >>> having actually *read* it).

    >>
    >> Google for clc and comp.std.c messages with "containers" in the
    >> Subject:; most of the messages after 2009 are part of the discussion

    >
    > ------------------------------------------^
    >
    > Yikes! Can you spell "ancient history"?


    Yes, and for me it starts a millennium or two earlier than it does for
    you. I come from a background in science and in particular astronomy -
    for some purposes, I consider anything less than a billion years old to
    be relatively young :)

    While the start of that discussion is several years old, the most recent
    messages are relatively recent. Jacob's still working on it, and is
    still interested in discussing it, so it's still current.
    James Kuyper, Mar 12, 2012
    #9
  10. Joe keane

    Don Y Guest

    Hi James,

    On 3/12/2012 3:21 PM, James Kuyper wrote:

    [snip]

    >>>> And, I don't see the "containers" thread you mentioned
    >>>> (possibly old or something I marked as "read" without
    >>>> having actually *read* it).
    >>>
    >>> Google for clc and comp.std.c messages with "containers" in the
    >>> Subject:; most of the messages after 2009 are part of the discussion

    >>
    >> -----------------------------------------^
    >>
    >> Yikes! Can you spell "ancient history"?

    >
    > Yes, and for me it starts a millennium or two earlier than it does for
    > you. I come from a background in science and in particular astronomy -
    > for some purposes, I consider anything less than a billion years old to
    > be relatively young :)


    Ah, women-folk must *love* you at the local bars!! ;-)

    > While the start of that discussion is several years old, the most recent
    > messages are relatively recent. Jacob's still working on it, and is
    > still interested in discussing it, so it's still current.


    It's not uncommon for people to fixate on *an* issue. There's
    a guy in one of the database groups that keeps harping on a
    certain *feature* that he wants but that others (i.e., the
    *implementers*) have decided against. That doesn't stop him
    from bringing up the subject regularly...

    <frown> OK, maybe I should go take a peek to see if there's
    any fire behind the smoke. Though if it is some part of the
    "Standard", I probably wouldn't be interested.

    ("OK, so you want the steering wheel to be on the *RIGHT*
    side? <shrug> Just tell me where I insert the key...")
    Don Y, Mar 12, 2012
    #10
  11. Joe keane

    jacob navia Guest

    If you are interested in knowing what the container's library is about
    look at

    http://code.google.com/p/ccl/

    There you will find the whole containers library for C, the
    documentation, and the source code.

    "containers" means lists (single/double linked), hash-tables,
    flexible arrays, buffers, circular buffers, trees, and several others.

    My proposal is to standardize this in a similar way to C++
    stl and allow you to use lists and hashtables in your C code without
    reinventing the wheel.

    The other people here that do not like this project complain that
    there will be never a single package that satisfy all needs, etc.

    They are in general against any modification of the language, except
    trivialities like the prototype of main() (thompson).


    have fun with the library and tell me if you find any bug

    jacob
    jacob navia, Mar 12, 2012
    #11
  12. In article <>,
    Keith Thompson <> wrote:
    > (Joe keane) writes:
    >> 1. it's not twos' complement
    >>
    >> 2. an 'int' may have a trap value
    >>
    >> -who- -cares-

    >
    >If you don't care, you don't have to participate in such discussions.
    >They are certainly on topic for a group that discusses the C
    >programming language. Would you suggest another forum to discuss
    >such issues, or would you censor them entirely?
    >
    >> go have sex with youselves

    >
    >You are teetering on the edge of my killfile.


    It is to laugh. For so long, Kiki was the champion of "I don't use a
    killfile, because only peons use killfiles, and I am above that sort of
    thing."

    Now, he can't resist the urge to do that stupidest of all things: Use his
    (supposed) killfile as a weapon in battle.

    How things change...

    --
    One of the best lines I've heard lately:

    Obama could cure cancer tomorrow, and the Republicans would be
    complaining that he had ruined the pharmaceutical business.

    (Heard on Stephanie Miller = but the sad thing is that there is an awful lot
    of direct truth in it. We've constructed an economy in which eliminating
    cancer would be a horrible disaster. There are many other such examples.)
    Kenny McCormack, Mar 12, 2012
    #12
  13. Joe keane

    Don Y Guest

    Hi Jacob,

    On 3/12/2012 3:53 PM, jacob navia wrote:
    > If you are interested in knowing what the container's library is about
    > look at
    >
    > http://code.google.com/p/ccl/
    >
    > There you will find the whole containers library for C, the
    > documentation, and the source code.
    >
    > "containers" means lists (single/double linked), hash-tables,
    > flexible arrays, buffers, circular buffers, trees, and several others.
    >
    > My proposal is to standardize this in a similar way to C++
    > stl and allow you to use lists and hashtables in your C code without
    > reinventing the wheel.


    But what is the *philosophy* behind the language maintainers?
    I.e., *should* C's libraries continue to grow to creep further
    into the application domain? Where do you stop -- what about
    cryptographic functions? Infinite precision/decimal math?
    etc.

    I've always assumed a big part of the reasoning behind the STL
    was to bootstrap the adoption and "learning" of C++. Not
    things that would really translate to C (this late in the game)

    C always had a nice, light "feel" -- something that C++ can't
    approach. The existing libraries almost seem to be pushing the
    limits of that (though they tend not to be as bloated as C++'s
    approach to things).

    [If you've ever tackled Ada, you understand the difference in
    "attitude" taken/portrayed by the language(s)]

    > The other people here that do not like this project complain that
    > there will be never a single package that satisfy all needs, etc.
    >
    > They are in general against any modification of the language, except
    > trivialities like the prototype of main() (thompson).
    >
    > have fun with the library and tell me if you find any bug
    >
    > jacob
    >
    Don Y, Mar 13, 2012
    #13
  14. Joe keane

    Ian Collins Guest

    On 03/13/12 08:26 AM, Don Y wrote:
    >
    > If you've ever dealt with a "building inspector", you've
    > seen how they might (and *are*, LEGALLY!) be the epitome of
    > what is allowed/expected in the construction of a building.
    > But, chances are, you'd never hire any of them to *design*
    > a building for you! Or, furnish it. Sure, it might meet
    > all the structural, electrical, plumbing, etc. requirements
    > of the current Codes... but that doesn't mean it would be a
    > pleasant or *useful* place to live/work!


    Nice analogy.

    It can probably be stretched a little further to say a building company
    benefits from an inspector and a software company benefits from a
    language lawyer!

    --
    Ian Collins
    Ian Collins, Mar 13, 2012
    #14
  15. Joe keane

    jacob navia Guest

    Le 13/03/12 01:17, Don Y a écrit :
    >
    > But what is the *philosophy* behind the language maintainers?
    > I.e., *should* C's libraries continue to grow to creep further
    > into the application domain?


    No. The containers library is not an application; A container is used
    in most applications though, and that is the difference.

    Most serious programs use lists, need flexible arrays, hash tables, etc.
    The "solution" now is that each program redevelops a linked list
    package, a hash table package, etc from scratch at each project.

    Since there isn't a common interface all this programs are incompatible
    and need to be adapted when used together.

    If I use package "A" with its list module and package "B" with another
    incompatible lost module, I have to write adapter code to pass lists
    written in package "A" to lists in package "B".

    And you know very well what I am talking about. Never done
    a list package? You never used a list in your programs?

    > Where do you stop -- what about
    > cryptographic functions? Infinite precision/decimal math?
    > etc.



    Many of those functions are provided by my compiler system
    lcc-win but I am not proposing to generalize them. What I am
    proposing is standardizing the principal containers.
    jacob navia, Mar 13, 2012
    #15
  16. Joe keane

    Don Y Guest

    On 3/13/2012 12:19 AM, Ian Collins wrote:
    > On 03/13/12 08:26 AM, Don Y wrote:
    >>
    >> If you've ever dealt with a "building inspector", you've
    >> seen how they might (and *are*, LEGALLY!) be the epitome of
    >> what is allowed/expected in the construction of a building.
    >> But, chances are, you'd never hire any of them to *design*
    >> a building for you! Or, furnish it. Sure, it might meet
    >> all the structural, electrical, plumbing, etc. requirements
    >> of the current Codes... but that doesn't mean it would be a
    >> pleasant or *useful* place to live/work!

    >
    > Nice analogy.
    >
    > It can probably be stretched a little further to say a building company
    > benefits from an inspector and a software company benefits from a
    > language lawyer!


    That depends on the role he plays in the organization.
    A building inspector, in theory, serves a vital role.
    OTOH, he can also be an *impediment* to progress -- by
    insisting on detail that may or may not be significant.

    I suspect you will find most "building companies" don't have
    inspectors on their payroll. Rather, they have "normal
    employees" with a working knowledge of the pertinent issues.
    This might not be enough to keep them out of every screw-up.
    But, it is usually enough to enable them to get their
    work done *efficiently*.
    Don Y, Mar 13, 2012
    #16
  17. Joe keane

    Don Y Guest

    On 3/13/2012 1:09 AM, jacob navia wrote:
    > Le 13/03/12 01:17, Don Y a écrit :
    >>
    >> But what is the *philosophy* behind the language maintainers?
    >> I.e., *should* C's libraries continue to grow to creep further
    >> into the application domain?

    >
    > No. The containers library is not an application; A container is used
    > in most applications though, and that is the difference.


    I didn't claim it was an application. Rather, I said "creep
    further into the application domain". I.e., where do you
    draw the line between "part of the language" and "*part* of
    the application"?

    I use lots of geometric functions. Should the language tout
    a library that provides these to me in some "standard" way?
    What about crypto functions? Secure hashes? etc.

    Why not support for *tasking* -- native to the language
    (instead of in a library!) like Limbo?

    > Most serious programs use lists, need flexible arrays, hash tables, etc.
    > The "solution" now is that each program redevelops a linked list
    > package, a hash table package, etc from scratch at each project.
    >
    > Since there isn't a common interface all this programs are incompatible
    > and need to be adapted when used together.
    >
    > If I use package "A" with its list module and package "B" with another
    > incompatible lost module, I have to write adapter code to pass lists
    > written in package "A" to lists in package "B".
    >
    > And you know very well what I am talking about. Never done
    > a list package? You never used a list in your programs?


    You *really* don't want to pose that question to me! :>
    I often rewrite major portions of the standard libraries
    as I move from project to project -- because the execution
    environments frequently differ and I don't need the "generality"
    that most of the libraries provide. Or, I am bastardizing a
    standard data type, etc.

    When was the last time you used:

    digits = INT_MAX
    decimals = INT_MAX
    printf("The answer is %*.*e", value, digits, decimals)

    In fact, when was the last time you used the '*' flag in printf??
    Will your copy of the libraries even *handle* this specific
    case??

    I.e., I tend to err on the side of "leaner" vs. "fatter".
    So, need to see a real reason for *adding* something in
    that can't already be handled some other way.

    E.g., Limbo's support for tasking and IPC "belongs" in the
    language (Limbo, that is). It noticeably changes the
    feel and capabilities of the language -- and the applications
    it tries to address (moreso than a "library" would have)

    >> Where do you stop -- what about
    >> cryptographic functions? Infinite precision/decimal math?
    >> etc.

    >
    > Many of those functions are provided by my compiler system
    > lcc-win but I am not proposing to generalize them. What I am
    > proposing is standardizing the principal containers.
    Don Y, Mar 13, 2012
    #17
  18. Joe keane

    Ian Collins Guest

    On 03/13/12 09:09 PM, Don Y wrote:
    > On 3/13/2012 12:19 AM, Ian Collins wrote:
    >> On 03/13/12 08:26 AM, Don Y wrote:
    >>>
    >>> If you've ever dealt with a "building inspector", you've
    >>> seen how they might (and *are*, LEGALLY!) be the epitome of
    >>> what is allowed/expected in the construction of a building.
    >>> But, chances are, you'd never hire any of them to *design*
    >>> a building for you! Or, furnish it. Sure, it might meet
    >>> all the structural, electrical, plumbing, etc. requirements
    >>> of the current Codes... but that doesn't mean it would be a
    >>> pleasant or *useful* place to live/work!

    >>
    >> Nice analogy.
    >>
    >> It can probably be stretched a little further to say a building company
    >> benefits from an inspector and a software company benefits from a
    >> language lawyer!

    >
    > That depends on the role he plays in the organization.
    > A building inspector, in theory, serves a vital role.
    > OTOH, he can also be an *impediment* to progress -- by
    > insisting on detail that may or may not be significant.


    One of my clients is a medical electronics company so there are plenty
    of inspectors!

    --
    Ian Collins
    Ian Collins, Mar 13, 2012
    #18
  19. Joe keane

    gwowen Guest

    jacob navia wrote:
    >
    > My proposal is to standardize this in a similar way to C++
    > stl and allow you to use lists and hashtables in your C code without
    > reinventing the wheel.
    >


    Your proposal will fail, and your energy will be wasted. Among the
    many reasons for this not least because using void* as your
    fundamental type shifts makes the compiler implenters life easy by
    shifting all the effort onto to the programmer. No one want generics
    where type safety is the responsibility of the programmer, and they
    have to keep casting their object pointers back and forth.

    That why C++ templates win - compile time type safety. You haven't got
    that, and you haven't got exceptions, and that means that your
    interfaces and error handling is horrible to the point of
    unusability. So what you have will never be widely accepted.

    Other reasons include your inability to accept any technical criticism
    of your design. You simply won't be able to persuade anyone of
    anything without a change in attitude.

    You may now accuse be of making personal attacks thereby proving my
    point.
    gwowen, Mar 13, 2012
    #19
  20. Joe keane

    Guest

    On Sunday, March 11, 2012 11:05:45 PM UTC, Joe keane wrote:

    > 1. it's not twos' complement
    >
    > 2. an 'int' may have a trap value


    why?

    Are they untrue? (plainly not as The Standard says so)
    tedious? (but int main(), and don't cast malloc() are ok?)
    irrelevent to modern implementations? (non 8-bit chars, 16 bit ints and a pointer may not fit in a long are ok?)

    why not ban mentions of EBCDIC or DSPs having 32 bit chars?
    , Mar 13, 2012
    #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. www.gustando.net

    GOogle ban

    www.gustando.net, Dec 19, 2005, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    512
    PeterMcC
    Dec 22, 2005
  2. =?Utf-8?B?V2lsbGlhbSBTdWxsaXZhbg==?=

    vs2005 publish website doing bad things, bad things

    =?Utf-8?B?V2lsbGlhbSBTdWxsaXZhbg==?=, Oct 25, 2006, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    599
    =?Utf-8?B?UGV0ZXIgQnJvbWJlcmcgW0MjIE1WUF0=?=
    Oct 25, 2006
  3. Alf P. Steinbach
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    321
    Adam Aulick
    May 26, 2006
  4. Alien
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    350
    Alien
    Jul 5, 2006
  5. Tony

    More posts in clc than in clc++ ?

    Tony, Feb 8, 2009, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    352
Loading...

Share This Page