variable length arrays

Discussion in 'C Programming' started by E. Robert Tisdale, Sep 27, 2003.

  1. > cat vararray.c
    #include <stdio.h>

    int Print3DArray(int n3, int n2, int a[][n2][n3], int n1) {
    int i = 0;
    for(i = 0; i < n1; ++i) {
    int j = 0;
    for(j = 0; j < n2; ++j) {
    int k = 0;
    for(k = 0; k < n3; ++k) {
    printf("a[%d][%d][%d] = %3d\n", i, j, k, a[j][k]);
    }
    }
    }
    return 0;
    }

    int main(int argc, char* argv[]) {
    int a[4][2][3];
    int i = 0;
    for(i = 0; i < 4; ++i) {
    int j = 0;
    for(j = 0; j < 2; ++j) {
    int k = 0;
    for(k = 0; k < 3; ++k) {
    a[j][k] = 100*i + 10*j + k;
    printf("A[%d][%d][%d] = %3d\n", i, j, k, a[j][k]);
    }
    }
    }
    putchar('\n');
    Print3DArray(3, 2, a, 4);
    return 0;
    }

    > gcc -Wall -std=c99 -pedantic -O2 -o vararray vararray.c
     
    E. Robert Tisdale, Sep 27, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. E. Robert Tisdale

    Aggro Guest

    E. Robert Tisdale wrote:
    > > cat vararray.c


    Did you ask something?
     
    Aggro, Sep 27, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. E. Robert Tisdale

    Kevin Bracey Guest

    In message <>
    "E. Robert Tisdale" <> wrote:

    > > cat vararray.c


    Super. It compiled without errors or warnings here, on my (non-gcc) C99
    compiler, and printed the array contents twice.

    Can't see anything wrong with the code; if you've got a problem it's
    probably the compiler.

    --
    Kevin Bracey, Principal Software Engineer
    Tematic Ltd Tel: +44 (0) 1223 503464
    182-190 Newmarket Road Fax: +44 (0) 1223 503458
    Cambridge, CB5 8HE, United Kingdom WWW: http://www.tematic.com/
     
    Kevin Bracey, Sep 29, 2003
    #3
  4. Kevin Bracey wrote:

    > E. Robert Tisdale wrote:
    >
    >> > cat vararray.c

    >
    > Super. It compiled without errors or warnings here,
    > on my (non-gcc) C99 compiler, and printed the array contents twice.
    >
    > Can't see anything wrong with the code;
    > if you've got a problem it's probably the compiler.


    It appears to me that
    the new variable-length array features in the current standard
    reduce much of what appears in the C FAQ to *bad advice*.
     
    E. Robert Tisdale, Sep 29, 2003
    #4
  5. E. Robert Tisdale wrote:

    > It appears to me that
    > the new variable-length array features in the current standard
    > reduce much of what appears in the C FAQ to *bad advice*.


    Only for those with C99 implementations who have no need for their code to
    remain portable to C90 implementations.

    --
    Richard Heathfield :
    "Usenet is a strange place." - Dennis M Ritchie, 29 July 1999.
    C FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
    K&R answers, C books, etc: http://users.powernet.co.uk/eton
     
    Richard Heathfield, Sep 30, 2003
    #5
  6. Richard Heathfield wrote:

    > E. Robert Tisdale wrote:
    >
    >>It appears to me that
    >>the new variable-length array features in the current standard
    >>reduce much of what appears in the C FAQ to *bad advice*.

    >
    > Only for those with C99 implementations who have no need
    > for their code to remain portable to C90 implementations.


    Yes. That's an accurate description of new users
    who are so often admonished to "read the FAQ".
    I don't see any reason for these people to learn bad habits
    which will only be difficult to break when, eventually,
    everyone has new C99 compilers.
    The advice in the C FAQ regarding variable length arrays
    should be revised. The current advice should be labeled
    anachronistic and should be deprecated.
     
    E. Robert Tisdale, Sep 30, 2003
    #6
  7. E. Robert Tisdale wrote:

    > Richard Heathfield wrote:
    >
    >> E. Robert Tisdale wrote:
    >>
    >>>It appears to me that
    >>>the new variable-length array features in the current standard
    >>>reduce much of what appears in the C FAQ to *bad advice*.

    >>
    >> Only for those with C99 implementations who have no need
    >> for their code to remain portable to C90 implementations.

    >
    > Yes.


    i.e. almost nobody.

    > That's an accurate description of new users
    > who are so often admonished to "read the FAQ".


    No, it isn't. Most new users are still using C90 implementations. Some are
    even using /pre/-C90 implementations.

    > I don't see any reason for these people to learn bad habits
    > which will only be difficult to break when, eventually,
    > everyone has new C99 compilers.


    The habits are not bad. They are best practice at present. I believe that
    Steve Summit once mentioned spending quite a lot of time preparing C99
    updates to the FAQ. No doubt he'll release those updates in due course.

    > The advice in the C FAQ regarding variable length arrays
    > should be revised. The current advice should be labeled
    > anachronistic and should be deprecated.


    It's currently relevant to the vast majority of C programmers. Most people
    don't yet have C99 compilers.

    --
    Richard Heathfield :
    "Usenet is a strange place." - Dennis M Ritchie, 29 July 1999.
    C FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
    K&R answers, C books, etc: http://users.powernet.co.uk/eton
     
    Richard Heathfield, Sep 30, 2003
    #7
  8. On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 20:19:54 +0000 (UTC), in comp.lang.c , Richard
    Heathfield <> wrote:

    >E. Robert Tisdale wrote:
    >
    >> The advice in the C FAQ regarding variable length arrays
    >> should be revised. The current advice should be labeled
    >> anachronistic and should be deprecated.

    >
    >It's currently relevant to the vast majority of C programmers. Most people
    >don't yet have C99 compilers.


    And even those of us who do, should consider portability issues for
    the next decade or so. I still occasionally have to recompile on an
    old sun box which has only a pre-ANSI compiler available, and the
    majority of my programming is done with a mainstream compiler whose
    manufacturer has apparently publically stated they've no immediate
    intention of supporting more of C99 than they already (badly) do.
    --
    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>
     
    Mark McIntyre, Oct 1, 2003
    #8
  9. Richard Heathfield wrote:

    > E. Robert Tisdale wrote:
    >
    >>The advice in the C FAQ regarding variable length arrays
    >>should be revised. The current advice should be labeled
    >>anachronistic and should be deprecated.

    >
    > It's currently relevant to the vast majority of C programmers.


    But the vast majority of C programmers don't read the FAQ.
    Most of the contributors to the comp.lang.c newsgroup
    don't read the FAQ. If they did, they could cite and quote the FAQ
    instead of answering Frequently Answered Questions.

    > Most people don't yet have C99 compilers.


    They should get C99 compilers and start using them.
     
    E. Robert Tisdale, Oct 1, 2003
    #9
  10. Mark McIntyre wrote:

    > Richard wrote:
    >
    >>E. Robert Tisdale wrote:
    >>
    >>> The advice in the C FAQ regarding variable length arrays
    >>> should be revised. The current advice should be labeled
    >>> anachronistic and should be deprecated.

    >>
    >> It's currently relevant to the vast majority of C programmers.
    >> Most people don't yet have C99 compilers.

    >
    > And even those of us who do,
    > should consider portability issues for the next decade or so.
    > I still occasionally have to recompile on an old sun box
    > which has only a pre-ANSI compiler available, and the majority
    > of my programming is done with a mainstream compiler whose
    > manufacturer has apparently publicly stated they've no immediate
    > intention of supporting more of C99 than they already (badly) do.


    Now you're beginning to sound like a Fortran programmer.

    You don't need to learn anything new. Your career will end
    long before the last of the C89 compilers are phased out.
    But what about the new programmers that are coming up
    to replace you? They will all have C99 compilers at their disposal
    long before their careers really take off. The only reason
    that they might need to learn about these anachronisms
    is so that they can read, understand and maintain
    your legacy code after you have retired.
    Fortunately, you won't be around to hear the "blessings"
    that they might utter regarding your code.
     
    E. Robert Tisdale, Oct 1, 2003
    #10
  11. E. Robert Tisdale wrote:

    > Richard Heathfield wrote:
    >
    >> Most people don't yet have C99 compilers.

    >
    > They should get C99 compilers and start using them.


    That's /their/ decision, not yours.

    --
    Richard Heathfield :
    "Usenet is a strange place." - Dennis M Ritchie, 29 July 1999.
    C FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
    K&R answers, C books, etc: http://users.powernet.co.uk/eton
     
    Richard Heathfield, Oct 1, 2003
    #11
  12. E. Robert Tisdale

    Mike Wahler Guest

    "E. Robert Tisdale" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Mark McIntyre wrote:
    >
    > > Richard wrote:
    > >
    > >>E. Robert Tisdale wrote:
    > >>
    > >>> The advice in the C FAQ regarding variable length arrays
    > >>> should be revised. The current advice should be labeled
    > >>> anachronistic and should be deprecated.
    > >>
    > >> It's currently relevant to the vast majority of C programmers.
    > >> Most people don't yet have C99 compilers.

    > >
    > > And even those of us who do,
    > > should consider portability issues for the next decade or so.
    > > I still occasionally have to recompile on an old sun box
    > > which has only a pre-ANSI compiler available, and the majority
    > > of my programming is done with a mainstream compiler whose
    > > manufacturer has apparently publicly stated they've no immediate
    > > intention of supporting more of C99 than they already (badly) do.

    >
    > Now you're beginning to sound like a Fortran programmer.
    >
    > You don't need to learn anything new. Your career will end
    > long before the last of the C89 compilers are phased out.
    > But what about the new programmers that are coming up
    > to replace you? They will all have C99 compilers at their disposal
    > long before their careers really take off. The only reason
    > that they might need to learn about these anachronisms
    > is so that they can read, understand and maintain
    > your legacy code after you have retired.


    In my experience, this is a large part of what the
    typical programmer does.

    > Fortunately, you won't be around to hear the "blessings"
    > that they might utter regarding your code.


    It's illogical to complain about code people wrote
    without using tools which were not available at the time.

    -Mike
     
    Mike Wahler, Oct 1, 2003
    #12
  13. E. Robert Tisdale

    Mike Wahler Guest

    "E. Robert Tisdale" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Richard Heathfield wrote:
    >
    > > E. Robert Tisdale wrote:
    > >
    > >>The advice in the C FAQ regarding variable length arrays
    > >>should be revised. The current advice should be labeled
    > >>anachronistic and should be deprecated.

    > >
    > > It's currently relevant to the vast majority of C programmers.

    >
    > But the vast majority of C programmers don't read the FAQ.


    So? That's their problem, not ours.

    > Most of the contributors to the comp.lang.c newsgroup
    > don't read the FAQ.


    You have no way of knowing this. You're speculating.

    > If they did, they could cite and quote the FAQ
    > instead of answering Frequently Answered Questions.


    Extremely poor deduction. You're presuming to read
    minds. Smoking is bad for the health. Virtually
    everyone knows this. "If they know smoking is bad,
    they'd quit." But many don't, even though they know
    the facts.

    I've read through the entire FAQ a few times,
    sometimes I refer folks to it, sometimes I answer the
    question. Of course I haven't committed the entire
    FAQ to memory, and I don't always check it before answering
    a question. Perhaps I should, but I don't, for whatever
    reason -- one day perhaps 'laziness', others perhaps
    'forgetfulness'. If I do answer, often it's because
    it's faster than first scanning the FAQ for the answer.
    The fact that I share my time here doesn't mean my
    time isn't still valuable to me. Sometimes I'll present
    an answer, and then mention that the answer's in the
    FAQ too. Sometimes I'll apply what I've learned from
    the FAQ in answering a question, then someone will
    show that my answer is wrong, causing me to realize
    I've misunderstood, and learn something myself.

    >
    > > Most people don't yet have C99 compilers.

    >
    > They should get C99 compilers and start using them.


    This is like saying:
    You should sell your car every year, and buy the latest
    model, even if the new features are not desirable or
    useful to you.

    I don't have a DVD unit for my TV, I have a VHS unit.
    It serves my purposes. Why should I buy a DVD?
    I need not until the VHS is insufficient (e.g. when
    VHS tapes no longer available, or I want or need
    what a DVD can do but a VHS cannot.)

    -Mike
     
    Mike Wahler, Oct 1, 2003
    #13
  14. Mike Wahler wrote:

    > E. Robert Tisdale wrote:
    >
    >>Richard Heathfield wrote:
    >>
    >>>E. Robert Tisdale wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>The advice in the C FAQ regarding variable length arrays
    >>>>should be revised. The current advice should be labeled
    >>>>anachronistic and should be deprecated.
    >>>
    >>>It's currently relevant to the vast majority of C programmers.

    >>
    >>But the vast majority of C programmers don't read the FAQ.

    >
    > So? That's their problem, not ours.
    >
    >>Most of the contributors to the comp.lang.c newsgroup
    >>don't read the FAQ.

    >
    > You have no way of knowing this. You're speculating.
    >
    >> If they did, they could cite and quote the FAQ
    >>instead of answering Frequently Answered Questions.

    >
    >
    > Extremely poor deduction. You're presuming to read minds.
    > Smoking is bad for the health.
    > Virtually everyone knows this.
    > "If they know smoking is bad, they'd quit."
    > But many don't, even though they know the facts.
    >
    > I've read through the entire FAQ a few times,
    > sometimes I refer folks to it, sometimes I answer the
    > question. Of course I haven't committed the entire
    > FAQ to memory, and I don't always check it before answering
    > a question. Perhaps I should, but I don't, for whatever
    > reason -- one day perhaps 'laziness', others perhaps
    > 'forgetfulness'. If I do answer, often it's because
    > it's faster than first scanning the FAQ for the answer.
    > The fact that I share my time here doesn't mean my
    > time isn't still valuable to me. Sometimes I'll present
    > an answer, and then mention that the answer's in the
    > FAQ too. Sometimes I'll apply what I've learned from
    > the FAQ in answering a question, then someone will
    > show that my answer is wrong, causing me to realize
    > I've misunderstood, and learn something myself.
    >
    >>>Most people don't yet have C99 compilers.

    >>
    >>They should get C99 compilers and start using them.

    >
    > This is like saying:
    > You should sell your car every year,
    > and buy the latest model,
    > even if the new features are not desirable
    > or useful to you.
    >
    > I don't have a DVD unit for my TV, I have a VHS unit.
    > It serves my purposes. Why should I buy a DVD?
    > I need not until the VHS is insufficient
    > (e.g. when VHS tapes no longer available,
    > or I want or need what a DVD can do but a VHS cannot.)


    I don't want you to give up your VHS, BETA-MAX,
    phonograph record player, bell-bottom pants, paisley shirts,
    platform shoes, side burns, Volkswagen Beetle, bean-bag chair
    or anything else that you have grown fond of over the years.
    I just don't think that the "new generation" should be compelled
    to make these things a part of their lives as well.
    I don't think that new C programmers should be compelled
    to adopt anachronisms just because you continue to use them
    in the code that you write.
     
    E. Robert Tisdale, Oct 1, 2003
    #14
  15. E. Robert Tisdale

    Mike Wahler Guest

    "E. Robert Tisdale" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Mike Wahler wrote:
    >
    > > E. Robert Tisdale wrote:
    > >
    > >>Richard Heathfield wrote:
    > >>
    > >>>E. Robert Tisdale wrote:
    > >>>
    > >>>>The advice in the C FAQ regarding variable length arrays
    > >>>>should be revised. The current advice should be labeled
    > >>>>anachronistic and should be deprecated.
    > >>>
    > >>>It's currently relevant to the vast majority of C programmers.
    > >>
    > >>But the vast majority of C programmers don't read the FAQ.

    > >
    > > So? That's their problem, not ours.
    > >
    > >>Most of the contributors to the comp.lang.c newsgroup
    > >>don't read the FAQ.

    > >
    > > You have no way of knowing this. You're speculating.
    > >
    > >> If they did, they could cite and quote the FAQ
    > >>instead of answering Frequently Answered Questions.

    > >
    > >
    > > Extremely poor deduction. You're presuming to read minds.
    > > Smoking is bad for the health.
    > > Virtually everyone knows this.
    > > "If they know smoking is bad, they'd quit."
    > > But many don't, even though they know the facts.
    > >
    > > I've read through the entire FAQ a few times,
    > > sometimes I refer folks to it, sometimes I answer the
    > > question. Of course I haven't committed the entire
    > > FAQ to memory, and I don't always check it before answering
    > > a question. Perhaps I should, but I don't, for whatever
    > > reason -- one day perhaps 'laziness', others perhaps
    > > 'forgetfulness'. If I do answer, often it's because
    > > it's faster than first scanning the FAQ for the answer.
    > > The fact that I share my time here doesn't mean my
    > > time isn't still valuable to me. Sometimes I'll present
    > > an answer, and then mention that the answer's in the
    > > FAQ too. Sometimes I'll apply what I've learned from
    > > the FAQ in answering a question, then someone will
    > > show that my answer is wrong, causing me to realize
    > > I've misunderstood, and learn something myself.
    > >
    > >>>Most people don't yet have C99 compilers.
    > >>
    > >>They should get C99 compilers and start using them.

    > >
    > > This is like saying:
    > > You should sell your car every year,
    > > and buy the latest model,
    > > even if the new features are not desirable
    > > or useful to you.
    > >
    > > I don't have a DVD unit for my TV, I have a VHS unit.
    > > It serves my purposes. Why should I buy a DVD?
    > > I need not until the VHS is insufficient
    > > (e.g. when VHS tapes no longer available,
    > > or I want or need what a DVD can do but a VHS cannot.)

    >
    > I don't want you to give up your VHS, BETA-MAX,
    > phonograph record player, bell-bottom pants, paisley shirts,
    > platform shoes, side burns, Volkswagen Beetle, bean-bag chair
    > or anything else that you have grown fond of over the years.
    > I just don't think that the "new generation" should be compelled
    > to make these things a part of their lives as well.


    IMO nor should they be discouraged from doing so if they
    so choose. I said nothing about 'compelling'.
    Of course it's a good idea to educate them
    about the more 'modern' alternatives, but the choice
    is still theirs, the consequences of which they of
    course must be prepared to face.

    > I don't think that new C programmers should be compelled
    > to adopt anachronisms just because you continue to use them
    > in the code that you write.


    I'd hardly call C90 an 'anachronism'. It's still the
    most widely used form of C, AFAIK.

    -Mike
     
    Mike Wahler, Oct 1, 2003
    #15
  16. On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 17:45:06 GMT, in comp.lang.c , "Mike Wahler"
    <> wrote:

    >"E. Robert Tisdale" <> wrote in message
    >news:...


    >> Most of the contributors to the comp.lang.c newsgroup
    >> don't read the FAQ.

    >
    >You have no way of knowing this. You're speculating.


    Not only that, but empirical evidence suggests otherwise. For example
    100% of the CLC contributors that I know personally have read the FAQ.

    >> If they did, they could cite and quote the FAQ
    >> instead of answering Frequently Answered Questions.

    >
    >I've read through the entire FAQ a few times,
    >sometimes I refer folks to it, sometimes I answer the
    >question. Of course I haven't committed the entire
    >FAQ to memory, and I don't always check it before answering
    >a question. Perhaps I should, but I don't, for whatever
    >reason


    Typically I don't check it because thats what the OP is supposed to
    do, dammit ! What, I have to do his homework /and/ read the FAQ for
    him? Why not just get his degree, marry his wife, and collect his
    paycheck too ?


    --
    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>
     
    Mark McIntyre, Oct 1, 2003
    #16
  17. Mark McIntyre wrote:

    > Typically,
    > I don't check it because that's what the OP is supposed to do, dammit!
    > What, I have to do his homework /and/ read the FAQ for him?


    No.
    But you could read the FAQ once in a while yourself.
    You know -- set a good example and all that.

    > Why not just get his degree, marry his wife
    > and collect his paycheck too?


    So much ambition for someone who won't even read the FAQ?

    I just don't think that it makes any sense
    to admonish new subscribers to "read the FAQ"
    if you refuse to do so every once in a while yourself.
    And, if you had read the FAQ, it doesn't seem unreasonable
    that you could quickly find, cite and even quote
    the relevant FAQ for the OP.
     
    E. Robert Tisdale, Oct 1, 2003
    #17
  18. Mark McIntyre <> scribbled the following:
    > Typically I don't check it because thats what the OP is supposed to
    > do, dammit ! What, I have to do his homework /and/ read the FAQ for
    > him? Why not just get his degree, marry his wife, and collect his
    > paycheck too ?


    That would suit me...
    (AFAICR you Mark are already married, so you don't need a wife. Give
    that one to me... =) )

    --
    /-- Joona Palaste () ---------------------------\
    | Kingpriest of "The Flying Lemon Tree" G++ FR FW+ M- #108 D+ ADA N+++|
    | http://www.helsinki.fi/~palaste W++ B OP+ |
    \----------------------------------------- Finland rules! ------------/
    "C++ looks like line noise."
    - Fred L. Baube III
     
    Joona I Palaste, Oct 12, 2003
    #18
  19. On 12 Oct 2003 17:28:55 GMT, in comp.lang.c , Joona I Palaste
    <> wrote:

    >Mark McIntyre <> scribbled the following:
    >> Typically I don't check it because thats what the OP is supposed to
    >> do, dammit ! What, I have to do his homework /and/ read the FAQ for
    >> him? Why not just get his degree, marry his wife, and collect his
    >> paycheck too ?

    >
    >That would suit me...
    >(AFAICR you Mark are already married, so you don't need a wife. Give
    >that one to me... =) )


    Depending on the size of the paycheck, I'm prepared to move to Utah...
    :)

    --
    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, Oct 12, 2003
    #19
  20. Mark McIntyre wrote:

    > On 12 Oct 2003 17:28:55 GMT, in comp.lang.c , Joona I Palaste
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>Mark McIntyre <> scribbled the following:
    >>> Typically I don't check it because thats what the OP is supposed to
    >>> do, dammit ! What, I have to do his homework /and/ read the FAQ for
    >>> him? Why not just get his degree, marry his wife, and collect his
    >>> paycheck too ?

    >>
    >>That would suit me...
    >>(AFAICR you Mark are already married, so you don't need a wife. Give
    >>that one to me... =) )

    >
    > Depending on the size of the paycheck, I'm prepared to move to Utah...
    > :)


    How does (the first) Mrs McIntyre feel about that?

    --
    Richard Heathfield :
    "Usenet is a strange place." - Dennis M Ritchie, 29 July 1999.
    C FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
    K&R answers, C books, etc: http://users.powernet.co.uk/eton
     
    Richard Heathfield, Oct 12, 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. Variable length arrays Q

    , Feb 20, 2006, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    390
    Jack Klein
    Feb 21, 2006
  2. jaime

    Initialization of variable length arrays

    jaime, Jun 15, 2007, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    1,177
    Ian Collins
    Jun 15, 2007
  3. Erwin Lindemann

    Variable length arrays

    Erwin Lindemann, Mar 6, 2008, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    45
    Views:
    1,169
    Keith Thompson
    Mar 8, 2008
  4. Philipp
    Replies:
    21
    Views:
    1,190
    Philipp
    Jan 20, 2009
  5. Rui Maciel
    Replies:
    56
    Views:
    2,750
    Tim Rentsch
    Jul 10, 2012
Loading...

Share This Page