Yet Another Spinoza Challenge

[spinoza1111]

[more of the same]

You does prove again that you quacks about things you konws nothing
about.

[...]

Herbert,spinoza1111is a troll.  

When my worst "enemy" here concedes I am not a troll, you are indeed
engaged, Mr. Thompson, in what you label trolling and what I'd call
incitement and trouble-making. As is Herr Rosenau.

A "troll" according to the only definition is one who insincerely
posts in order to get a rise out of people. Since 2000 I have
participated in comp.programming and this ng in good faith. I have
been praised here and in comp.programming for creating interesting
discussions. On the basis of my usenet participation prior to 2000, I
was invited to an online forum based at Princeton University Press
that also included Mike Godwin and Cass Sunstein. Neither Godwin (a
well-known cyberliberatarian who created "Godwin's Law" about internet
discussions converging on comparisions to Hitler) nor Sunstein (a
legal theorist of cyberspace) called my contributions to that forum
"trolling".

Furthermore, your use of "troll" is as I have said isomorphic to the
function of "Jew" in anti-semitic ravings. As I have said, it is
unconscious Nordic racism since the fairy-tale troll was a creature of
the European subconscious representative of the races displaced by the
Indo-Europeans.

In this particular post, you are allying yourself with an unpleasant
spammer and inciter who better fits your own personal use of "troll".
Rosenau is "trolling" ME by namecalling and incitement. Nor does he
help his case by his idiosyncratic English.

He's been posting nonsense like
this for years, and repeated attempts to ask him to stop have failed.

He his wasting our time by posting this stuff.  
You, I'm afraid,
are also wasting our time by responding to it.

Wouldn't it be more appropriate for you to say that to Heathfield, if
that is your view? I frankly demur from the law of *omerta* here and I
appreciate, somewhat, Heathfield's willingness here (not always
expressed elsewhere) to answer my points directly. But it seems to me
that your endeavor to boycott me has failed signally, since "Men of
all sorts take a pride to gird at me", as Falstaff says. Indeed it
makes you look quite the fool, quite the obsessive fool, railing at me
from the corner, and too much the poltroon to even properly answer my
emails.

 

[spinoza1111]

"spinoza1111" <[email protected]> ha scritto nel messaggio

[...]

What makes you believe the value of r will be undefined?

....I dunno why he said that, but in general, the miserable C99
"standard" makes it easy to cover up ignorance by saying things are
undefined: it's a sort of Copenhagen interpretation of C but far less
intellectually responsible than the epistemology of quantum theory. I
dunno if he's ignorant since I am not a C specialist nor a self-
serving, double-dealing, triple-crossing four flushing varmint of a C
"expert". If memory serves I thought the answer was C.

 

[cognacc]

I have gotten useful programming done since you were shitting your
pants during the scary parts of Scooby Doo, but I have always
understood better than you that Knuth is right. Programming isn't
making computers go fwing and blerrrppp and zap at all: programming is
not a child's game of faery lights. It is communicating your
intentions as to the use of computers to other human beings, and at
this Herb Schildt has succeeded, which is why you hate him. You
obfuscate, you confuse, you fail to understand, and this, to me, means
you are a failure as a programmer, unless programming is the lowest
form of dirtbag clerical activity known to man.

I epsecially like my hardware to go "biiinnggg"

Actually when getting hands on a new board embedded like. and make the
leds
blink in a pattern, and the small loudspeaker say fwing bleeerrppp.
That has a nice fascination, indicating, yes we can communicate. and
whenever we
get that right, there is always a sense of shared excitement, through
the developers / students.
Yes we have established contact, and can move further.
Its a good thing to have that excitement and fascination in what we
do.

But maybe that makes me a bad programmer and we should hide me (and
pals away in the cellar?)
I still think i can communicate fine with people ouside that technical
group.

I read Dostojevski sometime, i really don't think that proves
anything.
Homers illiad i found boring so i never read that very far.

There is no solution to programming's Homeric nod, the fact that we

Making up adding language / terminology(mostly temporary), as we go
that makes communication more effective in our group
is happening all the time(speak), we just know we shouldnt use that in
our writings.
It improves understanding of our common project.

Hey I just made my board say EooiWW EEEooiiww. jihahh(that was me).


mic

 

[cognacc]

...and your English, which is truly unique...

Nonsense, mein Herr. The fact is that students world wide endeavor to
learn "standard", "received", "BBC" English, and not from social
snobbery, simply to be able to communicate. And I'd caution you from
ranting and inciting here in your own version of English. It is rather
disturbing.

Whye don't you use your common sense, on what he "speaks" in english.

He's communication was quite clear and understandable, even though he
might have twisted his english a bit(?).

You are your own definition of heathfield, towards how people speak
the language.
That means you are attacking him in order to destroy him?, because his
english arent't/isn't (use your commonsense)
"pure", "standard", "received??" "ISO" english.
But you understood him right, right?


mic

 

[Kenny McCormack]

On Sep 6, 3:40 am, "Herbert Rosenau" <[email protected]> blathered
incoherently:
....

So, then tell us what C is meaning by 'a screen' and where that is
defined in the standard. Ah, I see, you are a duck quacking about
things you knows nothing about. Rigt, you hare only a twit like the
other twits around in this group like the naiva (or how the naive who
does like you knows nothing about C) who things that there is only one
OS running on the only existent processor who is selling a properitary
compiler that is not a C processor even as he claims that were one.

Waiter! I'll have another order of word salad, please.

 

[spinoza1111]

Undefined behaviour is to make it easy to write optimising compilers. On
some platforms an overflowing integer might automatically trigger an
excpetion which is hard to override. On another one it might be difficult to
detect overflow at all. By saying "the behaviour on overflow is undefined"
both the compilers can simply emit the code register a = register b +
register c, which is generally what the programmer wants when he write a = b
+ c;

That sounds, Malcolm, like an Official Story. I don't think behaviors
were made undefined to make it easier to write new optimizing
compilers. They were made undefined to make enough compilers "work"
with minimal change and to preserve the stock prices of compiler
development companies.

 

[spinoza1111]

Whye don't you use your common sense, on what he "speaks" in english.

He's communication was quite clear and understandable, even though he
might have twisted his english a bit(?).

You are your own definition of heathfield, towards how people speak
the language.
That means you are attacking him in order to destroy him?, because his
english arent't/isn't (use your commonsense)
"pure", "standard", "received??" "ISO" english.
But you understood him right, right?

Not talking about Heathfield, mein Herr, am talking about you. Your
dialect is not charming or acceptable because you came in here looking
for a fight. You came as it happened to the right shop.

 

[spinoza1111]

I epsecially like my hardware to go "biiinnggg"

Actually when getting hands on a new board embedded like. and make the
leds
blink in a pattern, and the small loudspeaker say fwing bleeerrppp.
That has a nice fascination, indicating, yes we can communicate. and
whenever we
get that right, there is always a sense of shared excitement, through
the developers / students.
Yes we have established contact, and can move further.
Its a good thing to have that excitement and fascination in what we
do.

But maybe that makes me a bad programmer and we should hide me (and
pals away in the cellar?)
I still think i can communicate fine with people ouside that technical
group.

I read Dostojevski sometime, i really don't think that proves
anything.
Homers illiad i found boring so i never read that very far.


Making up adding language / terminology(mostly temporary), as we go
that makes communication more effective in our group
is happening all the time(speak), we just know we shouldnt use that in
our writings.
It improves understanding of our common project.

Hey I just made my board say EooiWW  EEEooiiww. jihahh(that was me).

mic

Look, I thought I was hot shit when I made the 1401 go fwing too. At
the same time, the better angels of my nature told me that it was a
waste of time and that a real programmer would be more of a public
intellectual able to do IMMANENT criticism (from within) of how data
systems were ruining our lives. I ignored them for a few years only to
discover that Niklaus Wirth and the pre-C Kernighan actually felt the
same as I: that programming consisted of human-human communication as
to our INTENTIONS to use machines, and that far from being niceties,
correctness and elegance were central.

Their advice, which in Wirth's case was almost socialistic (the
pressure for "efficiency" being based on finance capital by way of the
time value of money) was never really accepted although lip service
was given, and it didn't help that Wirth made mistakes in Pascal.

Moreover, rather than being "public intellectuals", programmers were
nothing more than glorified clerks whose wisdom was ascribed to
executives even less able to understand, much less express, what was
happening as code was written...for the data systems which created the
fortunes of the few, such as Mike Bloomberg and Larry Ellison. The
result, today, is that military veterans whose lives are being
destroyed by service-related disabilities are actually told to wait
because "the computer doesn't have your file", and a depression was
caused by irresponsible creation of securitized mortgages using
software.

The result? The toxic atmosphere right here of hatred and thinly
veiled racism, because nobody here actually can give a straight
answer, post "standard" about C.

 

[spinoza1111]

In

spinoza1111wrote:



It is rare for racism to rear its ugly head in comp.lang.c, but on the
few occasions when it happens it normally causes a storm of protest.

Referring to me as "it" is the racism of cowards afraid to lynch
blacks like their grandfathers, who nonetheless need an outlet for
their hate. The use of "troll" is isomorphic to that of "Jew". You
cowards make storms of protest only when the most vague-to-nonexistent
persona is targeted, but as soon as a specific individual is attacked
for nonconforming views, you either join the cybernetic mob or hide.

You get straight answers here all the time. There are none so deaf as
those who will not listen.

Bullshit. You cannot even use the stack anymore to explain how things
work. The Ayatollah Seebach has issued a *fatwa* against this in his
"criticism" of Schildt, and you little taliban bow down.

 

[Herbert Rosenau]

In <[email protected]>, Herbert
Rosenau wrote:



If you are suggesting that Jacob Navia knows nothing about C, I have
to disagree. Whilst his knowledge is perhaps far from perfect, you
simply *can't* successfully maintain a not-quite-ISO-C-conforming
implementation for a number of years without knowing a thing or two
about the language. Since he has done so, he does.

When you says that lccw32 is the only C that exists then you right.
But I can not see that naiva will be able to see that his properitary
commerial compiler is the one that is able to be the only C compiler
on the world as he says always.

If naiva were able to know C he would not tell anybody that his
properitary compiler that is not fully compilant to the standard
(doesn't matter if C89 or C99). If his knowledge of the standard were
really that what you says he would never claim that his compiler were
one that can present as compilant.


--
Tschau/Bye
Herbert

Visit http://www.ecomstation.de the home of german eComStation
eComStation 1.2R Deutsch ist da!

 

[Keith Thompson]

When you says that lccw32 is the only C that exists then you right.

What? Nobody said that.

[snip]

 

[Nick Keighley]

When you says that lccw32 is the only C that exists then you right.

who said that? Or did you mean "when lcc-win32 is the only C compiler
in
the world then..."

But I can not see that naiva will be able to see that his properitary
commerial compiler is the one that is able to be the only C compiler
on the world as he says always.

he never said his compiler was the only one in the world. Or that it
should be. I also don't regard "properitary [sic] and commerial" as
wicked
things, as you obviously do. Plumbers get paid why shouldn't computer
programmers?

If naiva were able to know C he would not tell anybody that his
properitary compiler that is not fully compilant to the standard
(doesn't matter if C89 or C99). If his knowledge of the standard were
really that what you says he would never claim that his compiler were
one that can present as compilant.

His positions appears to be that his compiler is very near to full
compliance
therefore it is C compiler. (Some people, on this ng, say he shouldn't
say this,
but not everyone). I don't *think* he claims full compliance to
the C99 standard. He definitely doesn't claim compliance to C89.

Why is everyone putting words into other people's mouths on this
thread?

 

[Dennis \(Icarus\)]

In <[email protected]>, Kenneth Brody
wrote: [...]
I have gotten useful programming done since you were sh****ng your
pants during the scary parts of Scooby Doo,

[...]

I can't speak for Mr. Heathfield, but I can tell you that I have been
programming computers since 1971. How about you?

You misapprehend. Anyone who began programming earlier than he
did is a senile old fool whereas anyone who began programming
earlier than he did is an inexperienced pup. What is, any
programming you might have is useless because your programming
has been done at the behest of corporate managers who don't know
what they doing.

If you're programming experience is only on your own projcts, then you're
just a hobbyist, if you sucessfully commercialized your venture you're a
corproate capitalist oppressor of the working people, and beneath contempt.
Of course if the company folded, then clearly you're incompetent.

I think we've covered all the bases now.

Dennis

 

[spinoza1111]

In <[email protected]>,

spinoza1111wrote:


Your interpretation is bizarre and (if you're not just being
disingenuous for the sake of manufacturing an opening for an attack)
idiotic. It is quite clear that, in the sentence quoted above, I was
using the word "it" to refer to racism itself, not to any particular
person - and I suspect you know this all too well.

Hey, Reading Rainbow, that's not the passage to which I was referring,
and it wasn't your post.

Stack-based implementations certainly exist, and there's nothing wrong
with explaining how they work. But anyone who thinks that *all*
implementations use stacks for passing *all* parameters is fooling
themselves and, worse, potentially fooling other people too. Besides,
assuming a stack is not a prerequisite for giving a straight answer.

If you don't assume the stack, then you will describe subroutine
return and call as something like "the calling program saves state
(where?) and calls the subroutine, providing it a set of zero, one or
more parameters and a return address (where?)".

It is a *sine qua non* of the competent programmer, IMO, that she be
able to translate processes to machine/assembler level, and if you
don't describe the stack, she most likely will save "state" in "her"
own "data area" in her recursive N factorial program...and then wonder
why it won't work.

You CANNOT write a "re-entrant" pure procedure if its storage is
polluted with "save areas".

Absent Schildt's introduction of the stack, programmers charg'd with
writing a program that calls itself indirectly or directly will write
the sort of Coding Horrors I saw in Chicago's Loop in the 1970s,
including assembler programs with n "save areas" that blew up every
week when n+1 calls occured.

You need the Idea of the Stack.

It's LIFO, it's LIFO, all the way down
All the way down, to the cold steel:
All the way down to the bare ruin'd metal.
And since it is LIFO, all the way down,
You must call it a stack, alack, albeit painted brown.
Read Kant, read the Kritik der Reine Vernunft
Phenomena with noumena thou hast confunft.

 

[Herbert Rosenau]

That sounds, Malcolm, like an Official Story. I don't think behaviors
were made undefined to make it easier to write new optimizing
compilers. They were made undefined to make enough compilers "work"
with minimal change and to preserve the stock prices of compiler
development companies.

We see again that twit spinoza is unable to understund C.

Mr. spinjoza, why are you unable to tell us why you says that there is
a company who is selling GCC and how it makes money on it. Spinoza
proves dayly multiple times that his brain is too small to understund
what C is but quacks about.

--
Tschau/Bye
Herbert

Visit http://www.ecomstation.de the home of german eComStation
eComStation 1.2R Deutsch ist da!

 

[Nick Keighley]

ah, Thelma. She was scary

If you're programming experience is only on your own projcts, then you're
just a hobbyist, if you sucessfully commercialized your venture you're a
corproate capitalist oppressor of the working people, and beneath contempt.
Of course if the company folded, then clearly you're incompetent.

I think we've covered all the bases now.

Richard Stallman was neither a hobbyist (a few other people used
some of his software) nor a korporate klone

 

[Dik T. Winter]

....
> Not talking about Heathfield, mein Herr, am talking about you.

Do you not know that you are talking about three differe different people
here? And while the "main Herr" was appropriate originally, it is
certainly not so this time.

 

[spinoza1111]

In





spinoza1111wrote:


Learn to quote relevant context. Learn to snip irrelevant material.
Learn to reply in the right place. In short... learn.

From wise men, all the time. From fools, never.

Yes, where "where" equals "in some implementation-specific manner".
This has the merit of being true, and it is simple enough to expand
upon it by giving examples, of which a stack is one, and a parameter
block is another (non-exhaustive list).

You've never written a runtime, otherwise you wouldn't say this. You
see, dear boy, the "parameter block" (stack frame) is IN the stack all
nice and cozy. The callee could not find it otherwise. We have
explained this to you repeatedly.

Ignorance is not skepticism, ignorance is not wisdom
Ignorance is not the stupidity of the wise, nor Homer
Nodding off on a warm afternoon whether in Greece or in Simpson's cozy
bar.
Ignorance, my lord, is plain stupidity which gapes.
Heathfield pretendeth grave wisdom when he raises possibility:
But he raises possibilities as doth the slackening caterpillar,
Who dreams of danger and falls thereby
To sleep and dreams, not daring with fate to try.
The ignorant strike blindly at speculation
And kill common sense.

*Which* assembly language? There are (at least) dozens, all different.
Do you know them all?

Yes. You're not worthy: you're scum. Kow tow now.

 

[spinoza1111]

We see again that twit spinoza is unable to understund C.

Mr. spinjoza, why are you unable to tell us why you says that there is
a company who is selling GCC and how it makes money on it. Spinoza
proves dayly multiple times that his brain is too small to understund
what C is but quacks about.

--
Tschau/Bye
Herbert

Visithttp://www.ecomstation.dethe home of german eComStation
eComStation 1.2R Deutsch ist da!

Mein Lieber Herr, you have missed it where
I explained all to you (auf du).
You gibt zee code away
To starving young programmer, orphaned at birth
Struggling in technische Hochschule to prove seinem worth.
You let zee Fraulein in zee whorenhaus
Haff zee software for eine free blowen Job.

But venn zee wicked Kapitalist comes along
You do not sell zee software for einem Song
You look at him like Pirate Jenny in Bertolt Brecht
You look at his fine clothes undt seinem Watch,
And his tall hat of zee Zilken kind,
And his shoes so polished to ein Schein,
Undt you say, vun two three
T'ousand neuen Reichs Marks from zee likes of Thee!

Oh, das Meer ist Blaue, zo Blaue,
And zis is zee way it verks, is how.

 

[spinoza1111]

spinoza1111wrote:

In <[email protected]>, Kenneth Brody
wrote:

[...]
I have gotten useful programming done since you were sh****ng your
pants during the scary parts of Scooby Doo,

[...]

I can't speak for Mr. Heathfield, but I can tell you that I have been
programming computers since 1971.  How about you?

I wrote my first program in IBM 1401 assembler language in the then-
new library of Northwestern University on a freezing cold day in 1970;
I was not a student at Northwestern, but at Roosevelt in the city.
When the professor and I loaded it on the machine, it loaded itself on
top of the professor's loader. When I changed the "org" to the proper
address (233, one six bit byte past the end of the print area) it
worked perfectly, but all it did was make change for a ten dollar
bill.

In May of that year, I went on strike with most of my mates after
Nixon's illegal invasion of Cambodia. The professor announced that
while there would be no more lectures, students could use the computer
center to complete all programming assignments. As demonstrators we
picketed the president's office and did not harass the people in the
computer center, since, we agreed, after the revolution we would need
computers to calculate shares in cooperative ventures, store macrame
patterns for the chicks, and extend the Club of Rome's Fortran models
of ecological disaster.

I am not making this up. Cf. Ted Nelson's book, still available,
Computer Lib. And we were right. Computers were stolen from the people
and used to create bug-ridden privatized secret code which has played
a major role in the financial crash and depression.

I got a B in the class because my last program was late (a bubble
sort). Also, instead of sorting numbers, I made a list of four-letter
words, sorted it, and handed it in. Not very mature, I admit forty
years on.