YKYBRclcTLW

Discussion in 'C Programming' started by Kenneth Brody, Jun 19, 2007.

  1. You Know You've Been Reading clc Too Long When...

    You switch to another Usenet group, see a thread with the subject
    "bread", and think "but bread() isn't standard -- it's a FreeBSD
    extension".


    P.S. Recognizing "YKYB..." acronyms is a sure sign as well.

    --
    +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------+
    | Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | #include |
    | kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | <std_disclaimer.h> |
    +-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------+
    Don't e-mail me at: <mailto:>
     
    Kenneth Brody, Jun 19, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Kenneth Brody

    BWIGLEY Guest

    Re: YKYBRclcTLW [OT]

    "Kenneth Brody" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > You Know You've Been Reading clc Too Long When...
    >
    > You switch to another Usenet group, see a thread with the subject
    > "bread", and think "but bread() isn't standard -- it's a FreeBSD
    > extension".


    Um... What sort of newsgroup has postings about bread? It sounds...
    /interesting/.
     
    BWIGLEY, Jun 20, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Kenneth Brody

    jacob navia Guest

    Re: YKYBRclcTLW [OT]

    BWIGLEY wrote:
    > "Kenneth Brody" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> You Know You've Been Reading clc Too Long When...
    >>
    >> You switch to another Usenet group, see a thread with the subject
    >> "bread", and think "but bread() isn't standard -- it's a FreeBSD
    >> extension".

    >
    > Um... What sort of newsgroup has postings about bread? It sounds...
    > /interesting/.
    >
    >


    Yes, /interesting/!!!

    This group is a bore. The only messages are
    -----
    "I pressed "compile" button but it did not work".

    Help MEEEEEE!!!
    ------
    Please do my homework.
    -----
    I wrote i++=i++; but it doesn't work

    WHY???

    Always when you start some interesting stuff the same people
    will start yelling:

    OFF TOPIC!!! OFF TOPIC!!!

    Because they would like to get the language back to 1990...

    There are no discussions about software design, software maintenance,
    debugging and all the things that really interest the programmers!

    jacob
     
    jacob navia, Jun 20, 2007
    #3
  4. Re: YKYBRclcTLW [OT]

    jacob navia said:

    <snip>

    > This group is a bore.


    To you, maybe. Not to others here. If you find it boring, well, nobody
    is forcing you to read it or post to it.

    > The only messages are
    > -----
    > "I pressed "compile" button but it did not work".
    >
    > Help MEEEEEE!!!
    > ------
    > Please do my homework.
    > -----
    > I wrote i++=i++; but it doesn't work


    Actually, discussions can and do go considerably deeper than that.

    > WHY???
    >
    > Always when you start some interesting stuff the same people
    > will start yelling:
    >
    > OFF TOPIC!!! OFF TOPIC!!!


    1) What you consider interesting is not necessarily interesting to other
    people;
    2) What other people consider interesting is not necessarily interesting
    to you;
    3) Being "interesting" is not sufficient to make a subject topical here;
    4) There are ***OTHER NEWSGROUPS*** for discussing the kinds of things
    that you want to discuss; for example, the undoubtedly fascinating
    subject of lcc-win32 extensions is dealt with in its very own
    newsgroup. In ***THIS*** newsgroup, we discuss C.

    > Because they would like to get the language back to 1990...


    No, we'd like to get the language forward to 1999 so that we can all
    sing from the same sheet again, but implementors show little sign of
    co-operating.

    > There are no discussions about software design, software maintenance,
    > debugging and all the things that really interest the programmers!


    Not here, no. This newsgroup is about C. Software design, maintenance,
    debugging and the rest are all very interesting and indeed vital things
    to talk about, but there are ***OTHER NEWSGROUPS*** for discussing such
    things. ***OTHER NEWSGROUPS***.

    Um, how can I put this? Ah! I know!

    Ce newsgroup est au sujet de conception de C. Software, entretien, la
    correction et le repos sont toutes les choses très intéressantes et en
    effet essentielles pour parler, mais il y a *** l'AUTRE *** de
    NEWSGROUP pour discuter de telles choses. *** D'AUTRES NEWSGROUP ***.

    (Don't blame me for that translation - blame Babelfish.)

    --
    Richard Heathfield
    "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
    http://www.cpax.org.uk
    email: rjh at the above domain, - www.
     
    Richard Heathfield, Jun 20, 2007
    #4
  5. Kenneth Brody

    Chris Hills Guest

    Re: YKYBRclcTLW [OT]

    In article <46792d42$0$5104$>, jacob navia
    <> writes
    >BWIGLEY wrote:
    >> "Kenneth Brody" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> You Know You've Been Reading clc Too Long When...
    >>>
    >>> You switch to another Usenet group, see a thread with the subject
    >>> "bread", and think "but bread() isn't standard -- it's a FreeBSD
    >>> extension".

    >> Um... What sort of newsgroup has postings about bread? It sounds...
    >> /interesting/.
    >>

    >
    >Yes, /interesting/!!!
    >
    >This group is a bore. The only messages are
    >-----
    >"I pressed "compile" button but it did not work".
    >
    >Help MEEEEEE!!!
    >------
    >Please do my homework.
    >-----
    >I wrote i++=i++; but it doesn't work
    >
    >WHY???
    >
    >Always when you start some interesting stuff the same people
    >will start yelling:
    >
    >OFF TOPIC!!! OFF TOPIC!!!
    >
    >Because they would like to get the language back to 1990...


    No the On Topic net nannies include K&R1 to C99
    However the ISO C panel are looking at moving part way back from C99 to
    C95.....

    >There are no discussions about software design, software maintenance,
    >debugging and all the things that really interest the programmers!


    They would argue that you should go to a SW design NG, a SW Maintenance
    NG, a debugging NG..... Incidentally all of those NG's will discuss C
    as well.


    --
    \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
    \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
    /\/\/ www.phaedsys.org \/\/\
    \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
     
    Chris Hills, Jun 20, 2007
    #5
  6. Re: YKYBRclcTLW [OT]

    BWIGLEY wrote:
    > "Kenneth Brody" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> You Know You've Been Reading clc Too Long When...
    >>
    >> You switch to another Usenet group, see a thread with the subject
    >> "bread", and think "but bread() isn't standard -- it's a FreeBSD
    >> extension".

    >
    > Um... What sort of newsgroup has postings about bread? It sounds...
    > /interesting/.
    >

    alt.music.sixties?
    --
    clvrmnky <mailto:>

    Direct replies will be blacklisted. Replace "spamtrap" with my name to
    contact me directly.
     
    Clever Monkey, Jun 20, 2007
    #6
  7. Re: YKYBRclcTLW [OT]

    Richard Heathfield <> wrote:

    > No, we'd like to get the language forward to 1999 so that we can all
    > sing from the same sheet again, but implementors show little sign of
    > co-operating.


    <semi OT>Just for the sake of comparison, how long did it take for the
    Fortran 90 standard to overtake Fortran 77? (Or did it?)

    > Ce newsgroup est au sujet de conception de C. Software, entretien, la
    > correction et le repos sont toutes les choses tr?s int?ressantes et en
    > effet essentielles pour parler, mais il y a *** l'AUTRE *** de
    > NEWSGROUP pour discuter de telles choses. *** D'AUTRES NEWSGROUP ***.


    Wares, le plus soft? Group de news? :)

    --
    C. Benson Manica | I *should* know what I'm talking about - if I
    cbmanica(at)gmail.com | don't, I need to know. Flames welcome.
     
    Christopher Benson-Manica, Jun 20, 2007
    #7
  8. Re: YKYBRclcTLW [OT]

    Chris Hills <> writes:
    [...]
    > However the ISO C panel are looking at moving part way back from C99
    > to C95.....

    [...]

    Really? I've never heard that from anyone other than you. Can you
    expand on that? (Such information would be both interesting and
    topical, though it might be more appropriate for comp.std.c.)

    --
    Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
    San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
    "We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
     
    Keith Thompson, Jun 20, 2007
    #8
  9. Re: YKYBRclcTLW [OT]

    On 20 Jun, 14:33, jacob navia <> wrote:
    > This group is a bore.


    I find it extremely interesting myself. I have
    a big backlog of threads I want to read and
    I could hardly find the time to read all the
    interesting new threads even when I was accessing
    usenet on a daily basis.

    > Always when you start some interesting stuff the same people
    > will start yelling:
    >
    > OFF TOPIC!!! OFF TOPIC!!!


    They say "off topic" (without using capitals)
    when it's off topic not when it's interesting.

    > Because they would like to get the language back to 1990...


    Do they ? Where did you get that idea ?

    > There are no discussions about software design, software maintenance,
    > debugging and all the things that really interest the programmers!


    If there are issues regarding software design etc. which
    are specific to standard C then I believe they would be
    on topic here. Otherwise, comp.programming is only
    a few keystrokes away.

    Anyway , although I'm sure that you know as well as
    any other regular that your list of topics which supposedly
    exhaust what appears here has little connection with
    reality, here are some titles for you to search for:

    What makes a "good" programmer ?
    Something funny about numbers
    Why are C and C++ so popular?

    There have been a lot more in the last 12 months or so
    but quite annoyingly I don't seem to have stored the titles
    anywhere.
     
    Spiros Bousbouras, Jun 21, 2007
    #9
  10. Re: YKYBRclcTLW [OT]

    On 21 Jun, 00:40, Spiros Bousbouras <> wrote:
    > On 20 Jun, 14:33, jacob navia <> wrote:
    >
    > > This group is a bore.


    > Anyway , although I'm sure that you know as well as
    > any other regular that your list of topics which supposedly
    > exhaust what appears here has little connection with
    > reality, here are some titles for you to search for:
    >
    > What makes a "good" programmer ?
    > Something funny about numbers
    > Why are C and C++ so popular?
    >
    > There have been a lot more in the last 12 months or so
    > but quite annoyingly I don't seem to have stored the titles
    > anywhere.


    I've just located one:
    Maps, filters and accumulators

    I seem to recall a thread which I think was about the width
    of integers and included a macro which would return the
    width even if it was huge. But I don't know which words to
    search for.

    Here's another interesting one:
    SICP playfulness in C?
     
    Spiros Bousbouras, Jun 21, 2007
    #10
  11. Kenneth Brody

    BWIGLEY Guest

    Re: YKYBRclcTLW [OT]

    "jacob navia" <> wrote in message
    news:46792d42$0$5104$...
    > BWIGLEY wrote:
    > > "Kenneth Brody" <> wrote in message
    > > news:...
    > >> You Know You've Been Reading clc Too Long When...
    > >>
    > >> You switch to another Usenet group, see a thread with the subject
    > >> "bread", and think "but bread() isn't standard -- it's a FreeBSD
    > >> extension".

    > >
    > > Um... What sort of newsgroup has postings about bread? It

    sounds...
    > > /interesting/.
    > >
    > >

    >
    > Yes, /interesting/!!!
    >
    > This group is a bore. The only messages are


    Come on, It's C. It's not comp.lang.sugar-faeries or something. What
    do you expect? Anyway, Richard Heathfield can be quite funny
    sometimes.

    > -----
    > "I pressed "compile" button but it did not work".
    >
    > Help MEEEEEE!!!
    > ------
    > Please do my homework.
    > -----
    > I wrote i++=i++; but it doesn't work
    >
    > WHY???
    > Always when you start some interesting stuff the same people
    > will start yelling:
    >
    > OFF TOPIC!!! OFF TOPIC!!!


    There'll always be Off Topic stuff, and there'll always be people
    complaining about it. Personally I feel that threads like this should
    be replied to in the manner that they are asked. If they wanna act
    retarded then act retarded back.

    > Because they would like to get the language back to 1990...
    >
    > There are no discussions about software design, software

    maintenance,
    > debugging and all the things that really interest the programmers!


    Yeah, that sort of thing would be nice.
     
    BWIGLEY, Jun 21, 2007
    #11
  12. Kenneth Brody

    Ian Bush Guest

    Re: YKYBRclcTLW [OT]

    As if by magic, Christopher Benson-Manica appeared !

    > Richard Heathfield <> wrote:
    >
    >> No, we'd like to get the language forward to 1999 so that we can all
    >> sing from the same sheet again, but implementors show little sign of
    >> co-operating.

    >
    > <semi OT>Just for the sake of comparison, how long did it take for the
    > Fortran 90 standard to overtake Fortran 77? (Or did it?)
    >


    Certainly less than a decade. The vast majority of current compilers
    are ( supposedly ) fully compliant to the Fortran 95 standard.

    The latest Fortran standard is 2003. There are, to my knowledge, no fully
    compliant compilers yet, though IBM and NAG are both close. See e.g.


    http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infoc....ibm.xlf111.aix.doc/getstart/new_features.htm

    Ian
     
    Ian Bush, Jun 21, 2007
    #12
  13. Re: YKYBRclcTLW [OT]

    Ian Bush <> wrote:

    > As if by magic, Christopher Benson-Manica appeared !


    (It WAS magic.)

    > > <semi OT>Just for the sake of comparison, how long did it take for the
    > > Fortran 90 standard to overtake Fortran 77? (Or did it?)


    > Certainly less than a decade. The vast majority of current compilers
    > are ( supposedly ) fully compliant to the Fortran 95 standard.


    Hm. Would it be fair to suggest that Fortan 90 brought more needed
    features to Fortan than C99 brought to C users, spurring the eventual
    acceptance of the new Fortran standard whereas C99 shows little sign
    of overtaking C89?

    --
    C. Benson Manica | I *should* know what I'm talking about - if I
    cbmanica(at)gmail.com | don't, I need to know. Flames welcome.
     
    Christopher Benson-Manica, Jun 21, 2007
    #13
  14. Kenneth Brody

    Ian Bush Guest

    Re: YKYBRclcTLW [OT]

    As if by magic, Christopher Benson-Manica appeared !

    > Ian Bush <> wrote:
    >
    >> As if by magic, Christopher Benson-Manica appeared !

    >
    > (It WAS magic.)
    >
    >> > <semi OT>Just for the sake of comparison, how long did it take for the
    >> > Fortran 90 standard to overtake Fortran 77? (Or did it?)

    >
    >> Certainly less than a decade. The vast majority of current compilers
    >> are ( supposedly ) fully compliant to the Fortran 95 standard.

    >
    > Hm. Would it be fair to suggest that Fortan 90 brought more needed
    > features to Fortan than C99 brought to C users, spurring the eventual
    > acceptance of the new Fortran standard whereas C99 shows little sign
    > of overtaking C89?
    >


    I can't really say whether it is fair to suggest or not - C is very much
    my second language and I rarely use it. I read this newsgroup so that
    on the occasions that I do need it I don't screw up too badly.

    But ... On the acceptance of F90 there was initially a lot of skepticism
    from the user base, at least in my experience. However one or two features
    seemed nice ( e.g. the new array features and that radical innovation,
    dynamic memory allocation ), so the tried that and saw that they
    were good. So they tried something else, and then something else ...

    Ian
     
    Ian Bush, Jun 25, 2007
    #14
    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.

Share This Page