O_TEXT, in microsoft environment

[Tor Rustad]

When opening a file with open and O_TEXT, in microsoft environment, and
then reading it with read, it is done in text mode.

Check out the standard C functions instead:

fopen, fread, fwrite, fclose

 

[Malcolm McLean]

I see no reason to attack Java or C++ in a C newsgroup. If people want to
find out how good or how bad those technologies are, comp.lang.c is hardly
the right place to do it.

C++ is a near superset of C. So if we are going to justify use of C at all,
that implies some criticism of C++.

 

[Richard Heathfield]

Malcolm McLean said:

C++ is a near superset of C. So if we are going to justify use of C at
all, that implies some criticism of C++.

I don't think that's true, any more than the decision to use a teaspoon to
stir tea implies criticism of dessert spoons.

 

[Mark McIntyre]

C++ is a near superset of C. So if we are going to justify use of C at all,
that implies some criticism of C++.

That's a nonsensical argument. The superset of earth moving devices
includes ocean-going dredgers, but using a hand-trowel to dig your
window box does not imply any criticism of dredgers.
--
Mark McIntyre

"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it."
--Brian Kernighan

 

[Richard Tobin]

C++ is a near superset of C. So if we are going to justify use of C at all,
that implies some criticism of C++.

[/QUOTE]

That's a nonsensical argument. The superset of earth moving devices
includes ocean-going dredgers, but using a hand-trowel to dig your
window box does not imply any criticism of dredgers.

Neither this nor Richard Heathfield's reply are accurate enough
analogies to refute the claim. A dredger is not a superset of a
hand-trowel. A dessert spoon is not a superset of a teaspoon.

-- Richard

 

[Richard Heathfield]

Richard Tobin said:

That's a nonsensical argument. The superset of earth moving devices
includes ocean-going dredgers, but using a hand-trowel to dig your
window box does not imply any criticism of dredgers.

Neither this nor Richard Heathfield's reply are accurate enough
analogies to refute the claim. A dredger is not a superset of a
hand-trowel. A dessert spoon is not a superset of a teaspoon.[/QUOTE]

Okay, so we need a better illustration. How about this one? The reals are
not just a near superset, but a genuinely "proper" superset, of the
rationals. Nevertheless, using rationals in calculations does not imply
criticism of the reals.

 

[Charlie Gordon]

Charlie Gordon said:


I have never bashed his abilities, only his apparent *in*ability to learn
from his mistakes.

No, you are not. You often use irony in an offensive way that goes well
beyond this claim.

Right. When you make a mistake, you are generally quick to recognise it,
and even when you aren't so quick to do that, you make an effort to
understand what your critic is getting at. Well done you!

Thank you. But I think you are even more stubborn than he is when it comes
to recognizing your errors, or even just amending your position.

I'm not convinced.


Oh, that isn't the side I'm on. If people want to use something else, let
them. I'm not here to defend C, but to help people to learn it. Part of
helping people to learn C involves pointing out mistakes made not just by
the OP but by those who respond to him. But I have made a conscious effort
(not always successfully) to resist replying to Jacob Navia's articles in
recent months, despite the large number of mistakes he makes, simply
because such discussions tend to generate more heat than light. Since few
others here want to attract the kind of flak that I get from him, the
result is that many of his mistakes go uncorrected. This is not good for
the OPs or for the group.

Extreme conservatism is also counterproductive for the OPs and confines to
pedantry. Confusing newbies with the intricacies of non two's complement
representations or padding bits and trap values is, IMHO, useless display of
pedantry.

I'll make you a deal. If you will personally undertake to post corrections
to all the mistakes Jacob Navia makes in this group, I'll never so much as
mention his name again. Fair?

Fair. I will just not be as quick to jump on my keyboard as you are, time
not permitting.

I see no reason to attack Java or C++ in a C newsgroup. If people want to
find out how good or how bad those technologies are, comp.lang.c is hardly
the right place to do it.

Attacks are not necessary, irony will suffice.

 

[Richard Heathfield]

Charlie Gordon said:

No, you are not. You often use irony in an offensive way that goes well
beyond this claim.

Well, I disagree.

Thank you. But I think you are even more stubborn than he is when it
comes to recognizing your errors, or even just amending your position.

Perhaps we can agree to disagree about that. I try hard to own up to my own
errors as soon as possible, partly because it's the right thing to do and
partly because I hate to fight losing battles.

Extreme conservatism is also counterproductive for the OPs

Those who read what I write a little more objectively will actually realise
that I'm not actually an extreme conservative.

Fair. I will just not be as quick to jump on my keyboard as you are,
time not permitting.

Okay, for as long as you continue to correct every single error he makes in
comp.lang.c, within a reasonable time - say, within three days of his
posting the erroneous material - I'll refrain from replying to him,
mentioning his name, or making any comment about him or his code in
comp.lang.c. But I don't think you realise the magnitude of what you've
just undertaken to do.

 

[Richard Heathfield]

Charlie Gordon said:

"Richard Heathfield" <[email protected]> a écrit dans le message de
news: (e-mail address removed)...


Fair.

Charlie, I see a LOT of his mistakes still uncorrected by anyone, four days
after you promised to post corrections to all his mistakes. If you can't
keep to your end of the bargain, I will not feel bound by mine.

I will just not be as quick to jump on my keyboard as you are,
time not permitting.

If you don't have much time available, you cannot possibly honour a promise
to correct all the mistakes he makes here. (Nor could I, but then I've
never made such a promise.)