Pointers to 'Data Structures' in C

Discussion in 'C Programming' started by DSKR, Jun 24, 2003.

  1. DSKR

    DSKR Guest

    I was just quoting all earlier mentioned topics for reference,copied from
    "Or maybe that's just me"....this is what exactly I have been poting
    about.Because you are experienced you find everything related to C to be
    But many learners don't.Just as you find some 'Advanced' concepts in Perl
    (this may lead to another thread,'How could you call anything in perl to be
    many..many & many find Advanced concepts in C.This is the reason for
    proliferation of courses on
    'Advanced C'.

    DSKR, Jun 28, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  2. DSKR

    goose Guest

    the first search I did was for "advanced C" (with the quotes).

    result #1 pointed to a webpage which had none of the topics
    you mentioned above (ADT's, etc) - http://cplus.about.com/cs/advancedc/

    result #2 and #3 pointed to accu book lists, both of which were much to
    long for me to read through. the advanced C books no doubt covered
    the scenarios you listed.

    result #4 is the outline of a course for C. "Description This course
    covers advanced features of C in the use of C in more advanced applications."
    of the 13 highlights of the syllabus listed, only one of them mentions
    data structures like you wanted; surely a weak case for data structures
    to be "advanced C" ?

    result #5 takes me to an advanced C tutorial (or so it calls itself),
    which *never* *even* *mentions* data structures like you wanted.
    (it is, in case you were wondering, an x86-based tut on video drivers)

    result #6 and #7 and #8 had nothing to do with the C programming language

    result #9 is for something called the batky-howell advanced C course,
    with merely a single chapter on linked-lists (nothing else like tree's ADT's

    result #10 is another thing totally unrelated to the C programming language.

    it would be wise, before asking someone to look up something that proves
    your point, to look it up yourself first, just in case :)

    anyway, you still have not answered exactly *who* considers these
    things to be advanced concepts.
    I did, i googled for "advanced C", is google different on your world ?
    i think not, i might be normal, or just about average, but not exceptional.
    what do you mean "else" ??? I never categorised *anything* under the umbrella
    of "advanced".
    no, not really funny ... but you will find it so when you realise that
    ADTs, linked-lists, tree's of every type, etc are not advanced "C" concepts,
    but merely usefull data constructs that you will encounter in every language.

    just because you are able to do them in C, it does not mean that doing them
    in C is /advanced/ ...

    google is your fiend !!!!
    goose, Jun 30, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  3. DSKR

    goose Guest

    I would like you to note that I have *not* agreed that "there is a lesser
    variant of everything" !!!

    if you would be so kind as to not mis-quote me again, I would very much
    appreciate it !!!

    I do feel that there are some things which do *not* have a lesser variant,
    primarily because the thing in question is simple. As to whether the C
    programming language is a creature like that, I suppose it might differ
    according to the individual.

    but that is not what you were stating. you stated (more than once) that
    it is accepted that ADT's, tree's and a whole lot of other issues that
    are not exclusively related to the C programming language are "advanced
    C" concepts. you have not yet said who considers them to be advanced ...
    by that line of reasoning, the ability to read and decipher shakespearean
    quotations ("Olde English") would be an "advanced" concept ? or something
    that would only be taught as part of an advanced language course ?
    I have given it another thought, an I've already stated that from the
    perspective of a learner, *everything* is an advanced concept.
    not what I meant, let me clarify : C is a simple language, I would
    say that it is the simplest of all the languages that I have learned.
    it has none of the extras that other languages have (support for exceptions,
    type-safety until the programmer goes blue, concept of classes, objects,

    ADTs, data structures, trees, etc are *not* advanced C concepts. you may
    argue that they are advanced data constructs (although, they are possibly
    the simpler ones around, with the exception of regular arrays), but
    they are not advanced C concepts.

    yes, but its not what you asked, is it ?
    i sincerely doubt it, no matter what the language is that you are
    programming in.

    she sells C shells by the c-shore
    goose, Jun 30, 2003
  4. DSKR

    DSKR Guest

    Please don't get frustrated.It is very clear that you are not going to
    accept anything in words.I have shown you so many evidences to support my
    argument, in my earlier post today.I can show you many
    more.....books...courses....tutorials...etc *Show* me evidences to prove
    your argument.

    DSKR, Jun 30, 2003
  5. DSKR

    DSKR Guest

    wow,what a great technique of interpreting a search result. What should you
    look at in a search result? Something related to *what you want* or
    *everything* it displays?(should I tell you how a link gets first place in a
    search result?)In this case you should have been looking at pages that
    display 'Advanced C' concepts.Not book reviews,skincare related stuff or
    serum related things.
    Just the first two pages of my search("Advanced C") on google displayed the
    following links related to *Advanced C*.I got 15,550 results.(Google doesn't
    display a link if it doesn't contain 'Advanced C'...Right?). Ok, I am not
    listing them all.I am
    posting the *related results* displyed on 'FIRST TWO' Pages.

    Kindly refer these and give a reply.If you are not satisfied with
    these....refer all 15,000 odd links.

    I request fellow group members to make a similar search and let me know if
    the result is anything different.

    DSKR, Jun 30, 2003
  6. DSKR

    goose Guest

    what do you mean "interpretation" ??? that is the first page
    of my search. surely you dont expect me to search through all the
    results to justify your argument ?
    your theory would be interesting,
    yes, and of the links I found on the first page, I *did* mention the
    ones that said "advanced C" concepts.

    and of all the ones that mention advanced C concepts, only *one* of
    them had a chapter on data structures that you referred to.
    it lists 13 items in its TOC, only 1 of which is data structures.
    this does not refer to ADTs, trees, etc as "advanced"
    this "advanced C" class is a joke, amongst other things, they
    offer to teach one how to open, read and write files using std. c

    otoh, it *does* mention queues, stacks and binary trees
    this does not refer to ADTs, trees, etc as "advanced"
    (it does refer to other course contents as advanced, though).
    this does not refer to ADTs, trees, etc as "advanced".
    this site was down when I tried (8:30am, gmt +2)
    down when i tried.
    have done so, where possible. it seems you and one other person in
    the entire world thinks that ADT's are an advanced C concept.

    ADT's, tree's, etc are *NOT* an advanced C concept, they are an
    advanced /java/ concept. refer to all 56000 links when you do a search
    for "advanced java" ...

    see ?

    wish I could reset the followups, but posting from google.
    goose, Jul 1, 2003
  7. DSKR

    goose Guest

    why not ?

    you have mis-quoted me ... how would you like it if I said that
    "DSKR has said that using integers is an advanced C concept" ???

    you wont like that very much, will you ?
    actually, if you were to *post* something significant other than your
    own opinion (and thus far, your argument has been "everyone knows that
    ADT's and treesa, etc are advanced C concepts), I would gladly shut up.
    no you haven't. only a single one of the 20 results you looked at
    from google refers to stacks, trees, ADTs, etc as "advanced", all the others
    do not!!!

    if you can, then go ahead.
    otherwise stfd
    *you* made the claim, *you* show the proof.

    do you even remember what your argument was ???

    if you cannot even remember (and I can see that you dont, or
    else you would not have asked me to prove my argument), then
    what the hell are you going on about?

    for the last time (and pay close attention, i'm giving you a clue)
    stacks, trees and other ADTS are not specific to the C programming
    language. they can be implemented in *most* languages.

    therefore they are *not* advanced C concepts, for if they were, then
    they would also have to be advanced java concepts, advanced assembly
    concepts, advanced pascal concepts, advanced c++ concepts, etc ad nauseum

    they are *NOT*, repeat, _NOT_ advanced from the language pov. you may,
    if you so wish, consider them to be advanced data structure concepts.

    advanced C, I would think, would be implementing function-lookup tables
    to do runtime-overloading, writing data-containers that are generic
    (as Neil Cerutti pointed out), implementing OO, along with inheritance.

    writing a mere stack, or binary tree, ar queue, or doing bit
    manipulation is simple in comparison, once you know how your data
    structure is supposed to work.

    how can you call something that is thought to all college first-years
    (who are studying C) "advanced" is beyond me ...

    if it was advanced, varsities might wait till the students are in
    their second year before teaching it to them.

    btw, search "introduction to C" and "stacks" on google. a lot of courses
    teach stacks to the first-year students.
    goose, Jul 1, 2003
  8. DSKR

    DSKR Guest

    Any person following this thread, would have by now realised that you are
    MAD(I am too decent to use vulgar words like you did) and that you are also
    100% BLIND, because you were unable to find a single concept of many things
    I categorize as Advanced C, in any on the 7 links I posted(Results from just
    the first two pages of search) nor will you find anything in any of the
    15,000 odd results your search would display. Even if you find something,you
    would just say that the site was down.You would always say that I didn't
    show you a single evidence and you would never show a single proof which
    supports your argument.

    just to prove your meaningless arguments to the fellow members I am quoting
    my reply to your other post, here
    you replied....
    and in your reply you said that
    so Mr.MAD, I now realised how much time I wasted trying to argue with you.I
    sincerely pity the condition of your employer & colleagues.May GOD save
    DSKR, Jul 1, 2003
  9. DSKR

    DSKR Guest

    again a proof of how MAD you are.In the other post today you said,
    and in this post you say that
    so Mr.MAD, I now realised how much time I wasted trying to argue with you.I
    sincerely pity the condition of your employer & colleagues.May GOD save
    DSKR, Jul 1, 2003
  10. DSKR

    goose Guest

    are you merely oblivious to irony ? or do you regard stooping
    to personal remarks as vindication of your argument ?
    good luck, hope you figure out the difference between data structures
    and the language ... thought I could enlighten you, sorry ...

    dont worry, you'll get it ... eventually ...

    gonna go study the advanced concept of using emacs as a tex editor,
    just now ...
    goose, Jul 1, 2003
  11. DSKR

    goose Guest

    thats probably because the things you have categorised as advanced
    C is not categorised as advanced C on many of the links you have posted.
    the irony was a bit much, wasn't it ?
    god ??? to an agnostic ????

    dont worry, DSKR, you *will* get it eventually ...

    apologies to rest of group for, amongst other things, my vulgar language,
    goose, Jul 1, 2003
  12. DSKR

    Giuseppe Guest

    Yes, e.g.
    to think how a function has to calculate is 40+ minutes
    implement it is 5 minutes
    Giuseppe, Jul 3, 2003
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.