Re: The worst 'hello world' example ever written...

B

Beth

Attila said:

Nope, you did...
Beth! Get a life! You are fixated on this topic. Forget The Sage and just
understand that this is not your personal crusade or even enything remotely
important in your life. You have been posting here 3 pages (on an 1600x1200
monitor) essays about The Sage. At a time when he was not posting and
neither was anyone else. I could have asked you rudely, I did not. But
now - since you have asked for it - I do: please *stop whining*.

I had long since ignored the Sage ages ago...it is _solely_ your
attitude in response to me that concerns me now...as for the "3 pages"
of post, I don't do anything else...nothing should be construed from
it, I'm just a verbose person, who never does do "brief" posts...

Really, use Google groups to check out my posts to alt.lang.asm for
the last few years...or ask anyone in the ASM group...Google must have
to buy an extra high capacity storage system to archive just my posts
alone...don't construe anything from the length of my posts...they are
_ALL_ like that...it's nothing exceptional or "personal crusade" about
it...

Please, someone from alt.lang.asm, tell them that I'm always like this
and that I've actually been _restrained_ in this thread...exactly
because I really don't give that much of a crap about Sage
whatsoever...the warnings were for _you lot_ only...then, really, I
was intent to simply _leave_ the thread...the thing that's brought me
back - about a week later - was actually looking back into the thread
to see what was going on to find that your responses which I found
unwarranted and rude...if you'd said nothing, you'd never have heard a
single word from me (probably even never again, as I post to the other
group not the C++ one and our paths may not have crossed ever
again)...the length doesn't signify anything...and the _sole_ thing
keeping me in this thread - well, okay, I did make some remarks about
"backwards compatibility" too in a separate non-Sage branch of the
thread - is your responses...

Beth :)
 
B

Beth

Attila said:
Stop whining!

Stop being so rude as to give me reason to need to "whine", as you put
it...I'd be long gone by now if you'd just said nothing whatsoever...

Beth :)
 
W

WW

The_Sage wrote:
[SNIP]
"The men that American people admire most extravagantly are
most daring liars; the men they detest the most violently are
those who try to tell them the truth" -- H. L. Mencken

Hm. This is exactly the same thing L. Ron Hubbard said. At least we know
where The Sage is coming from...
 
W

WW

Beth said:
Attila, please attempt to at least be polite...especially considering
that I was _exactly right_ about the Sage and what would happen if my
advice was not heeded...that your arrogance here has appropriately
lead to egg running down your face...

There is 0, nul, nil, nada, zip arrogance in my post you have quoted. Of
course if you ask for arrogance long enough you can get it.
 
W

WW

David B. Held wrote:
[SNIP]
Am I the only one that gets the impression that Atilla is a younger
poster?

Still being offended by being reminded that the ANSI C++ standard does not
include all the ANSI standards? Get over it. I have posted a mail, asking
for your apologies if there was a misunderstanding. It seems you don't give
a damn. If this is the case I give up on you. I was able to apologize. If
you are unable to reject it honestly in the open but keep bashing me...
well, then based on the behavior the question should not be about my age.
 
W

WW

Beth said:
Oh...you know, I never thought of that...okay, perhaps I was slightly
too harsh there, then...being old enough to know better but still
young enough to be a right royal pain in the butt myself at times, I
should have thought about that and not dived in so quickly..."fools
rush in" and all that...oops...

First learn basic netiquette (for example do not suspect flame (arrogance in
your words) where there is none) and then take some courses in clearvoyance.
You can go together with David The Great, who knows everything about this
newsgroup after 2 months of contribution. Why? Because both of you are
pretty bad in ESP.
 
W

WW

Beth said:
The person who is offended defines whether offence was caused, not the
offender...okay, if it was not intentionally, then I offer you my
apologies for perhaps over-reacting in my response...but this was the
impression you gave me by repeating unnecessarily the same highly
abrupt post...

Beth: get a life. Honestly. Without any arrogance of any kind.
Perhaps a little in this case, so apologies for that...but you hardly
make a great case for your side when you consider me "over sensitive"
yet persist in the same unthinking abrupt manner...that makes any
upset you cause _delibrate_ because you are clearly aware that I might
not take this method of response in good spirit but yet you persist to
do it, even now...

Beth. You either learn to listen to what is said or you learn to listen to
what you think about it. It is your choice: to make you life easier or
harder.
Oh, alright...if you insist, you are flawlessly perfect and I was
utterly foolish and "evil" for trying to help you lot out, if
possible...

Again: overreacting.
I came in peace...but, hey, if the policy's "shoot to kill" then,
fine, I'll play dead if that suits you...this is, in fact, what's got
me "overly sensitive"...I came in peace, genuinely intent on helping
you lot out in good Faith and I get it ungracefully thrown back in my
face, seemingly for no good reason that I can see...that, to my mind,
is incredibly _rude_...

Again: overreacting.
I'm hardly over sensitive when I have regular dealings with idiots
like the Sage...but your response was slightly different...unlike the
Sage, _YOU_ clearly should know better...

Again: overreacting.
I had _respect_ for you and
thought you were a reasonable person...thus, when you _delibrately_
are rude,

I was not rude.
you're in a different class...Sage doesn't know better, _you
should_...that's why when you act in this way, it actualy is
upsetting...it's not really "overly sensitive"...it's being sensitive
to those who are _serious_ and _delibrate_ in their rudeness because

I was not rude.
they clearly know far, far better that when they act like someone like
the Sage, it's a whole different class...it's "overly sensitive", it's
that I expected a much higher standard from you than from an idiot
like the Sage...

Again: overreacting.
Okay, you haven't noticed that my postings are all grouped together in
time with around a week "gap" in the middle...hint: I'm not reading
this thread continuously and am posting when I have time to do
so...thus, I have to respond all in one go like this, as I simply was
not even reading the thread in the intervening time...

Ironic, really...you said "get a life!"...and, well, yes, that's
exactly why there was such a delay between postings...in the meantime,
I _was_ doing other things...

I was not talking about delays. Never mind.
Okay, fine...

Note, I know that, on Usenet, you're sort of forced onto your toes at
all times because there are flames everywhere...but, sorry, your
mistake - which is what upset - was that you treated me as though less
than human and not deserving of a reasonable, sensible reply when I
had done nothing to you to justify such a response...

Again: overreacting.
Okay, a sensible policy...really, I was only basically trying to tell
you that in my experience of Sage's postings that I'd found out that
this is the best policy and thought to simply tell you all, as it
might help you all...

I got upset simply because I was trying to _help_...nothing more...and
then got treated with a far more abrupt and rude response than, heck,
even the Sage gets...

Yes. Trying to help repeatedly posting huge posts, basically saying the
very same thing over and over again.
Untrue; I posted originally only to stress to _ignore_ him...I then
did not post for over a week to this thread...when I return, I find
your unwarranted responses - and I deemed them "unwarranted" and
"upsetting" for the exact reason you've just stated...I _was_ being
very friendly and trying to _help_ and nothing more, that snapping
rudely was completely unjustified in my eyes...

I did not snap you rudely. I have asked you not to bring up the thread -
which was at that time sinking - and even said *thanx* if you care to look
at what *I posted*.
and I will tolerate
many, many things but I do _DEMAND_ fair treatment...nothing

OK. If it makes you happy, demand it. I only demand fair treatment from
those who are in an authority position. From the others, I either earn it
or not. Which does not matter much in this case, since you have not been
treated unfairly. But if honesty bothers you, you need to look for
"friends" who lie what you want to hear.
more...just fair treatment, that you seemed to not want to give me,

Again: overreacting.
though I gave it to you unreservedly prior to that - so I responded
with a second batch of posts to respond to these accusations and
general nastiness that I believed that I'd done absolutely nothing to
warrant you doing to me...

Bullshit. There was no nastiness from my side until you have started your
personal vendetta against me. With my "inner eyes" I see The Sage
laughing...
Hardly "possessed"...but, if you want to dispute that point, then we
can, of course, simply count up the amount of responses in this
thread...and then, as I say, note that all my posts are "clumped" in
two or three "groups"...which just represents that I was not totally
glued to this thread...again, hardly "possessed"...

Look at what you write and how long it is. I was trying to give to you an
objective opinion. It is your business if you take it or not.
But I can see how you could possibly have got the wrong idea when you
saw a number of posts from me appear...

I have got no idea whatsoever until I have started you to repeat the same
things over and over again. Each showing that you take this The Sage person
way too seriously and in a way too personal way.
but, you see, I was not
constantly here in this thread throughout its life that I was
responding to the thread when I actually had the time to do so...it
was not delibrate "flooding" of the thread but that because I was here
throughout it all but merely "catching up" every time I got time to do
so, it was all "clumped" together...rather than, say, a post or two a
day or something for a week, you got all 7 to 14 posts in one go...

I see.
Although, I could see how if you didn't notice that this was how
things were happening that you might think I was "flooding"...plus,
also, I can be highly verbose and _am_ able to spit out literally 100s
of KBs of plain text post every day...I'm reknown in the ASM groups
for being able to do this...so, also, I can see that you think I might
have been being "extreme" in my postings...but, well, if you see what
I'm like in the ASM groups or ask the ASM people here, you'll realise
that I was being short, restrained and making only a few
posts...hence, what others consider "flooding" just isn't so to me
because I'm just generally able to produce and receive quite a lot of
text that, sorry, I forgot to hold back even more...the ASM guys are
used to this from me but you lot aren't...I tried to restrain it all a
bit but, well, obviously not enough for your tastes...

5Bs. Be Brief Brother, Be Brief.
No, I merely protest when I find things to be wrong...I don't hide
away in a corner...this is how I am...

Cool. I meant your lengthy posts about The Sage and how he frustrates you.
Yes; And I'll show feelings and emotions and admit my mistakes and so
forth in public too...

Good. Try once facing them and eliminating them. You are not what I see
you to be. You are you. But if you lie to yourself you will not become
what you have lied to yourself, but you will become the lie. Real friends
will tell you if you do that, and will show you the mirrored image even if
you don't like it. Even if you hate them for it. Those who try to cheat
themselves into your trust or do not care - well, those will support
anything you say.

Ask yourself! What is easier? Change everyone on the face of the Earth and
beyond who could deliberately or inadvertently? Or change your view of it
and get over it? Or possibly think about what they have said while puting
preconceptions and assumptions away?
This might take some getting used to because, usually, people switch
into "robot mode" in public and insist on being quite the opposite...I
don't...I believe that, in public, there is no lesser incentive
whatsoever in being honest about things than in private (in fact,
there are more people involved, thus, on strict numerical grounds,
there could even be a claim for _more_ honesty in public, perhaps
;)...

That is the case then. I am just as honest here (and make a fool of myself
due to that many times) as I am in real life, being alone with someone or
being in a bigger group.
So, yes, I will show these things and do not consider that to be in
any "wrong" or "weak" or anything...I have my frustrations, I have my
insecurities, I have my emotions, I have my opinions...in my opinion,
it would be _dishonest_ to try to pretend otherwise...it's part of
being human and I'm not ashamed to be human and show that I am
human...

But why do you show them? Did you think about that? And why do you get
offended is someone else has an opinion about it?

Short story. I knew a girl, who in the middle of a discussion about a town
or other things just dropped in a comment about someone being raped there.
At the first time it was only odd. After some such comments (within years)
I have got suspicious. It turned out that the girl was raped several times
on a very brutal way. And she told to no one. She could not. But it was
still coming out on odd occasions. And that was just one story. In my
world people expressing their frustrations and opinions about things being
bad are indeed asking to be listened to and ask for help... they just cannot
do it straight.

And I see a pattern here in you being "proud" of being frustrated.

So the reason why I pointed out that it is bad you pay that much attention
to The Sage and his ranting was not to offend you, but to give you an
"outside" - if not objective - opinion.
That is an unusual thing in public forums, perhaps...but I make no
apologies for it...

Neither did I ask for one. It does not hurt me, it may hurt you. If you
choose to be proud of things bad for you, it is your choice. I have made
all I can do: I have told you you could do better.
to be anything otherwise, would be to present to
you a dishonest face of who I am...I'm not perfect...just like
everyone else on Usenet...I'm just not afraid to sometimes hold up my
hands and say "yup, that's me!"...

Yep. But there is another way. Get rid of those things bothering you by a
simple decision that they won't bother you anymore. And get on with oyur
life being happier and more free.
Don't you see the little smiley faces at the end of my sentences and
in my signature :)

I do. But I also do see you take things way to seriously. No one will type
essays if things did not bother them.
Oh, don't draw any conclusions from the length...really, ask the
people from the ASM groups about that one...I often produce well over
50KB of plain text without batting an eyelid...I am a verbose person
who likes to talk over a subject fully and present my thinking and my
reasoning for the things I say too...

Me too. And I never thought there will be someone else "worse" than me. ;-)
As for my tone, I merely thought it was cautionary at that
point...but, okay, perhaps you somehow picked up "miserable" from
it...charming,

Ah, I bet you tell this to all the boys. ;-)
I must say...but, well, some people can naturally see
through things and pick up underlying currents...

I am one of them. Not always, but being more than 900 years old one learns
a lot. (Referring to my joking about my bad English and really being Yoda.)
I do, on occasion, get miserable about things...

Happens to the best of us. Even me. ;-)
show me someone who doesn't and I'll show you a liar...
but if you picked this up, it had nothing to do with Sage
but was just more "general misery" unrelated to that...also, merely
something temporary...getting out of bed on the wrong side that day,
you know? Nothing of any great concern...

Well, you need to know that. Just be careful not to cheat yourself.
Please, review the postings again...I was not bothering to respond to
Sage at all...and I assure you, the only time I ever do is just to
poke fun at him and nothing else...

Yep. But you were very concerned about others answering him. It looked way
too concerned from the chair where I am sitting.
My attention was not on him but on others who are not aware of what he
is like, in an attempt to make it clear so as not to see anyone made
upset...for instance, as you saw and mentioned, he has absolutely no
qualms about outrightly insulting you with, sometimes, grossly
offensive language...

Yep. But believe me that here there are mostly thinking people (with few
exceptions) and those will see through a troll very fast.
My sole intent was to prevent such upset and to perhaps help to bring
this thread to a swift conclusions

The conclusion is there. There are worldwide experts who posted them. What
is going on now is few people having fun with a pathetic troll.
(because, as you now gather, there's no point
pursuing it at all)...

Not from The Rage. :)
my attentions were NOT on the Sage _whatsoever_...
my attentions were completely on trying to prevent
the damage that he wreaks on others wherever he tramples...I was
attempting to exercise "damage limitation" around the Sage as he
attempted to cause it, solely for the benefit of others...myself, I
know what he's like and how to deal with him...

I see. Do you care to share what damage The Sage did to you? I start to
see something coming up here...
Though I provoke him to respond in saying this, have you noticed that
he generally avoids ever responding to me? Even if I outrightly
challenge him, he resists...trust me, I know how to kick his arse any
day of the week...all I was trying to do was pass on that information
so that he couldn't get a foothold at all...

:) He won't. When all the guys will realise that he is pathetic and
boring he will get no answers whatsoever. And he will get lost.
Not really; Your response was the one that seemed to be picking up
annoyance at Sage and then incorrectly aiming it at me...

Seemed. Repeate that.
perhaps because I just happened to be the next post after him you
responded to and were still stuck in "how to deal with the Sage"
mode...

:) If you think that any of my "angry" replies to Rage were anything more
than me having fun... No. There is no Sage Mode. :) He is not close to
that. I know some trolls here who were able to get at me - once. But I
learn.
I ain't responded to the Sage - but to poke fun - and
he doesn't respond to me...
I've seen him do this for over a year intermittently...
his tricks have no effect on me anymore...

Good. But as I see there is still something you hide, something what drives
you to care about what he does and to drive you to bother to explain your
actions.
I think, though it was entirely
unintentional that I apologise for snapping at you for it, it was you
that accidentally picked up some of the way to treat the Sage and then
accidentally and unintentionally it got carried through into your
responses to me...

Not really. As I have said The Sage is just not clever enough to put me
into any other mood than I am in already. Except when he makes me laugh on
his pathetic tactics.
Hey, no sweat...I've done that once or twice myself...you know, should
have taken a breather from writing one post to someone annoying before
replying to someone reasonable, as you can sometimes accidentally
transfer your bad mood from one post into another unintentionally
because it hasn't completely worn off...

It is not the case. I have briefly asked you to not bring up the thread.
Whatever mood you have felt to detect was not there.
now I see that that's what probably happened,
I apologise for myself snapping at you there
because now I see what probably happened...

Nope. It was simply you, taking a communication without a lot of filling as
hostile. It happens, especially to US people. If something is told
straight it is taken as rude.
and it wasn't meant to be abrupt and rude,
it was just unintentionally carrying some of that
from talking to Sage just prior...fair enough...

I did not take it this way either. I was rather see it as overly sensitive
overreaction.
Actually, you _TOTALLY_ describe what I was doing...all except the
"brief" part...and everyone on the ASM groups will probably be
giggling here, as they know I'm entirely incapable of "brief", even
when I try really hard to do so...

Try holding your breath while you type and never make a post longer than a
breath. :)
There is NO fixation with the Sage...I've not responded to him - but
to poke fun - and he never really bothers responding to me for a long
while now because he knows he can't get at me anymore...

This (IIRC) is at least third time I read this in this post only. I think
there is more to it than meets the eye.
I don't even bother to tell him he's a clueless annoyance,
he already knows...

I don't think he does. I don't think he even knows he ougth to know what he
is.
and I _do_ ignore him...

Ignoring him and not answering his posts are two completely different
things.
but when I saw that he could start his rampage and
damage elsewhere, I thought I would, as you say, post a reminder to
others to keep him from catching out others who are not aware of what
he's like...

OK. Please be assured he will only get any attention here as long as he
amuses people. And he has not too much to offer.
That was exactly what I was doing...the only bit that's different is
that, well, I'm a verbose person...

I say ;-)
I don't do "brief"...and that's not "miserable" or anything...

I did nto conclude it from the size of the posts.
I'm just a Lover of language and don't find
having to write words some terrible, evil chore like some people
do...I like to talk and I am verbose...

#2 for saying the same thing.
and I think this is the real problem here...

Just be sure you don't cheat yourself.
you're not used to me being like that... I'm not used to
people who don't know about this "quirk" of mine because
it's a running gag in the ASM groups that there's just
no such thing as a "concise" post from me :)

I see.
 
W

WW

Beth said:
Stop being so rude as to give me reason to need to "whine", as you put
it...I'd be long gone by now if you'd just said nothing whatsoever...

I gave no reason, only an excuse. :)
 
W

WW

Beth said:
Nope, you did...

Drat. ;-)
I had long since ignored the Sage ages ago...it is _solely_ your
attitude in response to me that concerns me now...as for the "3 pages"
of post, I don't do anything else...nothing should be construed from
it, I'm just a verbose person, who never does do "brief" posts...

You don't say! :)
Really, use Google groups to check out my posts to alt.lang.asm for
the last few years...

I have tried, but Google run out of disk space. :)
or ask anyone in the ASM group...Google must have
to buy an extra high capacity storage system to archive just my posts
alone...don't construe anything from the length of my posts...they are
_ALL_ like that...it's nothing exceptional or "personal crusade" about
it...
Great.

Please, someone from alt.lang.asm, tell them that I'm always like this
and that I've actually been _restrained_ in this thread...exactly
because I really don't give that much of a crap about Sage
whatsoever...

I see. I still wonder why are you so concerned. In a 100 words or less.
:)
the warnings were for _you lot_ only...then, really, I
was intent to simply _leave_ the thread...

Oh. What have I done! ;-)
the thing that's brought me back - about a week later -
was actually looking back into the thread
to see what was going on to find that your responses which I found
unwarranted and rude...

*You* have found them unwarranted and rude. They were neither meant to be
such nor be such.
if you'd said nothing, you'd never have heard a
single word from me

Is this a threat? ;-)
(probably even never again, as I post to the other
group not the C++ one and our paths may not have crossed ever
again)...

Might very well be the case. But when two people cross into each other
there is sometimes more to it.
the length doesn't signify anything...and the _sole_ thing
keeping me in this thread - well, okay, I did make some remarks about
"backwards compatibility" too in a separate non-Sage branch of the
thread - is your responses...

Ahha.
 
W

WW

Beth said:
How ironic it is, then, that you're one of the most persistent
responders to the Sage that's actually helped extend this post on and
on and on...

Since the thread came alive. I do not look at threads with no new posts in
it.
And, anyway, you're just being a show off here...

Or maybe not.
I'm just as good at spotting what reasonable posters
are like as I am the Sage...there was
_absolutely no need_ to reply with "stop bringing this thread up" to
each and every instance...you could have placed it as a response to
one and then stopped...

I certainly could.
But, no, you repeated your arrogance and rudeness to me over and
over...

Neither arrogance nor rudeness was in those posts.
trying to "pull rank", are we?

You are building an attitude on an imagined insult.
Well, you have my pity that you
think such behaviour is "clever"...

OK. Send it to the nearest non-rpofit foundation please.
and you also have my pity because
you did not have the sense to actually _listen_ to me and are helping
to prolong this thread with each and every response you make to the
Sage, who simply will not stop until he grows tired...

I have fun, so do the others responding to that pathetic troll. Correction:
I had fun, since he has proved himself not too resourceful but rather
boring.
you _won't_ run him out of town, he'll walk out
of his own accord, laughing at you all
for falling for all of his stupid tricks...

I did not fall for anything. But he did fall quite a few times already by
posting clear personal insults - ending up in his ISPs abuse email box.
And I pity the fact that I actually was getting to like you with your
replies, right up until you thought you were so much better than
everyone else that you could arrogantly dismiss me in whatever rude
way that you thought you're "pulling rank" afforded you...

Stop imagining things. It will help you a lot in your life.
think I'd shy away and bow to your "holy authority"
or something?

Nor do I have neither did I claim to have any authority here.
Let me guess,
"go back to your knitting and cooking and cleaning"
or something along those lines?

You have a really wild imagination.
As I say, you have my pity...

As I said: send it to the nearest non-profit foundation. Preferably one
giving quality education to poor children.
 
W

WW

Beth said:
And this is another example of the "civility" you demonstrate...

Nope. It is another example of a good advice I give to you. You seem to be
obsessed with imagined present and possibly real past insults. That leads
to nowhere.
 
A

Ashish

WW said:
Beth wrote:
[snip!]


Woah! Returning to Usenet after so many months is exciting after all.
I dont know about Beth, but Wolf, you are a regular here. Dont spoil your
reputation by indulging in useless arguments.

-A
 
T

The_Sage

Reply to article by: "David B. Held said:
Date written: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 23:43:49 -0500
MsgID:<[email protected]>
I must be deaf, because I haven't heard you speak once yet.

So if you can't hear me speak then you must be deaf? It couldn't be you can't
hear me because we have never communicated other than in writing, would it?
Haha! This just emphasizes your lack of logical thinking abilities.
You wouldn't know if I'm dumb or not, because it's not possible
to prove that someone doesn't have a capability.

I meant dumb in the sense of stupid. Thanks for proving me right.
If I'm blind, then you must be telepathetic (pun intended), because
I'm somehow able to respond to your posts.

Telepathy doesn't exist and you are still blindly posting random responses. How
long have you had ADD?
How about a 3 choose 2 combination?

Nope...try another guess.
Wouldn't that be a treat?

You are about to find out, little boy.
How do I emphatically indicate my inattention?

Didn't your mommy and daddy teach you anything when you were growing up? Oh, I
am assuming you are grown up. Sorry about that.
You're the only one that still has questions about it.

I have never had any questions about it. Not a one. Try another random guess.
No, that's what *WE'VE* been discussing for the last two or
three weeks.

Is there an echo in here? That is what I just said. Which word didn't you
understand this time?
YOU'VE been discussion why "void main()" is
legal, which is an entirely different thing altogether.

Wrong again. We've been discussing what *RETURN TYPES* are legal according to
the standard, as quoted above. This isn't about what paramenter types are
allowed, this isn't about whether int main() is legal, this is about if anything
other than int main() is allowed, including, but not limited to, void main().

But you were never one for simple, elementary comprehension, were you? I didn't
think so.
With the sane people. It's fun. You should try it some time.

I will and I will start by ignoring your childish stupidity, your childish
dodging and evading the issues, and your childish reasoning abilities.

You didn't address the issue. Again! You coward! Of course the sentence in
question *IS NOT* ambigious because it says "shall" but then modifies "shall"
with "but otherwise". That means a conforming compiler shall have a version of
main() that returns an int (they have no choice but to allow that one) BUT
OTHERWISE you can return whatever you like (if implemented/defined), ie -- the
compiler manufacturers can use void main() as long as and only as long as, they
have int main() listed as one of the choices.

You had your chance and you failed. I had my chance and I succeeded (as proved
by your complete and total inability to refute the quote from the standard,
using either logic or by referencing legitimate sources that indicate
otherwise...oops! I'm sorry for using such big words that you have no clue what
they mean. Ask one of *YOUR* fellow programmers to read it back to you so you
can understand what was said.

End of discussion. Case closed.

The Sage

=============================================================
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage

"The men that American people admire most extravagantly are
most daring liars; the men they detest the most violently are
those who try to tell them the truth" -- H. L. Mencken
=============================================================
 
T

The_Sage

Reply to article by: "David B. Held said:
Date written: Sun, 28 Sep 2003 23:53:00 -0500
MsgID:<[email protected]>
Only a simpleton would consider your question unanswered.

That explains why you consider the question unanswered.
I see you have never tried to falsify your own claims. That's a result
of always assuming you are right. Unfortunately, while that is a
convenient strategy, it isn't very successful.

Hence the reason I have never used it.
How could you possibly call me lazy?

Easy...you are lazy.
Look how many times I've explained how you're wrong!

Let's see...zero!
It's practically a full-time job for me!

That's because you don't know what you're doing.
You're right. They didn't fail that section.

Then your point is moot, since you were wrong about void main() being illegal.
And I don't see MS or IBM on your "partially conforming" list either.

Still waiting for you to prove void main() is illegal according to the standard
(and not by quoting it out of context either).

But wait! You've already proven you weren't competent enough to refute where the
standard states...

3.6.1 Main function paragraph 2:
"It shall have a return type of type int
-->BUT<--
otherwise its type is implementation-defined"

That's pretty clear: A conforming compiler can use void main() as long as it
makes int main() available...duh! So I'm not wasting my time with your stupidity
any longer, since you aren't going to be honest enough to simply refute it with
logic or facts (I wonder if you even know what those words mean?).

The Sage

=============================================================
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage

"The men that American people admire most extravagantly are
most daring liars; the men they detest the most violently are
those who try to tell them the truth" -- H. L. Mencken
=============================================================
 
T

The_Sage

Reply to article by: "WW said:
Date written: Mon, 29 Sep 2003 19:09:17 +0300
MsgID:<[email protected]>
Hm. This is exactly the same thing L. Ron Hubbard said. At least we know
where The Sage is coming from...

Who is Ron Hubbard? Is he one of your idols from whom you learned to "think" and
"reason" from? In that case, I don't want to know who Ron Hubbard is.

The Sage

=============================================================
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage

"The men that American people admire most extravagantly are
most daring liars; the men they detest the most violently are
those who try to tell them the truth" -- H. L. Mencken
=============================================================
 
W

WW

The_Sage said:
Who is Ron Hubbard? Is he one of your idols from whom you learned to
"think" and "reason" from? In that case, I don't want to know who Ron
Hubbard is.

Hehe. So why do you ask then? Anyway you seem to know it already way too
well. You are boooooring.
 
T

T.M. Sommers

WW said:
The_Sage wrote:
[SNIP]
"The men that American people admire most extravagantly are
most daring liars; the men they detest the most violently are
those who try to tell them the truth" -- H. L. Mencken

Hm. This is exactly the same thing L. Ron Hubbard said. At least we know
where The Sage is coming from...

Mencken (1880-1955) will have said it before Hubbard, assuming Mencken
said it at all (with The_Sagebrush one never knows (but it does sound
like Mencken)).

At any rate, it certainly applies to The_Parsley: he is a most daring
liar, does admire himself most extravagantly, and does detest most
violently those who try to tell him the truth.
 
A

Attila Feher

T.M. Sommers said:
WW said:
The_Sage wrote:
[SNIP]
"The men that American people admire most extravagantly are
most daring liars; the men they detest the most violently are
those who try to tell them the truth" -- H. L. Mencken

Hm. This is exactly the same thing L. Ron Hubbard said. At least
we know where The Sage is coming from...

Mencken (1880-1955) will have said it before Hubbard, assuming Mencken
said it at all (with The_Sagebrush one never knows (but it does sound
like Mencken)).

At any rate, it certainly applies to The_Parsley: he is a most daring
liar, does admire himself most extravagantly, and does detest most
violently those who try to tell him the truth.

Certainly. But the above "thought" was what L. Ron Hubbard used to explain
why is the whole world after him. I am not saying it is bad or not. The
only reason I have pointed this out is that there is a logical flow in using
the above to support ones claim to be detested because he tells the truth.
The above only talks about liars and truth tellers. It does not cover all
the grounds. A person can be detested/ignored simply because he is a
clueless, boring moron. Like in this case. :)
 

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. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Similar Threads


Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
473,772
Messages
2,569,588
Members
45,100
Latest member
MelodeeFaj
Top