The_Sage & void main()

B

Bob Bell

The_Sage said:
The subject of the sentence above is "return type", therefore the when "type" is
mentioned the second time, it clearly is still talking about return type...what
other "type" would they be talking about? Please explain. The non-return type?
We're they talking about another type from some other sentence in some other
chapter and paragraph a few pages back?

You stand corrected.

Bzzzt! Wrong again. Care to go for three?

The terms "type" and "return type" refer to two different things.
"Return type" means the type that the function returns. "Type" refers
to the entire signature of the function, which includes the function's
linkage, its return type, and the number, type and position of the
function's parameters.

What was that about ignorance, Mr. "I can't tell the difference
between a function's type and its return type"?

Bob
 
M

Mike Wahler

Bob Bell said:
Bzzzt! Wrong again. Care to go for three?

The terms "type" and "return type" refer to two different things.
"Return type" means the type that the function returns. "Type" refers
to the entire signature of the function, which includes the function's
linkage, its return type, and the number, type and position of the
function's parameters.

What was that about ignorance, Mr. "I can't tell the difference
between a function's type and its return type"?

Bob

Bob:

This troll isn't worth your time. Review the other
posts in this thread.

I suggest you not waste any more time on him.

-Mike
 
B

Bob Bell

Mike Wahler said:
Bob:

This troll isn't worth your time. Review the other
posts in this thread.

I suggest you not waste any more time on him.

Thanks, I appreciate the suggestion. I have reviewed a lot of this
thread, and I have no reason to believe that Mr. "semicolons are
optional at the end of compound statements" will see the truth of what
I say, where so many smarter people than I have failed; I'm just
blowing off steam.

Bob
 
T

The_Sage

Reply to article by: (e-mail address removed) (Bob Bell)
Date written: 5 Oct 2003 00:28:28 -0700
MsgID:<[email protected]>
Bzzzt! Wrong again. Care to go for three?
The terms "type" and "return type" refer to two different things.
"Return type" means the type that the function returns. "Type" refers
to the entire signature of the function, which includes the function's
linkage, its return type, and the number, type and position of the
function's parameters.
What was that about ignorance, Mr. "I can't tell the difference
between a function's type and its return type"?

Bzzzt! Wrong again. Care to go for four? At the rate you are going, you might
not understand simple elementary english for another six or seven tries. But
let's try and make this so simple, even a total illiterate imbecile like you can
undestand...

"It shall have a return type of type int"

That is a complete sentence in itself. The main topic/subject is: RETURN TYPE.
Any questions? Now we augment that sentence with the conjunction "but"...

"...but..."

If they were changing the main topic/subject, they would have started a new
paragraph/sentence. Since they didn't, the main topic/subject is still: RETURN
TYPE. "But" means "on the contrary; on the other hand; with the exception". And
what exception is there to the return type?

"...otherwise in all other respects its type is implementation-defined"

"Otherwise" is an adverb. It means "In another way; differently; under other
circumstances; in other respects". So for all you illiterate idiots out there,
like Bob Bell, what does that sentence tell us about the return type? It tells
us that...

"...main() shall have a return type of type int, with the exception that in
another way, in all other respects, main() can have a return type of
<implementation/defined>"

It has been a pleasure exposing your complete ignorance in this matter for the
whole world to see.

The Sage

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

"The biggest problem in the world, could have been solved
when it was small..." -- Lao Tzu
=============================================================
 
T

The_Sage

Reply to article by: "WW said:
Date written: Sun, 5 Oct 2003 13:34:41 +0300
MsgID:<[email protected]>
No. The Fuhrer is.

No, A fuhrer can be of any sex, not just male. And you logical reasoning
abilities aren't very good, seeing the title was Attila, a female, de Fuhrer, an
overbearing obstinate tyranical leader.

Don't quit you day job to ever become a programmer, since to be a good
programmer, you need good logical thinking abilities...and you definitely do not
seem to have good logical thinking abilities.

The Sage

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

"The biggest problem in the world, could have been solved
when it was small..." -- Lao Tzu
=============================================================
 
W

WW

The_Sage said:
No, A fuhrer can be of any sex, not just male. And you logical
reasoning abilities aren't very good, seeing the title was Attila, a
female, de Fuhrer, an overbearing obstinate tyranical leader.

Attila is a male name you moron.
 
B

Bob Bell

The_Sage said:
Bzzzt! Wrong again. Care to go for four? At the rate you are going, you might
not understand simple elementary english for another six or seven tries. But
let's try and make this so simple, even a total illiterate imbecile like you can
undestand...

The Sage drives down the court, weaving past logic, dodging past
facts, he shoots, HE SCORES! He's done it again, folks. I knew he
wouldn't let us down.

Let's watch it again in slow motion and see just how he screwed up
this time.
"It shall have a return type of type int"

That is a complete sentence in itself. The main topic/subject is: RETURN TYPE.
Any questions? Now we augment that sentence with the conjunction "but"...

You've got to hand it to The Sage, folks, he starts right off with the
boldest of blunders. The instant replay doesn't lie, so let's take a
closer look...
The main topic/subject is: RETURN TYPE.

For all those for whom English is a second language, let's be more
explict. The Sage is claiming that "return type" is the subject of the
clause "It shall have a return type of type int", yet as anyone with
an elementary education in English knows, the subject of that clause
is "It", which is a reference to the subject of the previous
sentences, and therefore means the main function.

Let's watch some more and see where he takes this...
"...but..."

If they were changing the main topic/subject, they would have started a new
paragraph/sentence. Since they didn't, the main topic/subject is still: RETURN
TYPE.

Ooo, that's got to hurt, people. The subject is still: the main
function, but that doesn't matter when you play at The Sage's level.
"But" means "on the contrary; on the other hand; with the exception". And
what exception is there to the return type?

"...otherwise in all other respects its type is implementation-defined"

"Otherwise" is an adverb. It means "In another way; differently; under other
circumstances; in other respects". So for all you illiterate idiots out there,
like Bob Bell, what does that sentence tell us about the return type? It tells
us that...

You've got to admit, folks, The Sage is slippery. Note the deft way he
avoids linking the word "its" in this clause to the subject of the
previous clause. For everyone else, it's clear that "its type" refers
to the main function's type. But by cleverly slipping in a personal
attack at just the right moment, he manages to deflect attention from
this oversight.

Let's pause for a recap. The Sage

-- failed to grasp the difference between a function's type and its
return type
-- failed to parse the sentence in question to realize the subject of
the first clause was the main function
-- failed to realize the subsequent clause was modifying the first
clause's subject, the main function

They don't call him The Sage for nothing.
"...main() shall have a return type of type int, with the exception that in
another way, in all other respects, main() can have a return type of
<implementation/defined>"

And there you have it, folks, all wrapped up in a neat little package.
I've got to hand it to The Sage, I don't see bungling of this caliber
every day.
It has been a pleasure exposing your complete ignorance in this matter for the
whole world to see.

On the contrary, the pleasure has been all mine. It's been fun, but
I've fed you long enough, I think.

Bye bye,

Bob
 
T

The_Sage

Reply to article by: (e-mail address removed) (Bob Bell)
Date written: 5 Oct 2003 22:14:02 -0700
MsgID:<[email protected]>
You've got to hand it to The Sage, folks, he starts right off with the
boldest of blunders. The instant replay doesn't lie, so let's take a
closer look...
For all those for whom English is a second language,

Well it certainly isn't your first, so that's a good start. You might also try a
little elementary logic, as you seem seriously lacking in that quality as well.
let's be more
explict. The Sage is claiming that "return type" is the subject of the
clause "It shall have a return type of type int", yet as anyone with
an elementary education in English knows, the subject of that clause
is "It", which is a reference to the subject of the previous
sentences, and therefore means the main function.

And here is where you prove your illiteracy beyond a doubt. Substituting "main
function" for "it" gives us...

"The main function shall have a return type of type int"

So the subject is the return type of the main function. Duh!
Let's watch some more and see where he takes this...

No problem...

"...but otherwise in all other respects the main functions type is
implementation-defined"

Clear as a bell; no doubt about it. The main function has a return type that
shall be int but otherwise can be anything you care to define or implement. Only
a total imbecile would try to twist it around to mean anything else.

Thank you for the pleasure of being able to demonstrate beyond a shadow of a
doubt to these NGs, what an illiterate idiot you are. Case closed. Don't come
back until you can finally get a clue.

The Sage

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

"The biggest problem in the world, could have been solved
when it was small..." -- Lao Tzu
=============================================================
 
T

The_Sage

Reply to article by: "WW said:
Date written: Mon, 6 Oct 2003 07:31:08 +0300
MsgID:<[email protected]>
Attila is a male name you moron.

Attila is feminine when used as a *first* name, you idiot. Attila the Hun was
the name of King whose *last* name was Attila. The key giveaway here is the -a
suffix, which is the feminine form of english given names, such as Fredirica
(Fred) or Andrea (Andrew).

Can't you get anything right?

The Sage

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

"The biggest problem in the world, could have been solved
when it was small..." -- Lao Tzu
=============================================================
 
S

SomeDumbGuy

The_Sage wrote:

Attila is feminine when used as a *first* name, you idiot. Attila the Hun was
the name of King whose *last* name was Attila. The key giveaway here is the -a
suffix, which is the feminine form of english given names, such as Fredirica
(Fred) or Andrea (Andrew).

Can't you get anything right?

The Sage

I have seen some sites that list that name as a female dog name.
I have seen that name listed as male.

Attila the Hun was from the area now known as Hungry and was king in
about 433 - 453 AD. The name had nothing to do with english. English
was not really even a language until that time (Middle of the 5 century
or about 450 AD) As far as I know Attila was the only name (No first or
last just ATTILA)

This is not really helping your argument about HLA or C or C++.
 
A

Attila Feher

The_Sage said:
Attila is feminine when used as a *first* name, you idiot. Attila the
Hun was the name of King whose *last* name was Attila. The key
giveaway here is the -a suffix, which is the feminine form of english
given names, such as Fredirica (Fred) or Andrea (Andrew).

Can't you get anything right?

Attila is a male name you moron.
 
T

T.M. Sommers

The_Sage said:
Attila is feminine when used as a *first* name, you idiot. Attila the Hun was
the name of King whose *last* name was Attila. The key giveaway here is the -a
suffix, which is the feminine form of english given names, such as Fredirica
(Fred) or Andrea (Andrew).

'Attila' is the diminuitive of 'atta', Gothic for 'father'. Thus it
means 'little father' in Gothic. Rather an odd name for a female.
 
G

Gary Labowitz

T.M. Sommers said:
'Attila' is the diminuitive of 'atta', Gothic for 'father'. Thus it
means 'little father' in Gothic. Rather an odd name for a female.

Thank you T.M. I see you guys are still struggling with "The_Sage" who is
"Mr. I-know-everything." He always starts with a false premise, which can
lead to any conclusion validly. "My uncle is a drunkard [false], therefore
the moon is made of green cheese [valid conclusion, but false]."
Why don't we all give up? If we don't answer his posts, he is just blowing
in the wind. [Let's hear it for the big red X!!]
 
J

Jonathan Mcdougall

Attila is feminine when used as a *first* name, you idiot. Attila
:) Yeah, The Rage *is* a ridiculous moron:

No, I think *you* are.

Do you realize that, while asking people not to
post off-topic questions, you are discuting the sex of your name and
posting a link to google with some images of a bunch of Attilas and
a baby name list.


Jonathan
 
W

WW

Jonathan said:
No, I think *you* are.

Do you realize that, while asking people not to
post off-topic questions, you are discuting the sex of your name and
posting a link to google with some images of a bunch of Attilas and
a baby name list.

Did you see any non-off-topic messages in this thread lately? BTW if it
bothers you so much, use the ïgnore thread" feature of your browser. Your
further ranting will be ignored.
 
J

Jonathan Mcdougall

Attila is feminine when used as a *first* name, you idiot. Attila
Did you see any non-off-topic messages in this thread lately? BTW if it
bothers you so much, use the ïgnore thread" feature of your browser. Your
further ranting will be ignored.

Nice.


Jonathan
 
M

Mike Wahler

T.M. Sommers said:
'Attila' is the diminuitive of 'atta', Gothic for 'father'. Thus it
means 'little father' in Gothic. Rather an odd name for a female.

In addition, "The Sage", describing his "giveaway", refers to
"English given names." AFAIK, "Attila" is *not* an English name.

But applying "Sage logic", it would seem that since this is
an English "speaking" forum, only those with English names
are allowed to post here.

-Mike
who is not English, speaks English, and whose name
is derived from Hebrew
 
J

Jonathan Mcdougall

Attila is feminine when used as a *first* name, you idiot.
So "Hosea" is the feminine form of "Hose"? You hoser!


Look who's talking.

This thread is dead. Stop trying.


Jonathan
 

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

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
473,744
Messages
2,569,483
Members
44,901
Latest member
Noble71S45

Latest Threads

Top