Opengroupware source code in C/C++?

Does anyone know of source code for opengroupware in C/C++?

thanx.

Anthony Yio wrote:
[color=blue]
> Does anyone know of source code for opengroupware in C/C++?[/color]

Why the hell would it have to be in C++??

This might still be viable:

http://wikicpp.sourceforge.net/

--
Phlip
http://www.xpsd.org/cgi-bin/wiki?Tes...UserInterfaces

Anthony Yio wrote:
[color=blue]
> Does anyone know of source code for opengroupware in C/C++?[/color]

There is no such language as "C/C++", but the opengroupware source code
can surely be downloaded from http://www.opengroupware.org . Sometimes,
I wonder how people manage to post to usenet newsgroups if they can't
even find out such simple things on their own...

"Rolf Magnus" <ramagnus@t-online.de> wrote in message:
[color=blue][color=green]
> > Does anyone know of source code for opengroupware in C/C++?[/color]
>
> There is no such language as "C/C++", but the opengroupware source[/color]
code

Really? How embarrassing! I always thought 'C/C++' was the language
discussed in the C/C++ Users Journal, and compiled by Comeau C/C++.
;-)

Jonathan

> > There is no such language as "C/C++", but the opengroupware source[color=blue]
> code
>
> Really? How embarrassing! I always thought 'C/C++' was the language
> discussed in the C/C++ Users Journal, and compiled by Comeau C/C++.
> ;-)[/color]

There is no language called "C/C++". There is, however, a marketing slant
called "C/C++". It targets those who may not be aware which style of
language they are using, or which language they are using.

--
Phlip
http://www.xpsd.org/cgi-bin/wiki?Tes...UserInterfaces

"Phlip" <phlip_cpp@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:nmkUb.18999$FT4.17467@newssvr16.news.prodigy. com...[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
> > > There is no such language as "C/C++", but the opengroupware source[/color]
> > code
> >
> > Really? How embarrassing! I always thought 'C/C++' was the language
> > discussed in the C/C++ Users Journal, and compiled by Comeau C/C++.
> > ;-)[/color]
>
> There is no language called "C/C++". There is, however, a marketing slant
> called "C/C++". It targets those who may not be aware which style of
> language they are using, or which language they are using.
>[/color]
Besides c/c++ is undefined behavior if C is a built-in type.

Ron Natalie wrote:[color=blue]
> "Phlip" <phlip_cpp@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:nmkUb.18999$FT4.17467@newssvr16.news.prodigy. com...
>[color=green][color=darkred]
>>>>There is no such language as "C/C++", but the opengroupware source
>>>
>>>code
>>>
>>>Really? How embarrassing! I always thought 'C/C++' was the language
>>>discussed in the C/C++ Users Journal, and compiled by Comeau C/C++.
>>>;-)[/color]
>>
>>There is no language called "C/C++". There is, however, a marketing slant
>>called "C/C++". It targets those who may not be aware which style of
>>language they are using, or which language they are using.
>>[/color]
>
> Besides c/c++ is undefined behavior if C is a built-in type.
>[/color]

LOL!

When folks write "C/C++", I think they mean "C and C++". Come to think
of it, I'm going to start writing "C&C++". Does anybody see any problem
(other than ugliness) with C&C++, or have a better idea? Perhaps
C\+{0,2} for regex fans?

On Thu, 05 Feb 2004 09:13:13 -0500, Jeff Schwab wrote:
[color=blue]
> When folks write "C/C++", I think they mean "C and C++". Come to think
> of it, I'm going to start writing "C&C++". Does anybody see any problem
> (other than ugliness) with C&C++, or have a better idea? Perhaps
> C\+{0,2} for regex fans?[/color]

<SPLORF>

I don't have any problem with C&C++. Cats & Coffee++. Brilliant. No
problem. But I think most people will take the term somewhat less
seriously..... :-)

See http://lightning.prohosting.com/~bjg...learn/acr.html.

M4

Jeff Schwab wrote:
[color=blue]
> When folks write "C/C++", I think they mean "C and C++". Come to think
> of it, I'm going to start writing "C&C++". Does anybody see any problem
> (other than ugliness) with C&C++[/color]

Wouldn't that also be undefined behavior? ;-)

--
Mike Smith

Martijn Lievaart wrote:[color=blue]
> On Thu, 05 Feb 2004 09:13:13 -0500, Jeff Schwab wrote:
>
>[color=green]
>>When folks write "C/C++", I think they mean "C and C++". Come to think
>>of it, I'm going to start writing "C&C++". Does anybody see any problem
>>(other than ugliness) with C&C++, or have a better idea? Perhaps
>>C\+{0,2} for regex fans?[/color]
>
>
> <SPLORF>
>
> I don't have any problem with C&C++. Cats & Coffee++. Brilliant. No
> problem. But I think most people will take the term somewhat less
> seriously..... :-)
>
> See http://lightning.prohosting.com/~bjg...learn/acr.html.
>
> M4
>
>[/color]

D'oh! The good ones are always taken. :)

Mike Smith wrote:[color=blue]
> Jeff Schwab wrote:
>[color=green]
>> When folks write "C/C++", I think they mean "C and C++". Come to
>> think of it, I'm going to start writing "C&C++". Does anybody see any
>> problem (other than ugliness) with C&C++[/color]
>
>
> Wouldn't that also be undefined behavior? ;-)[/color]

Ah, yes. A state point clearly is needed. How about "C;C++"?
Actually, is "C,C++" legal?