If I have:
struct one_{
unsigned int one_1;
unsigned short one_2;
unsigned short one_3;
};
struct two_{
unsigned int two_1;
unsigned short two_2;
unsigned char two_3;
};
struct mystruct{
struct one_ one;
struct two_ two;
}mystruct1;
Then could I by any change ask on the value of the whole struct mystruct1,
that is all the elements in the struct in one call? I want to do something
like (in pseudo like language):
if(mystruct1 == 0) { print("All elements of mystruct1 is zero");}
Best Regards
Terry
Nov 13 '05
258  8764 
Roose wrote: "Read both mailing lists and newsgroups for one to two months before you
post anything. This helps you to get an understanding of the culture of
the group." - RFC 1855.
Thanks,
That's quite all right.
check out this one too:
"Don't get involved in flame wars. Neither post nor respond to incendiary
material."
I have not posted any incendiary material in this thread. If you think I
have breached this guideline, it can only be because you think that /your/
material is incendiary. If so, then you have breached the guideline
yourself. I, however, have not.
You're in no position to tell me not to top-post, clearly.
I have *asked* you not to top-post. There is a difference between asking and
telling.
And this is
not recognition of those rules as authority.
It appears from what you say that the only authority you recognise (and
expect us to recognise) is you.
I see you're finally quoting context. Well done.
I already said that I am perfectly capable of quoting, when I think it's
more clear. I top-post when that's more clear.
I disagree that putting the response before the stimulus is ever "more
clear".
<newsreader "ergonomics " point dealt with elsethread, so I've snipped it
here>
Just like HTML e-mail used to be an ungodly annoyance, it is coming into
acceptance because of greater disk space, bandwidth, and more e-mail
clients
support it. Oh times they change.
HTML e-mail remains an ungodly annoyance. Oh times they stay the same.
That's a lie. There have been no articles by Roose, EVER, in the
comp.lang.c newsgroup except in this very thread, according to the archives.
Apparently you don't really understand how Usenet works.
Well, you certainly don't, if you think you can make unsupported and indeed
patently false claims in this newsgroup without being challenged.
> Because you post here a lot doesn't mean you own the group.
No, but neither does /not/ posting here a lot.
No shit. I never said that I owned the group. You're the ones telling ME
what to do.
I have /asked/ you to stop top-posting. If you wish to be taken seriously in
this newsgroup (and it appears that you don't), it would be wise to follow
the accepted conventions of the group.
I'm not telling you to do anything. I simply suggest that if
you're so keen on following netiquette, then killfile me already.
But what if you were to start dispensing language advice? If you were in
every regular contributor's killfile, who would correct your errors?
--
Richard Heathfield : bi****@eton.pow ernet.co.uk
"Usenet is a strange place." - Dennis M Ritchie, 29 July 1999.
C FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
K&R answers, C books, etc: http://users.powernet.co.uk/eton
Roose <no****@nospam. nospam> wrote:
Since you do not wish to killfile various people in the group, I would
recommend just ignoring them and ending this thread.
Their only desire at this point is to continue baiting you. They are not
interested in any genuine or logical discussion. They are only posting
because they believe it makes you say funny things.
--
James Hu wrote: Obviously, it is a convention of this newsgroup to not top-post. Just
like it is convention to not bring crying babies into the movie theater.
It doesn't mean it doesn't ever happen, but when it does, the convention
breaker will get complaints.
Because you can't killfile a baby or its parent that won't step out
without going to prison for a very long time. Therefor all that can be
done is complain and hope the theater personell do something.
We have it so easy here.
NR te*********@BUS ThotmailE.Rcom wrote: Their only desire at this point is to continue baiting you. They are not
interested in any genuine or logical discussion. They are only posting
because they believe it makes you say funny things.
Ah, another troll. Like your buddy Roose, you go:
*plonk*
Brian Rodenborn
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 04:08:25 GMT, in comp.lang.c , "Roose"
<no****@nospam. nospam> wrote: do it sometimes, as I already said. But there are valid reasons for
top-posting as well, which I already listed.
Unfortunately the reasons were IMO invalid.
And that is why I get pissed
when people complain about ME top-posting.
people complain because your posts are usually unreadable gibberish
without resorting to scrollinh up and down to read what you failed to
snip, or diving off to google to read the fscking archives. When you
stop posting so antisocially, people will stop complaining.
The bottom line is that it is personal preference, and UseNet is public, so
I have the right to follow my preference.
Public doesn't mean "I can do what I like and the h*ll with everyone
else". It means "I have to behave according to the accepted practices
of the society I'm in". In the Real World (tm) you do'nt p*ss in
public, or attack children with mallets and your private parts. In CLC
you don't top post.
Just like everyone has the right
to post their f*cking stupid sigs after every goddamn message.
Astonishing as it may seem, sigs are accepted by RFC.
However, I am less pissed now than amused by the fact that I've caused a
collective apoplexy in comp.lang.c, over something as stupid as top-posting.
Well stop doing it.
--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.c om/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc. html>
----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 04:12:46 GMT, in comp.lang.c , "Roose"
<no****@nospam. nospam> wrote: Do you have the slightest clue how much diskspace even the text-only
newsgroups take up per day? Not to mention the binaries. I'm not
wasting my diskspace storing that.
Well, I looked in my outlook folder, and it's 26 megs, for about 40
newsgroups from two news servers, including a several binary groups.
*shrug* PER DAY, headers alone take up about 70MB for me, ie a weeks
worth is half a gig. You can imagine how much space headers+bodies
would take up, not to mention the retention needed to keep up with
some threads.
That's because it only downloads the headers at first.
which are useless if you want to retain the threading, no? don't /have/ to read old messages. Either get with the plot, or get
plonked.
THAT'S WHAT I'VE BEEN TELLING YOU TO DO, IDIOT, SO FUCKING DO IT ALREADY.
You misunderstand. Other people will plonk you, not me.
--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.c om/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc. html>
----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 06:18:50 GMT, in comp.lang.c , "Roose"
<no****@nospam. nospam> wrote: No, I don't think he is.
You don't think I am *what*? If you would post properly, we'd know
what you were talking about?
In any case, it's not relevant if he's talking about running a news server.
Agreed.
I said that it is easy to track a thread even
without quoting, if you have a proper newsreader which sorts by thread. He
said that that isn't possible because you would have to store too many
messages on your machine. I say, not really, they're on the server.
FWIW few servers these days retain even plain text for more than a few
days. And even if they did, so what? I need to track down what roose
said last week, so I have to go off to some server to get it, when if
he'd retained context in the first place, he'd have saved everyone
lots of strife.
There is no disk space issue with tracking messages backward by thread, in
order to follow a conversation without quoting.
Yes there is.
--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.c om/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc. html>
----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 06:44:14 GMT, in comp.lang.c , "Roose"
<no****@nospam. nospam> wrote: In USENET, you are expected to read a group for a couple weeks
before posting to it.
Says who? There is no President of UseNet.
Says the usnet guidelines at usenet.org, plus the readme. first for
this and many other groups, plus common sense. Are you clinically
thick?
But this is different: this is *long*-standing
USENET-acceptable. Top-posting is not, though some of the younger
That is not a good enough reason for me.
Then you're behaving like an antisocial cretin who deserves to be
ostracised by your fellows.
The English language is a standard
as well, but it changes with time and de facto rules evolve. Old rules get
broken. Same thing with UseNet. It has changed over time to include
top-posting as acceptable.
So you've tried here, and failed, much like Noah Webster failed to get
some English words respelled to suit his idiosyncracies. Learn a
lesson from this.
The issue is not top-posting: the issue is continued rudeness
towards a group in which you are currently a *guest*.
I am no more a guest than you are. I probably posted here in 1995,
Frankly, I don't believe you. A google reference please, with proof
that its you..
well before most people here.
Thats very unlikely, if you restrict yourself to regulars.
--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.c om/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc. html>
----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 08:00:50 GMT, in comp.lang.c , "Roose"
<no****@nospam. nospam> wrote: > Old rules get broken. Same thing with UseNet.
Only if the old rules cease to make sense in new circumstances. That isn't
the case here.
The new circumstances are that most people use different newsreaders than
they did 10 years ago. Back in the day, the ergonomics of newsreaders
demanded that you quote. Now they don't, as there are zillions of free
newsreaders that let you track threads quite easily.
Fortunately nobody gives a sh*t what you think about the ergonomics of
newsreaders changing everything. You're talking bullshit, evidently
based on exceptionally limited experience of possibly the world's
most poorly designed newsreader. Threading newsreaders have been
around for decades, but are irrelevant to the actual point.
Just like HTML e-mail used to be an ungodly annoyance, it is coming into
acceptance because of greater disk space, bandwidth, and more e-mail clients
support it.
And the opportunity to spread viruses, trojans and generally irritate
the crap out of people. Again you're wrong. That's a lie. There have been no articles by Roose, EVER, in the
comp.lang.c newsgroup except in this very thread, according to the archives.
Apparently you don't really understand how Usenet works.
Apparently you're unable to back up your wild claim.
--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.c om/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc. html>
----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
"Mark McIntyre" <ma**********@s pamcop.net> wrote in message
news:v6******** *************** *********@4ax.c om... On Wed, 29 Oct 2003 02:07:15 GMT, in comp.lang.c , "Roose"
<no****@nospam. nospam> wrote:
You said you killfiled me already,
He has not, but I am now:
*PLONK!*
No, I killfile you when you start telling people wrong C answers.
That would be a bad idea, wrong answers need to be corrected.
Ignorant idiots, OTOH, may be happily plonked :-)
Right now you're just an annoying idiot.
I think everybody agrees on that. This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion. |
