473,836 Members | 1,358 Online
Bytes | Software Development & Data Engineering Community
+ Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Topic Nazis (OR Mystery: static variables & performance)

MSG
Michel Bardiaux <mi************ *@peaktime.be> wrote in message news:<G4******* *************@g iganews.com>...
Mark Shelor wrote:

OK, Sidney, I am considering it. I can certainly understand the premise
that a group might choose to entertain ONLY those questions that can be
resolved purely by a reading or clarification of (drum roll please) The
Standard. But how utterly boring, and what a waste of talent. It
reduces the newgroups participants to a mere gaggle of lawyers.


I agree 100% with you.


Mark Shelor's question was off-topic, but not for the reasons
mentioned.

To interface C and Perl, it is necessary to *call* functions. The
standard however does not define the stack size, so the behavior of
any function that calls another function is undefined, and therefore
we can not discuss it here. QED.

Yeah, sure. You can predict the behavior of function calls *if* the
stack is known to be big enough, but by the same logic, you can
predict a lot of things if some extras are known. Well, they ain't.
Not in The Standard!

So, read my lips: no...function.. .calls!

We can only discuss things that are happening entirely inside
"main()". Everything else ist verboten!

Heil...
MSG
Nov 14 '05
109 4209
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 10:45:48 +0100, in comp.lang.c , Erik <et57 at correos
calor dot com> wrote:
On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 18:44:02 +0000 (UTC), the right honourable Richard
Heathfield <do******@addre ss.co.uk.invali d> wrote:
MSG wrote:
Everything else ist verboten!

Heil...


http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/G/Godwins-Law.html

Thank you for that link.
It illustrates a common debating strategy, to poison a debate:


You obviously don't understand godwins law.

By the way, *plonk*

--
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 =---
Nov 14 '05 #61
On 10 Feb 2004 23:42:23 -0800, in comp.lang.c , ms*****@yahoo.c om (MSG)
wrote:
"Mike Wahler" <mk******@mkwah ler.net> wrote in message news:<_Z******* ************@ne wsread2.news.pa s.earthlink.net >...
[Ich bin] "Mr. Wahler".


Dear Self-Appointed Unmoderated Newsgroup Moderator Impersonator,


Yeah, whatever.

*plonk*

--
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 =---
Nov 14 '05 #62
Erik wrote:
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 14:34:33 +0000, the right honourable Thomas Stegen
CES2000 <ts************ @cis.strath.ac. uk> wrote:
Context serves as a limiting factor you know. If someone asks
how to turn up gcc to maximimum warning level I choose not to
answer even though I know how to do this. Because you see,
this is a mechanism I (and several others) use to keep this
group maximimally useful. It is called focus, as it is now I find
that I either find something interesting and educational or I
already know it and can perform quality control on the material.

and it's the only mechanism there is for unmoderated newsgroups.


This is false. This is what I have chosen based on the fact that
there are enough people standing on the walls already. And most
people understand and are even thankful when they are pointed
to a more appropriate venue.

A comp.lang.c.mod erated would not be nearly as useful to anyone.
Foul language is not, calling names is not.
Of course it is not. And you haven't seen me arguing in that direction
either. I am arguing against your position of diluting this newsgroup
with everything related to C. And the foul language more often than not
comes from those who feel rejected because they were told they were
off topic. If that happens, the big guns come out and the offenders
deserves everything they get.
Regulars here have found the path to take to make the group
more useful to them, why should they give way to whining newbies
who wants to make it less useful? Out of kindness of their hearts?

Internet, Usenet, comp.lang.c, is not only for "regulars".
It's for anybody with a connection to the net.


Of course. Everyone can become a regular. Without the
regulars there would be no useful newsgroups. No matter
where you go on on the internet or in real life this is
going to be the case unless you are a politician and choose
the answer the questions you want without regard for the
actual questions.
You pay your ISP for
that.
You pay your ISP for access, not to post whatever you want wherever
you want.
It's even for people who just need a quick answer, and have no time to
first follow a group for weeks, before daring to pose a question.
If one doesn't like that, one sets up a moderated group.
Or tell them to go somewhere else. Why do you have this notion
that all human conduct and interaction must be covered by rules and
regulations? If we set up a moderated newsgroup we loose, because
moderation (in the sense of someone reviewing all the posts)
detracts from quality.

I don't think so. No matter what you think, there are exceedingly
few people on usenet who are only after giving away free help to
others, if there is no gain for someone they will leave.

You get what you pay for they say and they say you pay nothing
on usenet. That is wrong, we buy knowledge and ideas with knowledge
and ideas.

No. in buying and selling there is enforceable obligation. Not so on
the net.


Enforceable obligation has nothing to do with it. Trade laws or
whatever is so wholly irrelevant to the concept of trade that it
is almost unbelievable to read such a statement. Don't you see that
those laws are there to protect both parties? There are no such laws
on usenet so we protect ourselves.

Again, the concept of a value for value trade is not predicated
upon the laws sourrounding it.

It is like saying "No you cannot mutually benefit because it
is not an enforcable obligation." If I choose to trust someone
on the web it is my ass on the line, my responsibility and my
gain if everything goes well. More often than not, everything
goes well.
If you don't pay for your groceries, someone will feel cheated.
On Usenet, I can't think of a situation is which I would feel cheated.
On usenet if you feel cheated there is very little you can do
about it. So we protect ourself against it by telling off-topic
people to go somewhere else.

So if, as you say, you don't feel cheated by us telling you to
take your off-topicness somewhere else, why don't you just take
it somewhere else?

By keeping this group focused I have more to pay with
and can so buy more.

The value of Usenet does not go down with questions that are
off-topic.


Why not (if you don't argue for your statements they are essentially
worthless)? If I have to wade through tons off stuff I have no interest
in that devaluates the experience (or maybe you have some super filter
for filtering out the chaff from the wheat in which case no groups would
be needed at all!)
The very mechanism of ignoring will filter and regulate.
False. Your claim has been disputed. comp.lang.c++ tried your
approach. Didn't work. They died and had to work very hard to
get back on track.

In an ideal world of course this would maybe be the best approach,
but then again, in an ideal world noone would post off-topic questions
either. Ignoring does not work as long someone does not ignore and
choose to answer, and someone always does.
I can't expect a solution to my bicycle problem on comp.lang.c, can I
?
Of course not. It seems you are beginning to understand. The line needs
to be drawn somewhere, at the border cases things might seem a bit
strange, but that is the nature of the beast.

Think of what happens when you go off-topic in a face to face meeting:
people look at you and kindly tell you they were talking about
something else and you say "oops, sorry", and you walk on.
But on comp.lang.c it is apparently ok to not walk on, and start
arguing about how people should be discussing something else?
Why do you say this? Why do you act this way? I assume you are using
the above to illustrate how things should be done? Remember you are
the newcomer who were that we were talking about something else.

On comp.lang.c things go differently. The lack of identity causes
people to become incredibly rude and uncivilised.


If you pay any sort of attention you will notice that it is usually
the off-topicers who become incredibly rude and uncivilised.

--
Thomas.

Nov 14 '05 #63
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 23:12:10 +0100, Erik <et57 at correos calor dot
com> wrote:

FWIW, I've found the regulars to be knowledgable, intelligent,
generous, and straightforewar d - if not always diplomatic. I'd be
proud to work with any of them on any project.


but do you *trust* them ? now ?

For guidance, yes. However, I would not blindly use code suggested
here without first understanding it and believing that it solved the
problem I presented. I suppose that could be read as mis-trust, but I
think of it as contributing to my education. I'm looking for
verifiable contributions to my skill and understanding, and the
verification is part of the learning process. I trust the "regulars"
enough that when my own understanding disagrees with them, there's a
significant probability that I'm wrong ;-) Not to say that I won't
argue about it, because that also contributes to my education, and
quite likely to the education of other readers.

"Trust them"? I guess I'd have to know what you mean by that. Trust
them to write good code and give good advice? Yes. Would I hire one of
them to write code? Yes. Would I test the code they produced? Yes.
Would I give them my bank password? No.

--
Al Balmer
Balmer Consulting
re************* ***********@att .net
Nov 14 '05 #64
Of course it is not. And you haven't seen me arguing in that direction
either.
No I did not. and did not imply you did.

I am arguing against your position of diluting this newsgroup
with everything related to C.
I did not. I point out, that the borders can not be as clear as some
would like them to be, and that uncivilised behaviour does not do a
usenet group any good.

And the foul language more often than not
comes from those who feel rejected because they were told they were
off topic. If that happens, the big guns come out and the offenders
deserves everything they get.
You should see some of the names I was called...

You pay your ISP for access, not to post whatever you want wherever
you want.
you stretch things a bit here: I do not propose to post whatever etc..

It's even for people who just need a quick answer, and have no time to
first follow a group for weeks, before daring to pose a question.
If one doesn't like that, one sets up a moderated group.
Or tell them to go somewhere else. Why do you have this notion
that all human conduct and interaction must be covered by rules and
regulations? If we set up a moderated newsgroup we loose, because
moderation (in the sense of someone reviewing all the posts)
detracts from quality.


I do not propose a moderated group. I just point out that that would
be a solution to those who want borders clear cut.

No. in buying and selling there is enforceable obligation. Not so on
the net.


Enforceable obligation has nothing to do with it. Trade laws or
whatever is so wholly irrelevant to the concept of trade that it
is almost unbelievable to read such a statement. Don't you see that
those laws are there to protect both parties? There are no such laws
on usenet so we protect ourselves.


that's what I said.

Again, the concept of a value for value trade is not predicated
upon the laws sourrounding it.

It is like saying "No you cannot mutually benefit because it
is not an enforcable obligation." If I choose to trust someone
on the web it is my ass on the line, my responsibility and my
gain if everything goes well. More often than not, everything
goes well.
yes.

If you don't pay for your groceries, someone will feel cheated.
On Usenet, I can't think of a situation is which I would feel cheated.
On usenet if you feel cheated there is very little you can do
about it. So we protect ourself against it by telling off-topic
people to go somewhere else.

you don't feel *cheated* in an off-topic case, do you ??

I was not talking about off-topic really, but about not-so-clear
boundaries.


Why not (if you don't argue for your statements they are essentially
worthless)?
arguing is something else than the names people get called here
sometimes.
The very mechanism of ignoring will filter and regulate.


False. Your claim has been disputed. comp.lang.c++ tried your
approach. Didn't work. They died and had to work very hard to
get back on track.


maybe the naming of the *language* was not very smart here , grin...
c....c++ hm..

In an ideal world of course this would maybe be the best approach,
but then again, in an ideal world noone would post off-topic questions
either. Ignoring does not work as long someone does not ignore and
choose to answer, and someone always does.
I can't expect a solution to my bicycle problem on comp.lang.c, can I
?
Of course not. It seems you are beginning to understand. The line needs
to be drawn somewhere, at the border cases things might seem a bit
strange, but that is the nature of the beast.

Think of what happens when you go off-topic in a face to face meeting:
people look at you and kindly tell you they were talking about
something else and you say "oops, sorry", and you walk on.


But on comp.lang.c it is apparently ok to not walk on, and start
arguing about how people should be discussing something else?


no, as stated before I'm not saying that at all. I state that what I
see is that The Standard tends to take away flexibility in some
peoples thinking, at least here in this group.
And that is a pity.
Why do you say this? Why do you act this way? I assume you are using
the above to illustrate how things should be done? Remember you are
the newcomer who were that we were talking about something else.

I'm no newcomer. I work in software making for about 25 years.
On comp.lang.c things go differently. The lack of identity causes
people to become incredibly rude and uncivilised.


If you pay any sort of attention you will notice that it is usually
the off-topicers who become incredibly rude and uncivilised.


not my experience.

frgr
Erik

Nov 14 '05 #65
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 16:08:47 -0700, the right honourable Alan Balmer
<al******@att.n et> wrote:
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 23:12:10 +0100, Erik <et57 at correos calor dot
com> wrote:

FWIW, I've found the regulars to be knowledgable, intelligent,
generous, and straightforewar d - if not always diplomatic. I'd be
proud to work with any of them on any project.
but do you *trust* them ? now ?

For guidance, yes. However, I would not blindly use code suggested
here without first understanding it and believing that it solved the
problem I presented. I suppose that could be read as mis-trust,


I think it is even not right or dishonest to expect or ask for such
trust.

but I
think of it as contributing to my education. I'm looking for
verifiable contributions to my skill and understanding, and the
verification is part of the learning process. I trust the "regulars"
enough that when my own understanding disagrees with them, there's a
significant probability that I'm wrong ;-) Not to say that I won't
argue about it, because that also contributes to my education, and
quite likely to the education of other readers.

"Trust them"? I guess I'd have to know what you mean by that. Trust
them to write good code and give good advice? Yes. Would I hire one of
them to write code? Yes. Would I test the code they produced? Yes.
Would I give them my bank password? No.

Thank you for your input.
And yes, you understood what I mean by trust :-)

One small point :
Morris Dovey wrote above: "if not always diplomatic".
Wouldn't it be advisable to think twice before hiring such a person ?
Or must we indeed make a sharp division between "on-line" and "in real
life" ?

now I really do go off-topic...
But then, shouldn't ethics, if I may use that word in this context,
be an integral part of any human endeavour ?
someone is going to bite...
frgr Erik
Nov 14 '05 #66
Erik wrote:
But then, shouldn't ethics, if I may use that word in this context,
be an integral part of any human endeavour ?
someone is going to bite...


Well of course. We do have a common /Standard/ by which we judge
all C programming behavior. I just knew this was going to wend
its way back to topicality - eventually. 8-D

--
Morris Dovey
West Des Moines, Iowa USA
C links at http://www.iedu.com/c
Read my lips: The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.

Nov 14 '05 #67

"Erik" <et57 at correos calor dot com> wrote in message
news:b8******** *************** *********@4ax.c om...
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 11:52:01 -0600, the right honourable Morris Dovey
<mr*****@iedu.c om> wrote:
Erik wrote:
A problem with the internet is one of identity. We do not know the
regulars, never seen them, never heard them, never met them.
I have great difficulty in trusting unseen people on the net.
Especially trusting them with any power to decide...etc.
Erik...

You can see my ugly face and read a brief work history at
http://www.iedu.com/mrd/mrd_self.html. You can do a Google groups
search on my name or that of any of the regulars to at least
acquire a notion as to participation in this ng - and you can
review the archived posts of anyone who has posted here.


yes, but then ? You may live in Greenland and wwe cannot ever meet in
person.

You are still not my collegue or my neighbor who I can meet face to
face. The net can never be a substitute for p2p.


I have found that here, sometimes folks will indicate that someone
posting with an 'anonymous' handle should at least use their real
name, in the interest of credibility. I know many have 'privacy
concerns', so I certainly do understand the practice of 'address
munging'. Everyone will do what he feels he must.

But as for myself, I post under my real name, using my real email
address. Anyone who wants to would have a very easy time physically
locating me. Yet nobody has ever shown up at my door, enraged at
something I posted on Usenet, threating violence, etc. (No, that's
not an invitation. :-) After all, who knows what sort of wild
(or domesticated) animals are roaming around my rural property,
and which ones are or are not in my employ. :-))


Deciding to trust and/or rating the proficiency of any of the
regulars (or others) is /your/ burden.
it's no burden. It is my responsability, yes.

No one can or desires to
make these decisions for you.

FWIW, I've found the regulars to be knowledgable, intelligent,
generous, and straightforewar d - if not always diplomatic. I'd be
proud to work with any of them on any project.


but do you *trust* them ? now ?


Some of them, yes, I do, based upon my experience interacting
with them. Others I would not trust to wash my car.

You will look at their answers to your questions differently than at
those of a gal you never saw here before, sure.
Of course I consider answers from those I've become acquainted with
differently from that of those with whom I haven't.

But would you, f.i. insert their code unseen in your project ? Not me,
never.
Inserting *any* code unseen would be very unwise. *Everyone* makes
mistakes at least occasionally. I'd review *any* code coming from
outside.

But were I to need (for whatever reason) a piece of code written
that I would use in my project, I would *without hesitation*, hire
certain people here to do it, others, I'd need to interview, others
I'd need to see code examples, references, etc., others, never in a
million years. A couple in the first cateory would be e.g. Richard
Heathfield and Jack Klein. I think you'd be in the second-to-last
category. Basing all this of course upon the articles by each I have
read here over the years, sometimes combined with evidence of their
reputation from other sources.

FYI, i worked for 25 years in tech software dev. and built code that
ran for 15 years in an industrial environment with great succes.
I've used from assembler via Pascal, Basic, Forth, Fortran to C and
god knows how many more languages.
I've seen programming methods and (standard)langu ages come and go.
I'm no newbie. And programming is still in its infancy.


IMO boasting will only detract from your credibility.
I'm not a programming novice either, but I won't go around
touting my exploits for purposes of 'winning' a debate.

-Mike
Nov 14 '05 #68

"Erik" <et57 at correos calor dot com> wrote in message
news:os******** *************** *********@4ax.c om...
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 16:08:47 -0700, the right honourable Alan Balmer
<al******@att.n et> wrote:
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 23:12:10 +0100, Erik <et57 at correos calor dot
com> wrote:

FWIW, I've found the regulars to be knowledgable, intelligent,
generous, and straightforewar d - if not always diplomatic. I'd be
proud to work with any of them on any project.

but do you *trust* them ? now ?
For guidance, yes. However, I would not blindly use code suggested
here without first understanding it and believing that it solved the
problem I presented. I suppose that could be read as mis-trust,


I think it is even not right or dishonest to expect or ask for such
trust.

but I
think of it as contributing to my education. I'm looking for
verifiable contributions to my skill and understanding, and the
verification is part of the learning process. I trust the "regulars"
enough that when my own understanding disagrees with them, there's a
significant probability that I'm wrong ;-) Not to say that I won't
argue about it, because that also contributes to my education, and
quite likely to the education of other readers.

"Trust them"? I guess I'd have to know what you mean by that. Trust
them to write good code and give good advice? Yes. Would I hire one of
them to write code? Yes. Would I test the code they produced? Yes.
Would I give them my bank password? No.

Thank you for your input.
And yes, you understood what I mean by trust :-)

One small point :
Morris Dovey wrote above: "if not always diplomatic".
Wouldn't it be advisable to think twice before hiring such a person ?
Or must we indeed make a sharp division between "on-line" and "in real
life" ?


In my younger days, I did many times make the error of disregarding
*everything* said or advised by someone I 'didn't like', whether
I knew they were correct or not, simply because I didn't like them.
I've learned better since. Call me a moron, then give me a solution
to a problem. By the time I recognize that I have a good solution,
I've completely forgotten the insult.

How many times have you seen someone (or yourself), upon hearing
something he disagreed vehemently about from a politician, say
"what an idiot!". I agree that many/most are what I'd call
'undesirables', but most politicians are quite bright. That's
how they get away with what they do.
now I really do go off-topic...
But then, shouldn't ethics, if I may use that word in this context,
be an integral part of any human endeavour ?
someone is going to bite...


Well since this came up a while back in a thread I participated in,
off topic or not, I'll repeat again here what I said then:
For me, I consider the most important characterstic of someone
I might hire to be their honesty. I'll hire an honest high-school kid
with absolutely no experience before I'd hire a dishonest 'expert'.
Every time. Also, beside the obvious benefits/detriments of each
type of person, imo an honest person is teachable, a dishonest one is not.

-Mike
Nov 14 '05 #69
"Thomas Stegen" <ts*****@cis.st rath.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:40******@n ntphost.cis.str ath.ac.uk...
Alan Balmer wrote:

Possible, I suppose, or possibly Seinfeld fans are a special class
<g>. BTW, I did watch an entire episode once. I never heard the term
"Soup Nazi" until now, though. Must have watched the wrong episode.


Was just one episode as far as I know. A veru good one in fact.

"No soup for you!"


"Come back ONE YEAR!"

FWIW, I don't think that guy was on any other episodes,
but was referred to in some (Remember, Elaine stole his
recipes. :-) ).

-Mike
Nov 14 '05 #70

This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion.

Similar topics

115
7670
by: Mark Shelor | last post by:
I've encountered a troublesome inconsistency in the C-language Perl extension I've written for CPAN (Digest::SHA). The problem involves the use of a static array within a performance-critical transform function. When compiling under gcc on my big-endian PowerPC (Mac OS X), declaring this array as "static" DECREASES the transform throughput by around 5%. However, declaring it as "static" on gcc/Linux/Intel INCREASES the throughput by...
0
9665
by: Hystou | last post by:
Most computers default to English, but sometimes we require a different language, especially when relocating. Forgot to request a specific language before your computer shipped? No problem! You can effortlessly switch the default language on Windows 10 without reinstalling. I'll walk you through it. First, let's disable language synchronization. With a Microsoft account, language settings sync across devices. To prevent any complications,...
0
10835
Oralloy
by: Oralloy | last post by:
Hello folks, I am unable to find appropriate documentation on the type promotion of bit-fields when using the generalised comparison operator "<=>". The problem is that using the GNU compilers, it seems that the internal comparison operator "<=>" tries to promote arguments from unsigned to signed. This is as boiled down as I can make it. Here is my compilation command: g++-12 -std=c++20 -Wnarrowing bit_field.cpp Here is the code in...
1
10585
by: Hystou | last post by:
Overview: Windows 11 and 10 have less user interface control over operating system update behaviour than previous versions of Windows. In Windows 11 and 10, there is no way to turn off the Windows Update option using the Control Panel or Settings app; it automatically checks for updates and installs any it finds, whether you like it or not. For most users, this new feature is actually very convenient. If you want to control the update process,...
0
9367
agi2029
by: agi2029 | last post by:
Let's talk about the concept of autonomous AI software engineers and no-code agents. These AIs are designed to manage the entire lifecycle of a software development project—planning, coding, testing, and deployment—without human intervention. Imagine an AI that can take a project description, break it down, write the code, debug it, and then launch it, all on its own.... Now, this would greatly impact the work of software developers. The idea...
0
6976
by: conductexam | last post by:
I have .net C# application in which I am extracting data from word file and save it in database particularly. To store word all data as it is I am converting the whole word file firstly in HTML and then checking html paragraph one by one. At the time of converting from word file to html my equations which are in the word document file was convert into image. Globals.ThisAddIn.Application.ActiveDocument.Select();...
0
5645
by: TSSRALBI | last post by:
Hello I'm a network technician in training and I need your help. I am currently learning how to create and manage the different types of VPNs and I have a question about LAN-to-LAN VPNs. The last exercise I practiced was to create a LAN-to-LAN VPN between two Pfsense firewalls, by using IPSEC protocols. I succeeded, with both firewalls in the same network. But I'm wondering if it's possible to do the same thing, with 2 Pfsense firewalls...
0
5818
by: adsilva | last post by:
A Windows Forms form does not have the event Unload, like VB6. What one acts like?
2
4007
muto222
by: muto222 | last post by:
How can i add a mobile payment intergratation into php mysql website.
3
3108
bsmnconsultancy
by: bsmnconsultancy | last post by:
In today's digital era, a well-designed website is crucial for businesses looking to succeed. Whether you're a small business owner or a large corporation in Toronto, having a strong online presence can significantly impact your brand's success. BSMN Consultancy, a leader in Website Development in Toronto offers valuable insights into creating effective websites that not only look great but also perform exceptionally well. In this comprehensive...

By using Bytes.com and it's services, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

To disable or enable advertisements and analytics tracking please visit the manage ads & tracking page.