By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
445,851 Members | 2,097 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 445,851 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Invoking other executable prgms using C?

P: n/a
hi

Is it possible to open an executable program like NOTEPAD(win)
using C-Program...(other than the function system() )? if so,please
provide me with an eg code...if not why?

Thanks in advance.

Dec 27 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
32 Replies


P: n/a
Pravin wrote:
hi

Is it possible to open an executable program like NOTEPAD(win)
using C-Program...(other than the function system() )? if so,please
provide me with an eg code...if not why?

Thanks in advance.

When you said "open" I presume you meant "execute". If you want to
really just open a file, the fopen is there to help you.

If you want to execute any program, then the only standard C call is
system().

<OT Call="POSIX">
My system has another set of calls exec* (execl,execv, etc.)
(#include <unistd.h>), which comes close (but for sure it's not same.)
You could refer the manuals of your compiler to see if it has something
similar and it has things that meets your needs.

However, note that this is Off-Topic to discuss further about
non-standard C calls further here. If you further have doubts regarding
the call, then please take to relevant (OS and/or Compiler specific) group.
</OT>

--
(Welcome) http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt
(clc FAQ) http://c-faq.com/
Dec 27 '05 #2

P: n/a
"Pravin" <pr***********@gmail.com> writes:
Is it possible to open an executable program like NOTEPAD(win)
using C-Program...(other than the function system() )? if so,please
provide me with an eg code...if not why?


There is no way in standard C to execute another program other than
the system() function. There may be other methods available on your
system; if you want more information, you'll need to ask in a
newsgroup that's specific to your system (not comp.lang.c).

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.
Dec 27 '05 #3

P: n/a
On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 06:51:24 UTC, "Pravin" <pr***********@gmail.com>
wrote:
Is it possible to open an executable program like NOTEPAD(win)
using C-Program...(other than the function system() )? if so,please
provide me with an eg code...if not why?


If you want a Windows-specific answer (as your question sort of implies)
then you might do better to crosspost to a Windows programming newsgroup
- posting to an OS/2 programming group won't help much!

OTOH, if it *is* OS/2 help you require, please ask again.

Dec 27 '05 #4

P: n/a
On 2005-12-27, Anand <An***@no-replies.com> wrote:
Pravin wrote:
hi

Is it possible to open an executable program like NOTEPAD(win)
using C-Program...(other than the function system() )? if so,please
provide me with an eg code...if not why?

Thanks in advance.
When you said "open" I presume you meant "execute". If you want to
really just open a file, the fopen is there to help you.

If you want to execute any program, then the only standard C call is
system().

<OT Call="POSIX">
My system has another set of calls exec* (execl,execv, etc.)
(#include <unistd.h>), which comes close (but for sure it's not same.)
You could refer the manuals of your compiler to see if it has something
similar and it has things that meets your needs.

However, note that this is Off-Topic to discuss further about
non-standard C calls further here. If you further have doubts regarding
the call, then please take to relevant (OS and/or Compiler specific) group.

<OT more>
However, he's unlikely to be able to run "NOTEPAD (win)" with exec* -
for that he probably needs CreateProcess or CreateProcessEx - that
should give him enough to google for if he can't find an appropriate
windows-specific newsgroup.
</OT> </OT>

Dec 27 '05 #5

P: n/a
Bob Eager wrote:
On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 06:51:24 UTC, "Pravin" <pr***********@gmail.com>
wrote:

Is it possible to open an executable program like NOTEPAD(win)
using C-Program...(other than the function system() )? if so,please
provide me with an eg code...if not why?

If you want a Windows-specific answer (as your question sort of implies)
then you might do better to crosspost to a Windows programming newsgroup
- posting to an OS/2 programming group won't help much!

OTOH, if it *is* OS/2 help you require, please ask again.


There are lots of ways in OS/2...


Dec 27 '05 #6

P: n/a
In comp.lang.c Pravin <pr***********@gmail.com> wrote:

(F'ups not set.)
Is it possible to open an executable program like NOTEPAD(win)
using C-Program...(other than the function system() )? if so,please
provide me with an eg code...if not why?


As noted, there is a very narrow C answer to this question. I suspect
you could benefit from a visit to the following URLs.

http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt
http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
http://benpfaff.org/writings/clc/off-topic.html

--
Christopher Benson-Manica | I *should* know what I'm talking about - if I
ataru(at)cyberspace.org | don't, I need to know. Flames welcome.
Dec 27 '05 #7

P: n/a
Christopher Benson-Manica wrote:
In comp.lang.c Pravin <pr***********@gmail.com> wrote:

(F'ups not set.)
Is it possible to open an executable program like NOTEPAD(win)
using C-Program...(other than the function system() )? if
so,please provide me with an eg code...if not why?


As noted, there is a very narrow C answer to this question. I
suspect you could benefit from a visit to the following URLs.

http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt
http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
http://benpfaff.org/writings/clc/off-topic.html


Why are you indulging in this campaign to revise all subject lines
to "[MTA]"?

--
Some informative links:
news:news.announce.newusers
http://www.geocities.com/nnqweb/
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html
http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html

Dec 27 '05 #8

P: n/a
In comp.lang.c Chuck F. <cb********@yahoo.com> wrote:

(Groups trimmed to comp.lang.c)
Why are you indulging in this campaign to revise all subject lines
to "[MTA]"?


It was suggested as more fitting than "OT" for Meta Topical Advice,
and it sounded reasonable to me. If it's doing more harm than good,
I'll be happy to continue using "OT".

--
Christopher Benson-Manica | I *should* know what I'm talking about - if I
ataru(at)cyberspace.org | don't, I need to know. Flames welcome.
Dec 27 '05 #9

P: n/a
Christopher Benson-Manica wrote:
In comp.lang.c Chuck F. <cb********@yahoo.com> wrote:

(Groups trimmed to comp.lang.c)
Why are you indulging in this campaign to revise all subject
lines to "[MTA]"?


It was suggested as more fitting than "OT" for Meta Topical
Advice, and it sounded reasonable to me. If it's doing more
harm than good, I'll be happy to continue using "OT".


You may have noticed that the better newsreaders also automatically
remove the "(was ...)", thus convincing the stupider newsreaders
that the thread is new. Thus my choice of 'revise' above.

--
Some informative links:
news:news.announce.newusers
http://www.geocities.com/nnqweb/
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html
http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html

Dec 28 '05 #10

P: n/a
Chuck F. <cb********@yahoo.com> wrote:
You may have noticed that the better newsreaders also automatically
remove the "(was ...)", thus convincing the stupider newsreaders
that the thread is new. Thus my choice of 'revise' above.


I use tin, and it isn't always correct when it makes netiquette
suggestions; this may be such an instance. Would it be preferable,
then, to simply prepend [MTA] and dispense with the (was:...)?

--
Christopher Benson-Manica | I *should* know what I'm talking about - if I
ataru(at)cyberspace.org | don't, I need to know. Flames welcome.
Dec 28 '05 #11

P: n/a
Christopher Benson-Manica wrote:
Chuck F. <cb********@yahoo.com> wrote:
You may have noticed that the better newsreaders also
automatically remove the "(was ...)", thus convincing the
stupider newsreaders that the thread is new. Thus my choice
of 'revise' above.


I use tin, and it isn't always correct when it makes netiquette
suggestions; this may be such an instance. Would it be
preferable, then, to simply prepend [MTA] and dispense with the
(was:...)?


Damfiknow. I do know that MTA is meaningless to me, while OT does
imply an opinion.

--
Some informative links:
news:news.announce.newusers
http://www.geocities.com/nnqweb/
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html
http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html

Dec 28 '05 #12

P: n/a


Pravin wrote:
hi

Is it possible to open an executable program like NOTEPAD(win)
using C-Program...(other than the function system() )? if so,please
provide me with an eg code...if not why?

Thanks in advance.


Dead easy:-

BOOL StartProgram(PCHAR program, PCHAR params)
{
STARTDATA SData = {0};
APIRET rc = 0;
PID pid = 0;
ULONG ulSessID = 0;
char achObjBuf[256] = {0};

SData.Length = sizeof(STARTDATA);
SData.Related = SSF_RELATED_INDEPENDENT;
SData.FgBg = SSF_FGBG_FORE;
SData.TraceOpt = SSF_TRACEOPT_NONE;
SData.PgmTitle = NULL;
SData.PgmName = program;
SData.PgmInputs = params;
SData.TermQ = NULL;
SData.InheritOpt = SSF_INHERTOPT_PARENT;
SData.SessionType = SSF_TYPE_DEFAULT;
SData.PgmControl = SSF_CONTROL_VISIBLE;
SData.ObjectBuffer = achObjBuf;
SData.ObjectBuffLen = 256;
rc = DosStartSession(&SData, &ulSessID, &pid);
if(rc != 0) return(FALSE);
return(TRUE);
}
...at least that is how it's done in OS/2

Yours,
Peter

Jan 28 '06 #13

P: n/a
Peter Koller wrote:

Pravin wrote:
Is it possible to open an executable program like NOTEPAD(win)
using C-Program...(other than the function system() )? if so,please
provide me with an eg code...if not why?

<snip>
BOOL StartProgram(PCHAR program, PCHAR params)
<snip OS2 specific answer.
..at least that is how it's done in OS/2


On comp.lang.c we only deal with standard C so please be so good as to
set follow-ups to exclude comp.lang.c when proposing system specific
answers so we don't have to put up with discussions about OS/2 which I'm
sure are perfectly reasonable over on comp.os.os2.programmer.misc.
--
Flash Gordon
Living in interesting times.
Although my email address says spam, it is real and I read it.
Jan 28 '06 #14

P: n/a
On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 21:39:36 UTC, Flash Gordon <sp**@flash-gordon.me.uk>
wrote:
Peter Koller wrote:

Pravin wrote:
Is it possible to open an executable program like NOTEPAD(win)
using C-Program...(other than the function system() )? if so,please
provide me with an eg code...if not why?


<snip>
BOOL StartProgram(PCHAR program, PCHAR params)


<snip OS2 specific answer.
..at least that is how it's done in OS/2


On comp.lang.c we only deal with standard C so please be so good as to
set follow-ups to exclude comp.lang.c when proposing system specific
answers so we don't have to put up with discussions about OS/2 which I'm
sure are perfectly reasonable over on comp.os.os2.programmer.misc.


If you deal only in standard C, then the question (which excluded
'system() ' as a solution) shouldn't have been posted there in the first
place!

Jan 28 '06 #15

P: n/a
On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 22:51:24 -0800, Pravin wrote:
Is it possible to open an executable program like NOTEPAD(win)
using C-Program...(other than the function system() )? if so,please
provide me with an eg code...if not why?

popen-> man popen
--
Hilsen/Regards
Michael Rasmussen
http://keyserver.veridis.com:11371/p...rch=0xE3E80917

Jan 28 '06 #16

P: n/a
"Bob Eager" <rd***@spamcop.net> writes:
On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 21:39:36 UTC, Flash Gordon <sp**@flash-gordon.me.uk>
wrote:
Peter Koller wrote:
> Pravin wrote:
>> Is it possible to open an executable program like NOTEPAD(win)
>> using C-Program...(other than the function system() )? if so,please
>> provide me with an eg code...if not why?


<snip>
> BOOL StartProgram(PCHAR program, PCHAR params)


<snip OS2 specific answer.
> ..at least that is how it's done in OS/2


On comp.lang.c we only deal with standard C so please be so good as to
set follow-ups to exclude comp.lang.c when proposing system specific
answers so we don't have to put up with discussions about OS/2 which I'm
sure are perfectly reasonable over on comp.os.os2.programmer.misc.


If you deal only in standard C, then the question (which excluded
'system() ' as a solution) shouldn't have been posted there in the first
place!


The question, "Is it possible ...", is perfectly appropriate.
The answer is No.

And why is system() not an acceptable solution in the first place?

(comp.os.os2.programmer.misc dropped from Newsgroups header.)

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.
Jan 28 '06 #17

P: n/a
When the question is cross-posted, so should the reply be.

Flash Gordon wrote:
Peter Koller wrote:

Pravin wrote:
Is it possible to open an executable program like NOTEPAD(win)
using C-Program...(other than the function system() )? if so,please
provide me with an eg code...if not why?

<snip>
BOOL StartProgram(PCHAR program, PCHAR params)

<snip OS2 specific answer.
..at least that is how it's done in OS/2

On comp.lang.c we only deal with standard C so please be so good as to
set follow-ups to exclude comp.lang.c when proposing system specific
answers so we don't have to put up with discussions about OS/2 which I'm
sure are perfectly reasonable over on comp.os.os2.programmer.misc.


Jan 28 '06 #18

P: n/a
Peter Flass wrote:
When the question is cross-posted, so should the reply be.

Flash Gordon wrote:


<snip>
On comp.lang.c we only deal with standard C so please be so good as to
set follow-ups to exclude comp.lang.c when proposing system specific
answers so we don't have to put up with discussions about OS/2 which
I'm sure are perfectly reasonable over on comp.os.os2.programmer.misc.


I asked for follow-ups to be set so the discussion gets directed only to
where it is topical. Or do you think that if someone starts a cross post
to a group you read that is off topic the cross-post should continue?
How about if a hundred people do it? How about if they do it with a
hundred threads each with 10 posts per day?

You might not care about keeping groups you read topical, but we (most
of the regulars on comp.lang.c) care about keeping comp.lang.c topical.

Also, top posting is not considered acceptable on comp.lang.c, if it is
acceptable on comp.os.os2.programmer.misc then that is another reason to
set follow-ups to only one group.

Note that I did not set follow ups because discussion of whether
something should be cross-posted is a discussion of topicality, and
those are generally considered topical everywhere.
--
Flash Gordon
Living in interesting times.
Although my email address says spam, it is real and I read it.
Jan 29 '06 #19

P: n/a
Peter Flass wrote:

When the question is cross-posted, so should the reply be.


No. The question should have follow-ups set to a single
newsgroup. And those follow-ups should never be top-posted.

--
"The power of the Executive to cast a man into prison without
formulating any charge known to the law, and particularly to
deny him the judgement of his peers, is in the highest degree
odious and is the foundation of all totalitarian government
whether Nazi or Communist." -- W. Churchill, Nov 21, 1943
Jan 29 '06 #20

P: n/a
Flash Gordon wrote:
Peter Flass wrote:
When the question is cross-posted, so should the reply be.

Flash Gordon wrote:
<snip>
On comp.lang.c we only deal with standard C so please be so good as
to set follow-ups to exclude comp.lang.c when proposing system
specific answers so we don't have to put up with discussions about
OS/2 which I'm sure are perfectly reasonable over on
comp.os.os2.programmer.misc.


I asked for follow-ups to be set so the discussion gets directed only to
where it is topical. Or do you think that if someone starts a cross post
to a group you read that is off topic the cross-post should continue?
How about if a hundred people do it? How about if they do it with a
hundred threads each with 10 posts per day?


The difficulty is that the original poster has not yet indicated what
he wants. The question was cross-posted to two newsgroups, one
of which is OS-specific and the other not. Followups were not set,
so we don't know which group the OP is looking for an answer in.
There's no point in posting the answer in a group that the OP is
not reading.

Life would be easier if people posting questions were less vague, and
were aware of the rules of polite behaviour (setting followups, etc.).
Unfortunately not all posters are perfect, and we have to deal
with that.
You might not care about keeping groups you read topical, but we (most
of the regulars on comp.lang.c) care about keeping comp.lang.c topical.
A perfectly reasonable attitude. But we in the comp.os.os2.* groups are
perpetually plagued with Windows questions, presumably by people who
are not aware that computers weren't invented by Microsoft. In some
cases, as in the present thread, it's not at all clear whether a
system-specific solution was required.

What happens when someone posts a programming question to comp.lang.c,
and the context suggests (but does not make it unambiguously clear) that
it is probably a Visual Basic question? Do you give the C solution, or send
the poster to another group, or what? The answer is never obvious.
Also, top posting is not considered acceptable on comp.lang.c, if it is
acceptable on comp.os.os2.programmer.misc then that is another reason to
set follow-ups to only one group.
Top posting is not considered acceptable on any of the newsgroups that
I read, but it is pretty much compulsory on things like Google Groups.
Shit happens.
Note that I did not set follow ups because discussion of whether
something should be cross-posted is a discussion of topicality, and
those are generally considered topical everywhere.


Agreed. Besides, we still need to hear from the OP on the question of
which group the question should really have gone to.

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org

Please note the changed e-mail and web addresses. The domain
eepjm.newcastle.edu.au no longer exists.
My e-mail addresses at newcastle.edu.au will probably remain "live"
for a while, but then they will disappear without warning.
The optusnet address still has about 5 months of life left.
Feb 10 '06 #21

P: n/a
Peter Moylan <pe***@DIESPAMMERS.ozebelg.org> writes:
Flash Gordon wrote:

[...]
Also, top posting is not considered acceptable on comp.lang.c, if it
is acceptable on comp.os.os2.programmer.misc then that is another
reason to set follow-ups to only one group.


Top posting is not considered acceptable on any of the newsgroups that
I read, but it is pretty much compulsory on things like Google Groups.


A lot of people use the groups.google.com interface to post to
comp.lang.c; many of them manage to post properly. (If you're
referring to Google's own non-Usenet groups, I have no idea what the
protocol there is.)

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.
Feb 10 '06 #22

P: n/a
Peter Moylan wrote:
Flash Gordon wrote:
Peter Flass wrote:
When the question is cross-posted, so should the reply be.

Flash Gordon wrote:

<snip>
The difficulty is that the original poster has not yet indicated what
he wants. The question was cross-posted to two newsgroups, one
of which is OS-specific and the other not. Followups were not set,
so we don't know which group the OP is looking for an answer in.
There's no point in posting the answer in a group that the OP is
not reading.

Life would be easier if people posting questions were less vague, and
were aware of the rules of polite behaviour (setting followups, etc.).
Unfortunately not all posters are perfect, and we have to deal
with that.
Setting follow-ups on a response does not prevent the message from being
seen in all groups, so the OP would still see it. So as long as the post
says that follow-ups have been redirected to the correct group this is
not a problem since the OP will see the response and know where further
messages in the thread will be seen. If the OP chooses not to go to the
correct group after a message redirecting him/her then that is his/her
problem, not ours.
You might not care about keeping groups you read topical, but we (most
of the regulars on comp.lang.c) care about keeping comp.lang.c topical.
<snip>
What happens when someone posts a programming question to comp.lang.c,
and the context suggests (but does not make it unambiguously clear) that
it is probably a Visual Basic question? Do you give the C solution, or
send
the poster to another group, or what? The answer is never obvious.


Depending on luck they are either redirected so a specific group, told
to look for a group with "windows" in the name, or merely told they need
to post else where. Often, and especially when I am not certain I am
suggesting the correct group, I will tell them to check out the FAQ for
any alternative group before posting there.
Also, top posting is not considered acceptable on comp.lang.c, if it
is acceptable on comp.os.os2.programmer.misc then that is another
reason to set follow-ups to only one group.


Top posting is not considered acceptable on any of the newsgroups that
I read, but it is pretty much compulsory on things like Google Groups.
Shit happens.


Plenty of people manage to post correctly through the Google Groups
interface so that is not a valid excuse and certainly people don't get
let off for top-posting in any groups I read just because the use Google.
Note that I did not set follow ups because discussion of whether
something should be cross-posted is a discussion of topicality, and
those are generally considered topical everywhere.


Agreed. Besides, we still need to hear from the OP on the question of
which group the question should really have gone to.


A reasonable assumption would have been either a standard C solution
(which may be topical over in comp.os.programmer.misc as well as
comp.lang.c, but could certainly be redirected to just comp.lang.c) or
OS2 specific solution which would only be topical over in an OS2 group.

BTW, we do accept questions about whether something is possible in
standard C or whether an implementation specific solution is required.
In such situations we answer the question and if the answer is that you
need a system specific solution we will do our best to suggest where to
ask about such a solution. So the OPs question *might* have been
acceptable here (I can't remember the details) even though discussion of
the specifics of the OS2 solution are not.

So I stand by my request that in a situation like this when posting an
OS2 specific response you set follow-ups to an OS2 group (with your
response being cross-posted) so we only see the original message and the
initial OS2 specific response, but not further discussion of the OS2
specifics.
--
Flash Gordon
Living in interesting times.
Although my email address says spam, it is real and I read it.
Feb 10 '06 #23

P: n/a
Peter Moylan wrote:
Flash Gordon wrote:
.... snip ...
What happens when someone posts a programming question to comp.lang.c,
and the context suggests (but does not make it unambiguously clear)
that it is probably a Visual Basic question? Do you give the C
solution, or send the poster to another group, or what? The answer
is never obvious.
We send them to another group, if known, and yell at idjits who
insist on answering their questions here, on the theory that the
answers will never get vetted, and just constitute unnecessary
clutter and encouragement.
Also, top posting is not considered acceptable on comp.lang.c, if
it is acceptable on comp.os.os2.programmer.misc then that is
another reason to set follow-ups to only one group.


Top posting is not considered acceptable on any of the newsgroups
that I read, but it is pretty much compulsory on things like
Google Groups. Shit happens.


No it isn't acceptable. But the first task with the googolian
monstrosities is to teach them to use what is already provided to
supply context. Some catch on immediately. Some seem to closely
resemble a pooh-bear of little brain.

--
"If you want to post a followup via groups.google.com, don't use
the broken "Reply" link at the bottom of the article. Click on
"show options" at the top of the article, then click on the
"Reply" at the bottom of the article headers." - Keith Thompson
More details at: <http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/>
Also see <http://www.safalra.com/special/googlegroupsreply/>
Feb 10 '06 #24

P: n/a
Peter Moylan wrote:

Top posting is not considered acceptable on any of the newsgroups that
I read, but it is pretty much compulsory on things like Google Groups.

This is not true, where did you get such an idea? While the quoting
version of the Google reply is somewhat hidden (see .sig below) there's
nothing that requires or even encourages top-posting once you use the
right mechanism.

I had to use GG for the first four months of 2005. I managed to post
and reply quite satisfactorily.
Brian

--
Please quote enough of the previous message for context. To do so from
Google, click "show options" and use the Reply shown in the expanded
header.
Feb 10 '06 #25

P: n/a
"Default User" <de***********@yahoo.com> writes:
Peter Moylan wrote:
Top posting is not considered acceptable on any of the newsgroups that
I read, but it is pretty much compulsory on things like Google Groups.


This is not true, where did you get such an idea? While the quoting
version of the Google reply is somewhat hidden (see .sig below) there's
nothing that requires or even encourages top-posting once you use the
right mechanism.

I had to use GG for the first four months of 2005. I managed to post
and reply quite satisfactorily.


The Google interface, even when used properly, *mildly* encourages
top-posting. The text window it opens contains the quoted article
preceded by a blank line, and the cursor is at the top of the window.
If you jump to the text window by hitting tab repeatedly (I suppose
this might depend on which browser you're using) and then start
typing, your new text will appear at the top.

Of course, it's easy enough to delete the blank line at the top and
start typing at the bottom, but it's still a little too easy not to.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.
Feb 10 '06 #26

P: n/a
Keith Thompson wrote:

The Google interface, even when used properly, mildly encourages
top-posting. The text window it opens contains the quoted article
preceded by a blank line, and the cursor is at the top of the window.
If you jump to the text window by hitting tab repeatedly (I suppose
this might depend on which browser you're using) and then start
typing, your new text will appear at the top.


Not when I just tried it. Cursor was at the bottom.
Brian
Feb 10 '06 #27

P: n/a
Default User wrote:
Keith Thompson wrote:

The Google interface, even when used properly, mildly encourages
top-posting. The text window it opens contains the quoted article
preceded by a blank line, and the cursor is at the top of the window.
If you jump to the text window by hitting tab repeatedly (I suppose
this might depend on which browser you're using) and then start
typing, your new text will appear at the top.


Not when I just tried it. Cursor was at the bottom.
Brian


Works for me as well. I'd prefer if they'd actually put the
cursor /below/ the last quoted line, instead of in its last character
position.

--
BR, Vladimir

You will obey or molten silver will be poured into your ears.

Feb 10 '06 #28

P: n/a
Vladimir S. Oka wrote:
Default User wrote:
Keith Thompson wrote:

The Google interface, even when used properly, mildly encourages
top-posting. The text window it opens contains the quoted article
preceded by a blank line, and the cursor is at the top of the
window.
Not when I just tried it. Cursor was at the bottom.


Works for me as well. I'd prefer if they'd actually put the
cursor below the last quoted line, instead of in its last character
position.

I just tried it with IE, it behaves as Keith said. Once again Firefox
proves superior!

Brian

Feb 10 '06 #29

P: n/a
"Default User" <de***********@yahoo.com> writes:
Keith Thompson wrote:
The Google interface, even when used properly, mildly encourages
top-posting. The text window it opens contains the quoted article
preceded by a blank line, and the cursor is at the top of the window.
If you jump to the text window by hitting tab repeatedly (I suppose
this might depend on which browser you're using) and then start
typing, your new text will appear at the top.


Not when I just tried it. Cursor was at the bottom.


So apart from its other flaws, the Google interface isn't even
consistent. Great.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.
Feb 10 '06 #30

P: n/a
Keith Thompson wrote:
"Default User" <de***********@yahoo.com> writes:
Keith Thompson wrote:
The Google interface, even when used properly, mildly encourages
top-posting. The text window it opens contains the quoted article
preceded by a blank line, and the cursor is at the top of the

window. >> If you jump to the text window by hitting tab repeatedly
(I suppose >> this might depend on which browser you're using) and
then start >> typing, your new text will appear at the top.

Not when I just tried it. Cursor was at the bottom.


So apart from its other flaws, the Google interface isn't even
consistent. Great.


Looks like it might be browser dependent, not too surprising. I had
differing results with Firefox and IE.


Brian
Feb 11 '06 #31

P: n/a
On Fri, 10 Feb 2006 21:27:28 GMT, in comp.lang.c , Keith Thompson
<ks***@mib.org> wrote:
The Google interface, even when used properly, *mildly* encourages
top-posting. The text window it opens contains the quoted article
preceded by a blank line, and the cursor is at the top of the window.


So do quite a few newsreaders, Agent included. I am always amazed at
how many people are unable to find the arrow keys. Must be too much
right-arm on the mouse or something...
Mark McIntyre
--
"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it."
--Brian Kernighan

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
Feb 11 '06 #32

P: n/a
Mark McIntyre <ma**********@spamcop.net> wrote:
On Fri, 10 Feb 2006 21:27:28 GMT, in comp.lang.c , Keith Thompson
<ks***@mib.org> wrote:
The Google interface, even when used properly, *mildly* encourages
top-posting. The text window it opens contains the quoted article
preceded by a blank line, and the cursor is at the top of the window.
So do quite a few newsreaders, Agent included.


Of course it does. Cursor at the top, but _not_ on a blank line, so you
don't forget to snip. Sig (if you have one) at the bottom, so you don't
think that the top is all there is.
I am always amazed at how many people are unable to find the arrow keys.


I'm equally amazed at the number of people who have forgotten where the
delete key is.

Richard
Feb 13 '06 #33

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.