473,327 Members | 1,997 Online
Bytes | Software Development & Data Engineering Community
Post Job

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Join Bytes to post your question to a community of 473,327 software developers and data experts.

Manipulating with large numbers in C

Hi All,
I m Halid Umar, network security research student. I will explain
my situation and give me hint if you can. I expect reply from you all.

* I have to handle numbers that have more than 64 bit like 128bit in
cryptography applications.

* For example, if i want to add two 128 bit numbers what should i do in
C.

* Please explain me with example please.

Hope reading you soon.

Regards,
Halid Umar A.M

Apr 25 '06 #1
29 3229
Halid Umar A M said:
Hi All,
I m Halid Umar, network security research student. I will explain
my situation and give me hint if you can. I expect reply from you all.
For your information, "I expect reply from you all" makes it sound like you
are the boss, we are your servants, and we have to do what you say. I know
you don't mean to sound like that. I suggest you avoid the words "expect
reply".

I recommend, also, that you do a little research into the word "please".
* I have to handle numbers that have more than 64 bit like 128bit in
cryptography applications.

* For example, if i want to add two 128 bit numbers what should i do in
C.
Either use an existing bignum library:

http://www.gnu.org/software/gmp/ (GMP)
http://indigo.ie/~mscott/ (Miracl)

or write your own.
* Please explain me with example please.


Ah! You see? You do know the word. :-)

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at above domain (but drop the www, obviously)
Apr 25 '06 #2
Hello Mr.Richard,
I am really sorry for the sentence i have framed for the question.
As I am not a native speaker of English, I framed wrong sentence
without respect. Really I didnt mean in that way. Please apologise me
for my bad english. I am also improving my english.

Thanks for your quick response and again i am sorry for that.

Halid Umar

Apr 25 '06 #3
Halid Umar A M said:
Hello Mr.Richard,
I am really sorry for the sentence i have framed for the question.


No need to apologise. I was not offended. I was just trying to help you to
avoid giving offence to some of the more sensitive souls in here.

Anyway, like I said, you want either GMP, Miracl, or plenty of time and
coffee. :-)

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at above domain (but drop the www, obviously)
Apr 25 '06 #4
Hello Mr.Richard,
Thanks, I tried to send you a personal mail but i could not find
your personal id. Please if you dont mind, send me a mail to my id so
that i can communicate with you easily without spamming to all.
ha**********@gmail.com or ha**********@yahoo.co.in ; thanks again.

Regards
Halid Umar

Apr 25 '06 #5
Halid Umar A M a écrit :
Hi All,
I m Halid Umar, network security research student. I will explain
my situation and give me hint if you can. I expect reply from you all.

* I have to handle numbers that have more than 64 bit like 128bit in
cryptography applications.

* For example, if i want to add two 128 bit numbers what should i do in
C.

* Please explain me with example please.

Hope reading you soon.

Regards,
Halid Umar A.M

If you use the lcc-win32 C compiler you do:

#include <stdio.h>
#include <int128.h>
int main(void)
{
char buf[512];
int128 a = 1,b;

b = (a << 94);
i128toa(&b,buf);
printf("%s\n",buf);
}

Output
19807040628566084398385987584

Support for 128 bit integers is quite new, and I haven't gotten around
to add the printf/scanf support. But most functions are working now.

To get lcc-win32 go to:

http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32

P.S. Note that this are EVIL EXTENSIONS that will make you think that
lcc-win32 is a good compiler and other compilers just do not cut it :-)
Apr 25 '06 #6
jacob navia <ja***@jacob.remcomp.fr> wrote:
Halid Umar A M a écrit :
I m Halid Umar, network security research student. I will explain
my situation and give me hint if you can. I expect reply from you all.
If you use the lcc-win32 C compiler you


are completely off-topic and non-portable. Caveat emptor.

Richard
Apr 25 '06 #7
Halid Umar A M wrote:
Hello Mr.Richard,
Thanks, I tried to send you a personal mail but i could not find
your personal id. Please if you dont mind, send me a mail to my id so
that i can communicate with you easily without spamming to all.
ha**********@gmail.com or ha**********@yahoo.co.in ; thanks again.

Regards
Halid Umar


The other members of the group want to hear what you have to say. They
just... enjoy whining about everything that goes against the tradition
of the group.

Anyway, please quote what was said before; click 'More Options' and 'Add
Reply' instead of using the broken Reply link at the bottom.

If you are making your own 128-bit numbering system, what base do you
want to use? (10 would be most natural, but 16 would be much easier).
Apr 25 '06 #8
Halid Umar A M wrote:
Hello Mr.Richard,
Thanks, I tried to send you a personal mail but i could not find
your personal id. Please if you dont mind, send me a mail to my id so
that i can communicate with you easily without spamming to all.
ha**********@gmail.com or ha**********@yahoo.co.in ; thanks again.


You might want to read

http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-...html#noprivate
http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
August
Apr 25 '06 #9
jacob navia said:
If you use the lcc-win32 C compiler


Is there not an lcc-win32 newsgroup?

The reason for this newsgroup's focus on portability has been explained to
you time and time again. You are damaging your reputation, and by extension
the reputation of your product, by continuing to ignore that focus. Does
that not concern you?

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at above domain (but drop the www, obviously)
Apr 25 '06 #10
Richard Heathfield a écrit :
jacob navia said:

If you use the lcc-win32 C compiler

Is there not an lcc-win32 newsgroup?

The reason for this newsgroup's focus on portability has been explained to
you time and time again. You are damaging your reputation, and by extension
the reputation of your product, by continuing to ignore that focus. Does
that not concern you?


I fail to see why supporting 128 bit integers "damages my reputation".
lcc-win32 has a lot of numeric types, and gives the user the possibility
of writing his/her own numeric types. You may disagree with how it is
done, or whether at all should be done. You are entitled to your opinion.

The "focus of this group" is nowhere stated, this group has no chart and
usenet is free. Yes, there is a group of people that think that all
improvements that compilers do to the language or to the run time
are to be banned and reduce C to a dead language, ready to be taken over
by C++.

Even such a simple thing like 128 bit integers provokes endless polemic,
without any substantive arguments of your part. Why should 128 bit
integers be banned? You do not say, and stay (as always) discussing
about what is on topic or not, never about whether something is correct
or incorrect or whether there is any advantage/disadvantage for using it.

Why are 128 bit integers OFF TOPIC here?

Because you say so?

Portability is one of the many factors that rule software construction,
as you may know. Usage is another. Try to write a 128 bit library and
you will se that is much more easy to use lcc-win32's library.

And please keep in mind that portability at all costs is nonsense.

jacob
Apr 25 '06 #11
jacob navia said:
Richard Heathfield a écrit :
jacob navia said:

If you use the lcc-win32 C compiler

Is there not an lcc-win32 newsgroup?

The reason for this newsgroup's focus on portability has been explained
to you time and time again. You are damaging your reputation, and by
extension the reputation of your product, by continuing to ignore that
focus. Does that not concern you?


I fail to see why supporting 128 bit integers "damages my reputation".


It doesn't, and I didn't claim it did. But now your reputation for being
able to read is in danger.

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at above domain (but drop the www, obviously)
Apr 25 '06 #12
In article <44**********************@news.wanadoo.fr>,
jacob navia <ja***@jacob.remcomp.fr> wrote:
Why are 128 bit integers OFF TOPIC here?


They aren't, but #include <int128.h> is, as is the int128 type.
--
Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? It hath
been already of old time, which was before us. -- Ecclesiastes
Apr 25 '06 #13
jacob navia wrote:
.... snip ...
Support for 128 bit integers is quite new, and I haven't gotten around
to add the printf/scanf support. But most functions are working now.

To get lcc-win32 go to:

http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32

P.S. Note that this are EVIL EXTENSIONS that will make you think that
lcc-win32 is a good compiler and other compilers just do not cut it :-)


There is no need for any EVIL EXTENSION. You can define a long
long as a 128 bit quantity, a long as 64 bits, an int as 32 bits, a
short as 16 bits, and a byte (or char) as 8 bits and remain
perfectly standard. No need for non-standard headers such as
<int128.h>.

You seem determined to promulgate the Microsoft disease of
flagrantly ignoring standards and attempting to lock in the
uneducated to your peculiar system and bugs.

--
"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/>
Apr 25 '06 #14
Walter Roberson a écrit :
In article <44**********************@news.wanadoo.fr>,
jacob navia <ja***@jacob.remcomp.fr> wrote:

Why are 128 bit integers OFF TOPIC here?

They aren't, but #include <int128.h> is, as is the int128 type.


I asked in comp.std.c how I should name those, and all answers I got
pointed to such a name. The alternative "long long long" was completely
idiotic :-)

True, you have to include the 128 bit header since it is not enabled by
default... so what?

How else should I have done it?

And I fail to see what is so wrong with
#include <int128.h>

It is 100% standard C. True, the contents of that file are not in the
standard but what is wrong with that?

Apr 25 '06 #15
CBFalconer a écrit :
jacob navia wrote:

... snip ...
Support for 128 bit integers is quite new, and I haven't gotten around
to add the printf/scanf support. But most functions are working now.

To get lcc-win32 go to:

http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32

P.S. Note that this are EVIL EXTENSIONS that will make you think that
lcc-win32 is a good compiler and other compilers just do not cut it :-)

There is no need for any EVIL EXTENSION. You can define a long
long as a 128 bit quantity, a long as 64 bits, an int as 32 bits, a
short as 16 bits, and a byte (or char) as 8 bits and remain
perfectly standard. No need for non-standard headers such as
<int128.h>.


I wanted to do that for the 64 bit port (lcc-win64). I would have done
it if it weren't because both gcc and MSVC treat long long as 64 bits.
I would have been the only compiler to do that, and all code from both
gcc and MSVC would have been forced to be PORTED to my compiler system,
it would never compile without some tweaking.

Of course code that assumes that long long is 64 bits is (in principle)
wrong, but there is alreay SO MUCH CODE that assumes that, that it
wouldn't have been wise to follow that path.
You seem determined to promulgate the Microsoft disease of
flagrantly ignoring standards and attempting to lock in the
uneducated to your peculiar system and bugs.


This is nonsense. I do not ignore standards. I implemented a
non-standard data type. Please keep in mind that extensions are NOT
FORBIDDEN by the standard. They should NOT introduce new keywords,
that's all. That is why there is an include of a header file. There is
NO new "int128" keyword.

I have repeated this AD NAUSEUM. Over and over. And always there are
people that tell the uneducated masses that extensions are "forbidden".

Please read the standard before you start labelling systems as
"non-standard".

Apr 25 '06 #16
jacob navia <ja***@jacob.remcomp.fr> writes:
I asked in comp.std.c how I should name those, and all answers I got
pointed to such a name. The alternative "long long long" was completely
idiotic :-)

True, you have to include the 128 bit header since it is not enabled by
default... so what?

How else should I have done it?


Name your 128-bit type "int128_t" and make it available upon
including <stdint.h>.
--
"A lesson for us all: Even in trivia there are traps."
--Eric Sosman
Apr 25 '06 #17
On Tue, 25 Apr 2006 20:07:19 +0200, jacob navia
<ja***@jacob.remcomp.fr> wrote:
Richard Heathfield a écrit :
jacob navia said:

If you use the lcc-win32 C compiler

Is there not an lcc-win32 newsgroup?

The reason for this newsgroup's focus on portability has been explained to
you time and time again. You are damaging your reputation, and by extension
the reputation of your product, by continuing to ignore that focus. Does
that not concern you?


I fail to see why supporting 128 bit integers "damages my reputation".


You (deliberately?) misunderstand. It's your insistence on talking
about it here that damages your reputation.
lcc-win32 has a lot of
features which are off-topic here.

<snip>
The "focus of this group" is nowhere stated,


You know better. The focus of this group has been stated clearly many
times, and a large proportion of those times, it was stated directly
to you.
<snip>

--
Al Balmer
Sun City, AZ
Apr 25 '06 #18
jacob navia said:
Walter Roberson a écrit :
In article <44**********************@news.wanadoo.fr>,
jacob navia <ja***@jacob.remcomp.fr> wrote:

Why are 128 bit integers OFF TOPIC here?

They aren't, but #include <int128.h> is, as is the int128 type.


I asked in comp.std.c how I should name those,


long int.

Duh.

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at above domain (but drop the www, obviously)
Apr 25 '06 #19
Ben Pfaff a écrit :
jacob navia <ja***@jacob.remcomp.fr> writes:

I asked in comp.std.c how I should name those, and all answers I got
pointed to such a name. The alternative "long long long" was completely
idiotic :-)

True, you have to include the 128 bit header since it is not enabled by
default... so what?

How else should I have done it?

Name your 128-bit type "int128_t" and make it available upon
including <stdint.h>.


Well, I think you are 99% right actually.

The only problem is that it would be enabled by default...

But in any case intXXX_t is a reserved word isn't it?

The rationale for making it optional is avoiding clobbering some other
int128 type that may exist in user name space. But int128_t is probably
reserved.

jacob
Apr 25 '06 #20
jacob navia <ja***@jacob.remcomp.fr> writes:
Richard Heathfield a écrit :
jacob navia said:
If you use the lcc-win32 C compiler Is there not an lcc-win32 newsgroup?
The reason for this newsgroup's focus on portability has been
explained to you time and time again. You are damaging your
reputation, and by extension the reputation of your product, by
continuing to ignore that focus. Does that not concern you?


I fail to see why supporting 128 bit integers "damages my reputation".


It doesn't, and nobody has ever said it did. You can do whatever you
like with your compiler and I applaud you for doing so (though I have
no use for it myself, since I don't do any win32-specific
programming).

It is your attitude and your behavior in this newsgroup that is
damaging your reputation, as well as your apparent in ability to
understand repeated explanations. Perhaps I should try explaining
this to you in words of one syllable.
lcc-win32 has a lot of numeric types, and gives the user the possibility
of writing his/her own numeric types. You may disagree with how it is
done, or whether at all should be done. You are entitled to your
opinion.
Nobody has said you shouldn't implement anything you like in your
compiler.
The "focus of this group" is nowhere stated, this group has no chart
and usenet is free. Yes, there is a group of people that think that
all improvements that compilers do to the language or to the run time
are to be banned and reduce C to a dead language, ready to be taken
over by C++.
What will it take for you to realize that *nobody has said that*?
Even such a simple thing like 128 bit integers provokes endless
polemic, without any substantive arguments of your part. Why should
128 bit integers be banned? You do not say, and stay (as always)
discussing about what is on topic or not, never about whether
something is correct or incorrect or whether there is any
advantage/disadvantage for using it.

Why are 128 bit integers OFF TOPIC here?

Because you say so?
You can, if you like, implement 128-bit integers without even using an
extension. You can make your "long long" type 128 bits; for example,
you might have:

char 8 bits
short 16 bits
int 32 bits
long 64 bits
long long 128 bits

and nobody here would have the slightest problem with it.

Or you could keep long long as 64 bits and provide one or more
"extended integer types", as described in C99 6.2.5. You could call
your 128-bit signed type something like __int128_t, and your 128-bit
unsigned type __uint128_t. No special header would be required.
Presumably int128_t and intmax_t iin <inttypes.h> would be typedefs
for __int128_t; likewise for the unsigned version. Again, this would
be entirely within the standard, and nobody here would complain (but
of course we would point out that any code that depends on the
existence of a 128-bit type is not portable to any implementation that
doesn't support it).

Or, if you prefer it for some reason, you can provide 128-bit types
using a compiler extension, and require a system-specific header for
any code that uses them. This is a perfectly valid extension, and
nobody has a problem with you implementing such a thing in your
compiler.

The *only* problem is your insistence on pushing your own exensions in
this newsgroup, and whining about the fact that they haven't been
added to the standard.
Portability is one of the many factors that rule software
construction, as you may know. Usage is another. Try to write a 128
bit library and
you will se that is much more easy to use lcc-win32's library.
If I want 128-bit integers, I can find an existing portable library
that implements them, or I can use a library that provides arbitrary
multiple-precision types (at the expense of some loss of performance),
or (with some difficulty) I can write one myself. Using your
lcc-win32 library is not an option for me because I'm not interested
in writing code that I can run only on win32 systems.
And please keep in mind that portability at all costs is nonsense.


Of course it is. Portability at *some* cost is perfectly sensible,
though.

It's true the comp.lang.c has no charter, for the simple reason that
it was created (as net.lang.c) before newsgroup charters existed.
There is a general consensus that the the topic of this newsgroup is
the C language as defined by the ISO standard(s), and that discussions
of system-specific extensions are off-topic.

If you don't like the way this newsgroup works, perhaps you should
consider posting in comp.compilers.lcc. You practically have your own
newsgroup; why on Earth do you feel the need to come here and tell us
how to run this one?

Once again, in case I still haven't gotten through to you. Nobody has
any problem with you implementing extensions in your own compiler.
Nobody says that non-portable code is evil; when it's necessary,
there's nothing wrong with it. Our only concern is the topicality of
posts to this newsgroup. Many of us find it useful to have a
newsgroup that only discusses the C language as defined by the
standard. Why do you have a problem with that?

--
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.
Apr 25 '06 #21
jacob navia <ja***@jacob.remcomp.fr> writes:
Ben Pfaff a icrit :
jacob navia <ja***@jacob.remcomp.fr> writes:
I asked in comp.std.c how I should name those, and all answers I got
pointed to such a name. The alternative "long long long" was completely
idiotic :-)

True, you have to include the 128 bit header since it is not
enabled by default... so what?

How else should I have done it? Name your 128-bit type "int128_t" and make it available upon
including <stdint.h>.


Well, I think you are 99% right actually.

The only problem is that it would be enabled by default...


It would? <stdint.h> just provides a typedef that isn't visible
without including it. Presumably you'd use something like
__int128 for the underlying type.
But in any case intXXX_t is a reserved word isn't it?


In C99, yes.
--
"...what folly I commit, I dedicate to you."
--William Shakespeare, _Troilus and Cressida_
Apr 25 '06 #22
jacob navia <ja***@jacob.remcomp.fr> writes:
Ben Pfaff a écrit :
jacob navia <ja***@jacob.remcomp.fr> writes:
I asked in comp.std.c how I should name those, and all answers I got
pointed to such a name. The alternative "long long long" was completely
idiotic :-)

True, you have to include the 128 bit header since it is not
enabled by default... so what?

How else should I have done it? Name your 128-bit type "int128_t" and make it available upon
including <stdint.h>.


Well, I think you are 99% right actually.

The only problem is that it would be enabled by default...


And why is that a problem?

You can provide a compiler option that controls whether your 128-bit
types are supported. Your compiler invoked with that option would
then effectively be a different implementation than your compiler
invoked without the option. Both implementations could be conforming.
But in any case intXXX_t is a reserved word isn't it?
It's a reserved identifier (obviously not a keyword), and it's
reserved for exactly what you're doing.
The rationale for making it optional is avoiding clobbering some other
int128 type that may exist in user name space. But int128_t is
probably reserved.


You have an int64_t in your <stdint.h>, right? Why would adding
int128_t to your <stdint.h> be a problem?

--
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.
Apr 25 '06 #23

"jacob navia" <ja***@jacob.remcomp.fr> wrote in message
news:44**********************@news.wanadoo.fr...

The "focus of this group" is nowhere stated, this group has no chart and
usenet is free. Yes, there is a group of people that think that all
improvements that compilers do to the language or to the run time
are to be banned and reduce C to a dead language, ready to be taken over
by C++.

Say it again! You can write them off as quixotic, for they have never read
Don Quixote...
Compare this statement from John Bode with a joke from Ron White's "You
Can't Fix Stupid!" comedy tour:

"John Bode" <jo*******@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@e56g2000cwe.googlegr oups.com...
I've been following this newsgroup since around 1994, and I have to
say, after 12 years of people asking the same exact questions the same
exact way, it's hard to stay civil.

Paraphrasing "Ron White":

RW: "I was at an army base in Louisiana and mentioned there were 40,000 men
stationed there. At which point, a drunk woman stood up and said, 'Yeah,
they're all bad lays.' To which I responded, ' I'd think that after, I
don't know, the 39,000th F__k you'd think the problem might be you.'"

Rod Pemberton
Apr 26 '06 #24
Rod Pemberton said:
Compare this statement from John Bode with a joke from Ron White's "You
Can't Fix Stupid!" comedy tour:

"John Bode" <jo*******@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@e56g2000cwe.googlegr oups.com...

I've been following this newsgroup since around 1994, and I have to
say, after 12 years of people asking the same exact questions the same
exact way, it's hard to stay civil.

Paraphrasing "Ron White":

RW: "I was at an army base in Louisiana and mentioned there were 40,000
men
stationed there. At which point, a drunk woman stood up and said, 'Yeah,
they're all bad lays.' To which I responded, ' I'd think that after, I
don't know, the 39,000th F__k you'd think the problem might be you.'"


It seems to me that, after only about three months of using this newsgroup
(according to Google's archives), you have already found it hard to stay
civil. So you prove John Bode's point nicely.
--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at above domain (but drop the www, obviously)
Apr 26 '06 #25

"Richard Heathfield" <in*****@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:mN******************************@bt.com...
Rod Pemberton said:
Compare this statement from John Bode with a joke from Ron White's "You
Can't Fix Stupid!" comedy tour:

"John Bode" <jo*******@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@e56g2000cwe.googlegr oups.com...

I've been following this newsgroup since around 1994, and I have to
say, after 12 years of people asking the same exact questions the same
exact way, it's hard to stay civil.

Paraphrasing "Ron White":

RW: "I was at an army base in Louisiana and mentioned there were 40,000
men
stationed there. At which point, a drunk woman stood up and said, 'Yeah, they're all bad lays.' To which I responded, ' I'd think that after, I
don't know, the 39,000th F__k you'd think the problem might be you.'"


It seems to me that, after only about three months of using this newsgroup
(according to Google's archives), you have already found it hard to stay
civil. So you prove John Bode's point nicely.


Your comprehension is _low_. He said "after 12 years", "it's hard to stay
civil" because "of people people asking the same exact questions the same
exact way." I've only asked one question. And, I sure didn't do so just
now. Which means your declaration that I "prove John Bode's point nicely"
is a lie.
Rod Pemberton

Apr 26 '06 #26
Rod Pemberton said:

"Richard Heathfield" <in*****@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:mN******************************@bt.com...
Rod Pemberton said:
> Compare this statement from John Bode with a joke from Ron White's "You
> Can't Fix Stupid!" comedy tour:
>
> "John Bode" <jo*******@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> news:11**********************@e56g2000cwe.googlegr oups.com...
>>
>> I've been following this newsgroup since around 1994, and I have to
>> say, after 12 years of people asking the same exact questions the same
>> exact way, it's hard to stay civil.
>
>
> Paraphrasing "Ron White":
>
> RW: "I was at an army base in Louisiana and mentioned there were 40,000
> men
> stationed there. At which point, a drunk woman stood up and said, 'Yeah, > they're all bad lays.' To which I responded, ' I'd think that after, I
> don't know, the 39,000th F__k you'd think the problem might be you.'"
It seems to me that, after only about three months of using this
newsgroup (according to Google's archives), you have already found it
hard to stay civil. So you prove John Bode's point nicely.


Your comprehension is _low_.


No, it isn't.
He said "after 12 years", "it's hard to
stay civil" because "of people people asking the same exact questions the
same
exact way."
Yes.
I've only asked one question.
Irrelevant. You have still shown incivility, without even the excuse of 12
years of answering "the same exact questions" - thus demonstrating John's
point that it is hard to stay civil.
And, I sure didn't do so just now.
Irrelevant. You still showed incivility.
Which means your declaration that I "prove John Bode's point nicely"
is a lie.


No, your objection merely demonstrates that you don't understand plain
English, and your (unthinking and misplaced) accusation of mendacity merely
confirms John's point that it is hard to remain civil.

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at above domain (but drop the www, obviously)
Apr 26 '06 #27
Richard Heathfield wrote:
Rod Pemberton said:

.... snip ...

Paraphrasing "Ron White":

RW: "I was at an army base in Louisiana and mentioned there were
40,000 men stationed there. At which point, a drunk woman stood
up and said, 'Yeah, they're all bad lays.' To which I responded,
' I'd think that after, I don't know, the 39,000th F__k you'd
think the problem might be you.'"


It seems to me that, after only about three months of using this
newsgroup (according to Google's archives), you have already found
it hard to stay civil. So you prove John Bode's point nicely.


This seems to confirm my accuracy in plonking at about the 2 week
mark. I wonder how much invective and other foolishness I have
avoided, not to mention bandwidth.

--
"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/>

Apr 26 '06 #28

"Richard Heathfield" <in*****@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:Lt********************@bt.com...
Rod Pemberton said:

"Richard Heathfield" <in*****@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:mN******************************@bt.com...
Rod Pemberton said:

> Compare this statement from John Bode with a joke from Ron White's "You > Can't Fix Stupid!" comedy tour:
>
> "John Bode" <jo*******@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> news:11**********************@e56g2000cwe.googlegr oups.com...
>>
>> I've been following this newsgroup since around 1994, and I have to
>> say, after 12 years of people asking the same exact questions the same >> exact way, it's hard to stay civil.
>
>
> Paraphrasing "Ron White":
>
> RW: "I was at an army base in Louisiana and mentioned there were 40,000 > men
> stationed there. At which point, a drunk woman stood up and said, 'Yeah,
> they're all bad lays.' To which I responded, ' I'd think that after, I > don't know, the 39,000th F__k you'd think the problem might be you.'"

It seems to me that, after only about three months of using this
newsgroup (according to Google's archives), you have already found it
hard to stay civil. So you prove John Bode's point nicely.


Your comprehension is _low_.


No, it isn't.


Yes, it is.
He said "after 12 years", "it's hard to
stay civil" because "of people people asking the same exact questions the same
exact way."


Yes.
I've only asked one question.


Irrelevant. You have still shown incivility, without even the excuse of 12
years of answering "the same exact questions" - thus demonstrating John's
point that it is hard to stay civil.


He never said anything about "answered" questions for 12 years, only
"asking" questions. (low comprehension on your part).
And, I sure didn't do so just now.


Irrelevant. You still showed incivility.


Irrelevant. His point has to do with repetitive "asking the same exact
questions." Not inaccurately percieved incivility without asking questions
(again, low comprehension on your part).
Which means your declaration that I "prove John Bode's point nicely"
is a lie.


No, your objection merely demonstrates that you don't understand plain
English, and your (unthinking and misplaced) accusation of mendacity

merely confirms John's point that it is hard to remain civil.


No, your objections demonstrates consistently low comprehension, failure to
accept the truth, refusal to accept the fact that you attempted to project a
falsehood, and ignorance of John's statement.
Rod Pemberton
Apr 28 '06 #29

Rod Pemberton wrote:
"jacob navia" <ja***@jacob.remcomp.fr> wrote in message
news:44**********************@news.wanadoo.fr...

The "focus of this group" is nowhere stated, this group has no chart and
usenet is free. Yes, there is a group of people that think that all
improvements that compilers do to the language or to the run time
are to be banned and reduce C to a dead language, ready to be taken over
by C++.


Say it again! You can write them off as quixotic, for they have never read
Don Quixote...
Compare this statement from John Bode with a joke from Ron White's "You
Can't Fix Stupid!" comedy tour:

"John Bode" <jo*******@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@e56g2000cwe.googlegr oups.com...

I've been following this newsgroup since around 1994, and I have to
say, after 12 years of people asking the same exact questions the same
exact way, it's hard to stay civil.

Paraphrasing "Ron White":

RW: "I was at an army base in Louisiana and mentioned there were 40,000 men
stationed there. At which point, a drunk woman stood up and said, 'Yeah,
they're all bad lays.' To which I responded, ' I'd think that after, I
don't know, the 39,000th F__k you'd think the problem might be you.'"

Rod Pemberton


** plonk **

May 2 '06 #30

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

Similar topics

4
by: koray | last post by:
hi, i need to show large numbers seperated by commas. since i'm using variables from speedscript, i cannot know their values, since the user should enter them. how should i code to show these...
5
by: Todd Steury | last post by:
Greetings Python'ers: I'm just an amature who occasionally uses Python for complex mathematical models. The current model I'm working with occasionally generates really large numbers that are...
10
by: Tuvas | last post by:
I've been thinking about writing a program to generate the world's largest prime numbers, just for the fun of it. This would require being able to hold an 8000000 digit number into memory (25...
18
by: Brad | last post by:
I have a problem in that I need to change a large decimal value into its hex equivalent. The largest decimal value I need to represent as hex is 25516777215. The problem here is that this number...
18
by: Zero | last post by:
Hi, I am calculating an integer to the pwer of a large integer, e.g. 2^5000. It turns out that the result I always get is zero. I am sure that the result is too large to store in such type...
22
by: Frinton | last post by:
Hi, I am trying to do some calculations on large numbers (ie 7,768,489,957,892,578,474,792,094 / 12,280) and no matter what I do it doesn't get it quite right. Its always somewhere between 10...
3
by: CFonville | last post by:
I was wondering if there is any way to store large numbers in a variable? With this simple script: var bigpi = 1234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890;...
2
by: shihaoran | last post by:
I really need help with one my program; it is about arraylist; I do not get it. Can someone please help me with it? Here's the instruction: 1. Your instructor will provide you with a text...
0
by: zephyrus360 | last post by:
This is about a technique to find the mod of a very large integer with a normal small integer. I recently encountered this problem when I needed to compute the modulus of a very large number with...
0
by: DolphinDB | last post by:
Tired of spending countless mintues downsampling your data? Look no further! In this article, you’ll learn how to efficiently downsample 6.48 billion high-frequency records to 61 million...
0
by: ryjfgjl | last post by:
ExcelToDatabase: batch import excel into database automatically...
0
by: Vimpel783 | last post by:
Hello! Guys, I found this code on the Internet, but I need to modify it a little. It works well, the problem is this: Data is sent from only one cell, in this case B5, but it is necessary that data...
0
by: ArrayDB | last post by:
The error message I've encountered is; ERROR:root:Error generating model response: exception: access violation writing 0x0000000000005140, which seems to be indicative of an access violation...
1
by: CloudSolutions | last post by:
Introduction: For many beginners and individual users, requiring a credit card and email registration may pose a barrier when starting to use cloud servers. However, some cloud server providers now...
1
by: Defcon1945 | last post by:
I'm trying to learn Python using Pycharm but import shutil doesn't work
1
by: Shællîpôpï 09 | last post by:
If u are using a keypad phone, how do u turn on JavaScript, to access features like WhatsApp, Facebook, Instagram....
0
by: af34tf | last post by:
Hi Guys, I have a domain whose name is BytesLimited.com, and I want to sell it. Does anyone know about platforms that allow me to list my domain in auction for free. Thank you
0
isladogs
by: isladogs | last post by:
The next Access Europe User Group meeting will be on Wednesday 3 Apr 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC+1) and finishing by 19:30 (7.30PM). In this session, we are pleased to welcome former...

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.