moderator for c++ standard

[BilfFord X]

I'd like to elicit comment from the moderator of the full-contact version of
this forum. In particular, I would like to know his philosophy on the
language and I means by which I can identify him. Cordially, bfx

[Frederick Gotham]

BilfFord X posted:

I'd like to elicit comment from the moderator of the full-contact
version of this forum. In particular, I would like to know his
philosophy on the language and I means by which I can identify him.
Cordially, bfx

"Full-contact version of this forum"... ?

How about "uncensored, genuine, real-time version of this forum"?
comp.lang.c++ doesn't have a moderator.
--

Frederick Gotham

[BilfFord X]

"Frederick Gotham" <fg*******@SPAM.com> wrote in message
news:Bg*******************@news.indigo.ie...

BilfFord X posted:

I'd like to elicit comment from the moderator of the full-contact
version of this forum. In particular, I would like to know his
philosophy on the language and I means by which I can identify him.
Cordially, bfx

"Full-contact version of this forum"... ?

How about "uncensored, genuine, real-time version of this forum"?
comp.lang.c++ doesn't have a moderator.
--

Frederick Gotham

--------
[nothing snipped, appended--you could call it a repost
if you were new. This guy has good stuff.
By 'this' I do not mean the OP. bfx

[Frederick Gotham]

BilfFord X posted:

[nothing snipped, appended--you could call it a repost
if you were new. This guy has good stuff.
By 'this' I do not mean the OP. bfx

Address me intelligibly, or don't address me at all.

--

Frederick Gotham

[Jim Langston]

"BilfFord X" <in*****@invalid.nyet> wrote in message
news:44***********************@news.usenetmonster. com...

"Frederick Gotham" <fg*******@SPAM.com> wrote in message
news:Bg*******************@news.indigo.ie...

BilfFord X posted:

I'd like to elicit comment from the moderator of the full-contact
version of this forum. In particular, I would like to know his
philosophy on the language and I means by which I can identify him.
Cordially, bfx

"Full-contact version of this forum"... ?

How about "uncensored, genuine, real-time version of this forum"?
comp.lang.c++ doesn't have a moderator.
--

Frederick Gotham

--------
[nothing snipped, appended--you could call it a repost
if you were new. This guy has good stuff.
By 'this' I do not mean the OP. bfx

Is that English? I know they're English words, but they don't seem to be
arranged in any order that makes any sense.

Maybe you could rephrase what you're trying to say?

[BilfFord X]

"Frederick Gotham" <fg*******@SPAM.com> wrote in message
news:pF*******************@news.indigo.ie...

BilfFord X posted: Address me intelligibly, or don't address me at all.

Fair enough. I'm cloudy on what the entry point is going to be in progs
that are topical here. I'm given to understand that a person can talk about
how to have c++ interact with the winapi in a standard manner. If I'm OT
already, I need to know.

So in K&R we had main() as the entry point.
If you don't have need for argv and arc then we had int main(void) as the
entry.
Is this as acceptable entry:
int WINAPI WinMain (HINSTANCE hInstance, HINSTANCE hPrevInstance, PSTR
szCmdLine, int iCmdShow)
? cordially, bfx

[Frederick Gotham]

BilfFord X posted:

Fair enough. I'm cloudy on what the entry point is going to be in
progs that are topical here.

I'll try to be as courteous as I can in conveying this to you:
I don't want to talk to you.
--

Frederick Gotham

[BilfFord X]

"Jim Langston" <ta*******@rocketmail.com> wrote in message
news:Zy**************@fe05.lga...

"BilfFord X" <in*****@invalid.nyet> wrote in message Maybe you could rephrase what you're trying to say?

What's your philosophy on the language? Mine has evolved over the years and
has been heavily influenced by my proximity to the Microsoft bandwagon, by
theoreticians who haven't written compilable code since their days in
graduate school and by the all the fun and goofy things you can do now with
a telephone, computer and compiler. Does that make me different than joe
anybody around here?

Where do you think the language is going? cordially, bfx

[Default User]

BilfFord X wrote:

"Frederick Gotham" <fg*******@SPAM.com> wrote in message
news:pF*******************@news.indigo.ie...

BilfFord X posted:

Address me intelligibly, or don't address me at all.

Fair enough. I'm cloudy on what the entry point is going to be in
progs that are topical here. I'm given to understand that a person
can talk about how to have c++ interact with the winapi in a standard
manner. If I'm OT already, I need to know.

You're OT already.
So in K&R we had main() as the entry point.
If you don't have need for argv and arc then we had int main(void) as
the entry. Is this as acceptable entry:
int WINAPI WinMain (HINSTANCE hInstance, HINSTANCE hPrevInstance,
PSTR szCmdLine, int iCmdShow) ? cordially, bfx

No implementation-specific stuff in appropriate here.

Brian

[Victor Bazarov]

BilfFord X wrote:

[..] I'm cloudy on what the entry point is going to be in
progs that are topical here.
The only entry point to any C++ program is 'main'. It has the return
value type 'int' and can have two arguments or no arguments.
I'm given to understand that a person
can talk about how to have c++ interact with the winapi in a standard
manner. If I'm OT already, I need to know.
You can interact with any API in a manner that API defines. If you
want to talk MS Windows API in particular, you need to do that in
the newsgroup dedicated to MS Windows API, however.
So in K&R we had main() as the entry point.
We still do.
If you don't have need for argv and arc then we had int main(void) as
the entry.
Yes.
Is this as acceptable entry:
int WINAPI WinMain (HINSTANCE hInstance, HINSTANCE hPrevInstance, PSTR
szCmdLine, int iCmdShow)
? cordially, bfx

Anything is acceptable. The Standard says that implemenations are free
to provide (or require) any other functions as entry points. The catch
is that we don't discuss implementation-specific stuff here.

V
--
Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask

[BilfFord X]

"Victor Bazarov" <v.********@comAcast.net> wrote in message
news:Gb******************************@comcast.com. ..

BilfFord X wrote:

[..] I'm cloudy on what the entry point is going to be in
progs that are topical here.

The only entry point to any C++ program is 'main'. It has the return
value type 'int' and can have two arguments or no arguments.

I'm given to understand that a person
can talk about how to have c++ interact with the winapi in a standard
manner. If I'm OT already, I need to know.

You can interact with any API in a manner that API defines. If you
want to talk MS Windows API in particular, you need to do that in
the newsgroup dedicated to MS Windows API, however.

So in K&R we had main() as the entry point.

We still do.

If you don't have need for argv and arc then we had int main(void) as
the entry.

Yes.

Is this as acceptable entry:
int WINAPI WinMain (HINSTANCE hInstance, HINSTANCE hPrevInstance, PSTR
szCmdLine, int iCmdShow)
? cordially, bfx

Anything is acceptable. The Standard says that implemenations are free
to provide (or require) any other functions as entry points. The catch
is that we don't discuss implementation-specific stuff here.

Rats. If the entry point isn't topical then I'm just going to be wasting
bandwidth. Thanks for replies, that is, the last two, and I'll be out the
door. cordially, bfx