The_Sage, I see you've gotten yourself a twin asking for program in
comp.lang.c++ . http://groups.google.co.uk/groups?hl...c71c33c&rnum=1
If you the oh so mighty programmer that you pretend to be, why don't you
just write some? (And oh, void main is still not allow by the C++ standard.)
Seeming as how you tried to quote the standard in an attempt to pretend
you're right, I'll quote the standard to once and for all destory all your
arguements.
C++ standard 3.6.1 Main function
Paragraph 5
"A return statement in main has the effect of leaving the main function
(destroying any objects with automatic storage duration) and calling exit
with the return value as the argument. If control reaches the end of main
without encountering a return statement, the effect is that of executing
return 0;"
Now, not even an idiot like you can argue with what it says here. Either an
return value have been specificed, or the main function return 0 by default.
Could you please tell everyone in your (imaginary) infinte wisdom how main
can be of type void if it return a value?
(Oh btw, that paragraph from the standard is only 3 paragraphs down (on the
same page) from what you quoted, if only you had learn how to read
properly.....)
Kwan Ting
--
Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
- Heinrich Heine
Jul 19 '05
192  8696 
The_Sage wrote:
Attila is feminine when used as a *first* name, you idiot. Attila the Hun was
the name of King whose *last* name was Attila. The key giveaway here is the -a
suffix, which is the feminine form of english given names, such as Fredirica
(Fred) or Andrea (Andrew).
Can't you get anything right?
The Sage
I have seen some sites that list that name as a female dog name.
I have seen that name listed as male.
Attila the Hun was from the area now known as Hungry and was king in
about 433 - 453 AD. The name had nothing to do with english. English
was not really even a language until that time (Middle of the 5 century
or about 450 AD) As far as I know Attila was the only name (No first or
last just ATTILA)
This is not really helping your argument about HLA or C or C++.
The_Sage wrote: Attila is a male name you moron.
Attila is feminine when used as a *first* name, you idiot. Attila the
Hun was the name of King whose *last* name was Attila. The key
giveaway here is the -a suffix, which is the feminine form of english
given names, such as Fredirica (Fred) or Andrea (Andrew).
Can't you get anything right?
Attila is a male name you moron.
--
Attila aka WW
The_Sage wrote:
Attila is feminine when used as a *first* name, you idiot. Attila the Hun was
the name of King whose *last* name was Attila. The key giveaway here is the -a
suffix, which is the feminine form of english given names, such as Fredirica
(Fred) or Andrea (Andrew).
'Attila' is the diminuitive of 'atta', Gothic for 'father'. Thus it
means 'little father' in Gothic. Rather an odd name for a female.
"T.M. Sommers" <tm**@mail.ptd.net> wrote in message
news:Jf****************@nnrp1.ptd.net... The_Sage wrote:
Attila is feminine when used as a *first* name, you idiot. Attila the
Hun was the name of King whose *last* name was Attila. The key giveaway here is
the -a suffix, which is the feminine form of english given names, such as
Fredirica (Fred) or Andrea (Andrew).
'Attila' is the diminuitive of 'atta', Gothic for 'father'. Thus it
means 'little father' in Gothic. Rather an odd name for a female.
Thank you T.M. I see you guys are still struggling with "The_Sage" who is
"Mr. I-know-everything." He always starts with a false premise, which can
lead to any conclusion validly. "My uncle is a drunkard [false], therefore
the moon is made of green cheese [valid conclusion, but false]."
Why don't we all give up? If we don't answer his posts, he is just blowing
in the wind. [Let's hear it for the big red X!!]
--
Gary
T.M. Sommers wrote: The_Sage wrote:
Attila is feminine when used as a *first* name, you idiot. Attila
the Hun was the name of King whose *last* name was Attila. The key
giveaway here is the -a suffix, which is the feminine form of
english given names, such as Fredirica (Fred) or Andrea (Andrew).
'Attila' is the diminuitive of 'atta', Gothic for 'father'. Thus it
means 'little father' in Gothic. Rather an odd name for a female.
:-) Yeah, The Rage *is* a ridiculous moron: http://images.google.com/images?q=attila http://www.kabalarians.com/male/hungarym.htm
--
Attila aka WW
> >> Attila is feminine when used as a *first* name, you idiot. Attila the Hun was the name of King whose *last* name was Attila. The key
giveaway here is the -a suffix, which is the feminine form of
english given names, such as Fredirica (Fred) or Andrea (Andrew).
'Attila' is the diminuitive of 'atta', Gothic for 'father'. Thus it
means 'little father' in Gothic. Rather an odd name for a female.
:-) Yeah, The Rage *is* a ridiculous moron:
No, I think *you* are.
Do you realize that, while asking people not to
post off-topic questions, you are discuting the sex of your name and
posting a link to google with some images of a bunch of Attilas and
a baby name list.
Jonathan
Jonathan Mcdougall wrote: Attila is feminine when used as a *first* name, you idiot. Attila
the Hun was the name of King whose *last* name was Attila. The key
giveaway here is the -a suffix, which is the feminine form of
english given names, such as Fredirica (Fred) or Andrea (Andrew).
'Attila' is the diminuitive of 'atta', Gothic for 'father'. Thus it
means 'little father' in Gothic. Rather an odd name for a female.
:-) Yeah, The Rage *is* a ridiculous moron:
No, I think *you* are.
Do you realize that, while asking people not to
post off-topic questions, you are discuting the sex of your name and
posting a link to google with some images of a bunch of Attilas and
a baby name list.
Did you see any non-off-topic messages in this thread lately? BTW if it
bothers you so much, use the ïgnore thread" feature of your browser. Your
further ranting will be ignored.
--
WW aka Attila
> >>>> Attila is feminine when used as a *first* name, you idiot. Attila > the Hun was the name of King whose *last* name was Attila. The key
> giveaway here is the -a suffix, which is the feminine form of
> english given names, such as Fredirica (Fred) or Andrea (Andrew).
'Attila' is the diminuitive of 'atta', Gothic for 'father'. Thus it
means 'little father' in Gothic. Rather an odd name for a female.
:-) Yeah, The Rage *is* a ridiculous moron:
No, I think *you* are.
Do you realize that, while asking people not to
post off-topic questions, you are discuting the sex of your name and
posting a link to google with some images of a bunch of Attilas and
a baby name list.
Did you see any non-off-topic messages in this thread lately? BTW if it
bothers you so much, use the ïgnore thread" feature of your browser. Your
further ranting will be ignored.
Nice.
Jonathan
"T.M. Sommers" <tm**@mail.ptd.net> wrote in message
news:Jf****************@nnrp1.ptd.net... The_Sage wrote:
Attila is feminine when used as a *first* name, you idiot. Attila the
Hun was the name of King whose *last* name was Attila. The key giveaway here is
the -a suffix, which is the feminine form of english given names, such as
Fredirica (Fred) or Andrea (Andrew).
'Attila' is the diminuitive of 'atta', Gothic for 'father'. Thus it
means 'little father' in Gothic. Rather an odd name for a female.
In addition, "The Sage", describing his "giveaway", refers to
"English given names." AFAIK, "Attila" is *not* an English name.
But applying "Sage logic", it would seem that since this is
an English "speaking" forum, only those with English names
are allowed to post here.
-Mike
who is not English, speaks English, and whose name
is derived from Hebrew
"The_Sage" <th******@azrmci.net> wrote in message
news:92********************************@4ax.com... [...]
Attila is feminine when used as a *first* name, you idiot.
Attila the Hun was the name of King whose *last* name
was Attila. The key giveaway here is the -a suffix, which
is the feminine form of english given names, such as
Fredirica (Fred) or Andrea (Andrew).
So "Hosea" is the feminine form of "Hose"? You hoser!
Can't you get anything right?
Look who's talking.
Dave
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system ( http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.521 / Virus Database: 319 - Release Date: 9/23/2003
> > Attila is feminine when used as a *first* name, you idiot. Attila the Hun was the name of King whose *last* name
was Attila. The key giveaway here is the -a suffix, which
is the feminine form of english given names, such as
Fredirica (Fred) or Andrea (Andrew).
So "Hosea" is the feminine form of "Hose"? You hoser!
Can't you get anything right?
Look who's talking.
This thread is dead. Stop trying.
Jonathan
The_Sage wrote: Attila is a male name you moron.
Attila is feminine when used as a *first* name, you idiot. Attila the
Hun was the name of King whose *last* name was Attila. The key
giveaway here is the -a suffix, which is the feminine form of english
given names, such as Fredirica (Fred) or Andrea (Andrew).
One addition. The Hungarian language (Attila *is* a Hungarian name) has
*no* grammatical gender. BTW Andrea (which is *only* a female name in
Hungarian) is actually a male name in other countries. http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramma...rking_on_nouns
Short: http://tinyurl.com/q2jg
--
WW aka Attila
The_Sage wrote: Thank you for the pleasure of being able to demonstrate beyond a
shadow of a doubt to these NGs, what an illiterate idiot you are.
Case closed. Don't come back until you can finally get a clue.
Actually, he was right, and you are mistaken.
D.
On Tue, 7 Oct 2003 22:53:52 +0100, "Dunny" <pa********@ntlworld.com>
wrote: The_Sage wrote:
Thank you for the pleasure of being able to demonstrate beyond a
shadow of a doubt to these NGs, what an illiterate idiot you are.
Case closed. Don't come back until you can finally get a clue.
Actually, he was right, and you are mistaken.
He knows full well that he's mistaken, and is just enjoying how much
valuable time he can get others to waste trying to show him the light.
For those joining in late, here's a summary of the discussion so far:
Sage: The main function can return anything it wants to.
Everyone: No it can't, and here's the proof from the standard.
Sage: You're wrong.
Everyone: No, see it says quite clearly that it must return an int.
Sage: You're wrong. You're an idiot.
Everyone: No, really, the standard is explicit on this point.
Sage: You're wrong. You can't even understand simple English.
Everyone: Look, the people who wrote the standard are agreeing with us.
Sage: You're all wrong.
and so on ad infinitum. There is no point at all in continuing, and
hasn't been for a couple of weeks now. Nobody could possibly be as
dense as he is pretending to be. It's been a masterful job of trolling,
but please can't we all LET IT GO! He will never admit we're right,
even if the entire ANSI standards group, the signers of the US
Constitution, Jesus, Buddha, Gandhi, and all five members of the Beatles
showed up at his door and told him he was wrong.
There should be no more proof required than the quote he proudly
displays in his signature, and presumably lives his life by: "The men that American people admire most extravagantly are
most daring liars; the men they detest the most violently are
those who try to tell them the truth" -- H. L. Mencken
--
Greg Schmidt (gr***@trawna.com)
Trawna Publications ( http://www.trawna.com/)
>Reply to article by: SomeDumbGuy <ab***@127.0.0.1> Date written: Tue, 07 Oct 2003 05:14:37 GMT
MsgID:<1Z*******************@nwrddc01.gnilink.net >
Attila is feminine when used as a *first* name, you idiot. Attila the Hun was
the name of King whose *last* name was Attila. The key giveaway here is the -a
suffix, which is the feminine form of english given names, such as Fredirica
(Fred) or Andrea (Andrew).
Can't you get anything right?
I have seen some sites that list that name as a female dog name.
I have seen that name listed as male.
So it can be any of the above, right?
Attila the Hun was from the area now known as Hungry and was king in
about 433 - 453 AD. The name had nothing to do with english. English
was not really even a language until that time (Middle of the 5 century
or about 450 AD) As far as I know Attila was the only name (No first or
last just ATTILA)
I never said it was an "english name", just that in english, which is the
language we are *all* using here, Attila is a feminine name because it ends in
-a.
This is not really helping your argument about HLA or C or C++.
But that is how complete morons like WW avoid losing debates they can never win.
The Sage
================================================== ===========
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage
"The biggest problem in the world, could have been solved
when it was small..." -- Lao Tzu
================================================== ===========
>Reply to article by: "Attila Feher" <at**********@lmf.ericsson.se> Date written: Tue, 7 Oct 2003 10:17:04 +0300
MsgID:<bl**********@newstree.wise.edt.ericsson.se >
Attila is feminine when used as a *first* name, you idiot. Attila the
Hun was the name of King whose *last* name was Attila. The key
giveaway here is the -a suffix, which is the feminine form of english
given names, such as Fredirica (Fred) or Andrea (Andrew).
Can't you get anything right?
Attila is a male name you moron.
Whatever you say missy.
The Sage
================================================== ===========
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage
"The biggest problem in the world, could have been solved
when it was small..." -- Lao Tzu
================================================== ===========
>Reply to article by: "WW" <wo***@freemail.hu> Date written: Tue, 7 Oct 2003 22:33:45 +0300
MsgID:<bl*********@phys-news1.kolumbus.fi>
Attila is a male name you moron.
Attila is feminine when used as a *first* name, you idiot. Attila the
Hun was the name of King whose *last* name was Attila. The key
giveaway here is the -a suffix, which is the feminine form of english
given names, such as Fredirica (Fred) or Andrea (Andrew).
One addition. The Hungarian language (Attila *is* a Hungarian name) has
*no* grammatical gender. BTW Andrea (which is *only* a female name in
Hungarian) is actually a male name in other countries.
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramma...rking_on_nouns
Short: http://tinyurl.com/q2jg
Attila actually is not even a name, it is a title meaning "little father". It
also technially isn't Hungarian, since it actually originated from
Gothic-German. And it isn't a Hungarian name, as anyone who isn't Hungary can
use it as a name, but when used as a name in English, it no longer has any
meaning because Attila is not an English word. In the English world, given names
generally have absolutely no meanings to those who give or receive them (except
for a few words/names like Hope or some New Agers who name their kids things
like "ray of sunshine")
And by the "rules" of the English language, Andrea is a female name, just like
Attila would be in English. In English there are no rules for names except for
two: Anything ending in -a is feminine, and names do not have to go by any
phonetic or etymology standards (as if English really had some consistent rules
-- Ha!).
The Sage
================================================== ===========
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage
"The biggest problem in the world, could have been solved
when it was small..." -- Lao Tzu
================================================== ===========
>Reply to article by: "Dunny" <pa********@ntlworld.com> Date written: Tue, 7 Oct 2003 22:53:52 +0100
MsgID:<bl************@ID-106816.news.uni-berlin.de>
Thank you for the pleasure of being able to demonstrate beyond a
shadow of a doubt to these NGs, what an illiterate idiot you are.
Case closed. Don't come back until you can finally get a clue.
Actually, he was right, and you are mistaken.
Actually, you are resorting to the logical fallacy of blind faith assertion.
The Sage
================================================== ===========
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage
"The biggest problem in the world, could have been solved
when it was small..." -- Lao Tzu
================================================== ===========
>Reply to article by: Greg Schmidt <gr***@trawna.com> Date written: Tue, 07 Oct 2003 23:33:17 GMT
MsgID:<tl********************************@4ax.com >
Thank you for the pleasure of being able to demonstrate beyond a
shadow of a doubt to these NGs, what an illiterate idiot you are.
Case closed. Don't come back until you can finally get a clue.
Actually, he was right, and you are mistaken.
He knows full well that he's mistaken,
You know full well you are full of shit.
For those joining in late, here's a summary of the discussion so far:
Sage: The main function can return anything it wants to.
Everyone: No it can't, and here's the proof from the standard.
For those joining in late, that is the typical sort of lying and stupidity that
comes from this newsgroup. The discussion so far has only been...
Sage : I use void main()
Greg : You aren't allowed to do that
ISO : "The main function shall have a return type of type int but otherwise
in all other respects the main functions type is
implementation-defined"
IBM : We agree with Sage and that's why we provide it for him to use
MS : We agree with Sage and that's why we provide it for him to use
Borland : We agree with Sage and that's why we provide it for him to use
Greg : That isn't what the Standard meant
Dict. : "but otherwise means in addition to the aforementiond, there are
exceptions...
Greg : Wah! I want my mommy!
And if you get a dictionary and define the words "but" and "otherwise", you will
see these idiots have no leg to stand on.
The Sage
================================================== ===========
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage
"The biggest problem in the world, could have been solved
when it was small..." -- Lao Tzu
================================================== ===========
The_Sage wrote: I have seen some sites that list that name as a female dog name.
I have seen that name listed as male.
So it can be any of the above, right?
I would say yes. But it does *seem* to be more of a man's name.
I never said it was an "english name", just that in english, which is the
language we are *all* using here, Attila is a feminine name because it ends in
-a.
True, you didn't say it was an english name, but you are applying
english rules to it. Many languages do not have a gender aspect to it
(or do not use -a for it.) As the name is not english it does not seem
to fit putting english rules to it.
I would guess your are just taking "pokes" at poor attila to tick him
off. I should just stay out of it :)
The_Sage wrote: Reply to article by: "Attila Feher" <at**********@lmf.ericsson.se>
Date written: Tue, 7 Oct 2003 10:17:04 +0300
MsgID:<bl**********@newstree.wise.edt.ericsson.se>
Attila is feminine when used as a *first* name, you idiot. Attila
the Hun was the name of King whose *last* name was Attila. The key
giveaway here is the -a suffix, which is the feminine form of
english given names, such as Fredirica (Fred) or Andrea (Andrew). Can't you get anything right?
Attila is a male name you moron.
Whatever you say missy.
May your mouth be assured of my gender.
--
WW aka Attila
SomeDumbGuy wrote: I would guess your are just taking "pokes" at poor attila to tick him
off. I should just stay out of it :)
He is too obvious for a troll. I know who I am and he can post as much b/s
as he wants. BTW I have met this very same guy in a forum many years back.
And he was playing the same idiotic game with my name the same way, even
using the same words. That guy was a well known troll, and was not called
The Sage. Apparently he had to change his name so that people will still
pay some attention to him. And apparently he moved to the asm newsgroup.
--
Attila aka WW
"Jonathan Mcdougall" <jo***************@DELyahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:1h*********************@weber.videotron.net.. . [...]
This thread is dead. Stop trying.
Hey, he not only didn't have a rebuttal, he posted a followup
in another part of the thread which further amplifies my counter-
example. So he's implicitly conceding a point with his silence,
but then contradicting himself (but that's his M.O., so it's to be
expected).
Dave
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system ( http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.521 / Virus Database: 319 - Release Date: 9/23/2003
The_Sage wrote: Actually, he was right, and you are mistaken.
Actually, you are resorting to the logical fallacy of blind faith
assertion.
Nah, I live with an English Teacher. You're very funny, Mr Sage, I find you very
entertaining.
D.
In article <in********************************@4ax.com>,
The_Sage <th******@azrmci.net> wrote:
[snip] And by the "rules" of the English language, Andrea is a female name, just like
Attila would be in English. In English there are no rules for names except for
two: Anything ending in -a is feminine, and names do not have to go by any
phonetic or etymology standards (as if English really had some consistent rules
-- Ha!).
I just checked with my friend Joshua. He was surprised to discover he is female
and wants to know if he should tell his wife. Please advise.
Alan
--
Defendit numerus
"Alan Morgan" <am*****@Xenon.Stanford.EDU> wrote in message
news:bm**********@Xenon.Stanford.EDU... [...]
I just checked with my friend Joshua. He was surprised to
discover he is female and wants to know if he should tell
his wife. Please advise.
Obviously, he needs to change his name to "Joshu" so he
will be properly recognized by the gov't as a male.
Dave
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system ( http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.521 / Virus Database: 319 - Release Date: 9/23/2003
WW wrote: May your mouth be assured of my gender.
*That* is going in my list of "best ever" insults. Classic :-)
D.
>Reply to article by: SomeDumbGuy <ab***@127.0.0.1> Date written: Wed, 08 Oct 2003 01:53:25 GMT
MsgID:<p6*******************@nwrddc02.gnilink.net >
I have seen some sites that list that name as a female dog name.
I have seen that name listed as male.
So it can be any of the above, right?
I would say yes. But it does *seem* to be more of a man's name.
Yes, that is true but I believe that is because we have all become accustomer to
associating it with Attila the Hun -- who was a male.
I never said it was an "english name", just that in english, which is the
language we are *all* using here, Attila is a feminine name because it ends in
-a.
True, you didn't say it was an english name,
Yes I did.
but you are applying
english rules to it. Many languages do not have a gender aspect to it
(or do not use -a for it.) As the name is not english it does not seem
to fit putting english rules to it.
English has no restrictions on what names you can give your children.
I would guess your are just taking "pokes" at poor attila to tick him
off. I should just stay out of it :)
No, actually this was WW's off topic dodge and evade of issues he can't figure
out like the difference between a return type and a parameter or the difference
between killing a process and ending a program or what the dictioanry states
what "but otherwise" literally means.
Actually, 90% of the people in these newsgroups can't figure that out either,
including Mr/Mrs/It Attila.
The Sage
================================================== ===========
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage
"The biggest problem in the world, could have been solved
when it was small..." -- Lao Tzu
================================================== ===========
>Reply to article by: am*****@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Alan Morgan) Date written: Wed, 8 Oct 2003 17:25:09 +0000 (UTC)
MsgID:<bm**********@Xenon.Stanford.EDU>
And by the "rules" of the English language, Andrea is a female name, just like
Attila would be in English. In English there are no rules for names except for
two: Anything ending in -a is feminine, and names do not have to go by any
phonetic or etymology standards (as if English really had some consistent rules
-- Ha!).
I just checked with my friend Joshua. He was surprised to discover he is female
and wants to know if he should tell his wife. Please advise.
What country is he and his parents from originally?
The Sage
================================================== ===========
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage
"The biggest problem in the world, could have been solved
when it was small..." -- Lao Tzu
================================================== ===========
>Reply to article by: "Dunny" <pa********@ntlworld.com> Date written: Wed, 8 Oct 2003 15:26:49 +0100
MsgID:<bm************@ID-106816.news.uni-berlin.de>
Actually, he was right, and you are mistaken.
Actually, you are resorting to the logical fallacy of blind faith
assertion.
Nah, I live with an English Teacher.
You're very funny, Mr Sage, I find you very entertaining.
You aren't very literate for living with an English Teacher. Can you ask your
Teacher to get a dictionary and look up the words "but" and "otherwise" and tell
us what they mean when applied to the sentence from the ISO Standard that
states, ""The main function shall have a return type of type int but otherwise
in all other respects the main functions type is implementation-defined". Of
course, this presumes you really do live with an English Teacher.
The Sage
================================================== ===========
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage
"The biggest problem in the world, could have been solved
when it was small..." -- Lao Tzu
================================================== ===========
>Reply to article by: am*****@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Alan Morgan) Date written: Wed, 8 Oct 2003 17:25:09 +0000 (UTC)
MsgID:<bm**********@Xenon.Stanford.EDU>
And by the "rules" of the English language, Andrea is a female name, just like
Attila would be in English. In English there are no rules for names except for
two: Anything ending in -a is feminine, and names do not have to go by any
phonetic or etymology standards (as if English really had some consistent rules
-- Ha!).
I just checked with my friend Joshua. He was surprised to discover he is female
and wants to know if he should tell his wife. Please advise.
I know of a boy named Sue, so tell him his parents are very nice.
The Sage
================================================== ===========
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage
"The biggest problem in the world, could have been solved
when it was small..." -- Lao Tzu
================================================== ===========
In article <u4********************************@4ax.com>, The_Sage wrote:
[SNIP] For those joining in late, that is the typical sort of lying and stupidity that
comes from this newsgroup. The discussion so far has only been...
*SPECIFIC NOTE* Sage : I use void main()
and conviently dropped how you don't need a ; as a } is suffecient to end
as statement terminator...
*SPECIFIC NOTE*
The above specifically highlighted as I like how all mention of this has
been dropped by you yet you continue to pollute this NG with anything that
you can possibly convolute in so far as you perceive "wiggle room"
Greg : You aren't allowed to do that
*AND* be able to call it standard C++ code ISO : "The main function shall have a return type of type int but otherwise
in all other respects the main functions type is
implementation-defined"
That is not what the standard says in your paraphrase. Anyone with the
standard knows this. The positive out of this is anyone new to the
langauage trying to use this as a resource for learning will see how the
entire world is against you and your perceived understanding and therefore
not use it, it being your understanding, as Bible like the following: IBM : We agree with Sage and that's why we provide it for him to use
irrelevant MS : We agree with Sage and that's why we provide it for him to use
irrelevant Borland : We agree with Sage and that's why we provide it for him to use
irrelevant Greg : That isn't what the Standard meant
Correct Dict. : "but otherwise means in addition to the aforementiond, there are
exceptions...
[OT] This is not comp.lang.dictionary Greg : Wah! I want my mommy!
[OT] I've filtered this thread temporarily so I can't confirm this but I would
venture to guess more of your paraphrasing and is completely false and
incorrect as well. Please notice how if you have a reputation of making
stupid comments it will be *implied* for all future comments??? You seem
to be big on the dictionary - look up reputation.
This thread is now going back to being filtered.
The Sage you have now been moved from a temporary killfile to a permanent
one. The one time I remove you from it this is how you redeem yourself.
Perhaps I should have looked up the word reputation?
--
Chris Johnson
echo "qr*********@rkpvgr.pbz" | rot13
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
The_Sage wrote: I never said it was an "english name", just that in english, which is the
language we are *all* using here, Attila is a feminine name because it ends in
-a.
True, you didn't say it was an english name,
Yes I did.
The quote above is your quote of 'I never said it was an "english
name",...' I agreed with you.
I am not sure what you are trying to say here.
English has no restrictions on what names you can give your children.
True, but the name is still non-English. Kiko is a woman's name in
Japanese. I can use it, sure. I can even name a boy with Kiko if I so
choose. I can't say it is "male" because it ends with "o." If someone
Japanese were to hear the name they would assume female, regardless of
what I, as an english speaker used it as. There are no restrictions on
my use of it that is true, but because I use it differently than it was
intended does make it "correct."
what "but otherwise" literally means.
Actually, 90% of the people in these newsgroups can't figure that out either,
including Mr/Mrs/It Attila.
Your interpretation is possible, that is also true.
However, when the people that *wrote* it state that it was not how it
was meant to be taken, a better (in my option) follow up argument would
be to state something like, "perhaps you should consider re-wording the
line so this will not happen to others."
Then you get to say you had a hand in re-writing the C++ standard. :)
As it is you are just going in a circle.
The_Sage wrote: You aren't very literate for living with an English Teacher. Can you
ask your Teacher to get a dictionary and look up the words "but" and
"otherwise" and tell us what they mean when applied to the sentence
from the ISO Standard that states, ""The main function shall have a
return type of type int but otherwise in all other respects the main
functions type is implementation-defined". Of course, this presumes
you really do live with an English Teacher.
Yeah, she's already read your assertions and laughed at them. Your
interpretation of the English is still wrong, it refers to two seperate
properties of the object (the object being the function "Main"), said properties
being it's type and it's return type. The type can be pretty much anything the
implementor wishes, but the return type must be of type int. You've been told
this before numerous times, and chosen to ignore it though, so I'm not bothered
what your reply is - you're still wrong, and always will be on this point! :)
Drop the grammar argument, you're not going to win. Concentrate instead on
this -
Borland C++ Builder will compile void main, but only if you turn ansi compliance
*off*. This *could* be interpreted as being "implementation defined", but if it
were standard to do this, then it wouldn't require standard compliance to be
turned off.
You're still very funny, you know. Keep going, we're enjoying this :)
D.
The_Sage wrote: No, actually this was WW's off topic dodge and evade of issues he
can't figure out like the difference between a return type and a
parameter or the difference between killing a process and ending a
program or what the dictioanry states what "but otherwise" literally
means.
Actually, 90% of the people in these newsgroups can't figure that out
either, including Mr/Mrs/It Attila.
The_Sage wrote: So Attila is my Father? It is bad enough that you can't tell the
difference ... now you cannot even tell the difference
between male and female?
The above: Tha Sage Rage starting the off topic dodge and evade, in post
<nh********************************@4ax.com>
FYI: WW and Attila is the same person. Amusing that you have not realized
it for several weeks now.
Still all I can say to you is: may your mouth be convinced of my real
gender.
--
WW aka Attila
The_Sage wrote:
[CRAP]
According to the gurus our "Sage" is fake:
The Way of Heaven is to benefit others and not to injure.
The Way of the *sage* is to act but *not to compete*.
/Lao-tzu, The Way of Lao-tzu/
--
Attila aka WW
Snip... "...its type is implementation-defined"
Therefore, any compiler that implement-defines other types of main() functions,
in addition to int main(), types like void main() for example, are ISO
compliant, hence since MS, Borland, and IBM use int main() AND ALSO
IMPLEMENT/DEFINE void main(), they are therefore also ISO compliant.
I have yet to be proved wrong -- care to give it try yourself? Stop your yapping
and let's see what you are really made of.
The Sage
Didn't I see you once at the masochistic necrophilia-bestiality convenction?
>Reply to article by: "Dunny" <pa********@ntlworld.com> Date written: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 09:53:37 +0100
MsgID:<bm************@ID-106816.news.uni-berlin.de>
You aren't very literate for living with an English Teacher. Can you
ask your Teacher to get a dictionary and look up the words "but" and
"otherwise" and tell us what they mean when applied to the sentence
from the ISO Standard that states, ""The main function shall have a
return type of type int but otherwise in all other respects the main
functions type is implementation-defined". Of course, this presumes
you really do live with an English Teacher.
Yeah, she's already read your assertions and laughed at them.
Is that the best she could do? Just laugh? No web links to english sites, no
links to online dictionaries, just flap her lips like you do yours?
Your interpretation of the English is still wrong,
Just because you say so? You don't know shit about english.
it refers to two seperate
properties of the object (the object being the function "Main"), said properties
being it's type and it's return type. The type can be pretty much anything the
implementor wishes, but the return type must be of type int. You've been told
this before numerous times, and chosen to ignore it though, so I'm not bothered
what your reply is - you're still wrong, and always will be on this point! :)
Drop the grammar argument, you're not going to win.
I already did. All you could "refute" my argument with was the hearsay of some
imginary teacher and the meresay of your big mouth. I have a dictionary that
proves you are both idiots because the definition of "but otherwise" proves
there can be exceptions to int main(). Come on Danny boy, tell us what the
dictionary says about "but otherwise".
But I know you aren't going to tackle that "challenge" and you know you aren't
going to tackle that "challenge" because we both know you are wrong and you
don't have a leg to stand on.
See Danny boy run. Run Danny boy run. Stay away from dictionaries Danny boy, or
they will prove you don't know anything except how to talk out your arse.
Concentrate instead on this -
I'm not letting get off that easy. I asked a simple, reasonable question, so
either answer the question or give us a good excuse for not wanting to answer
it...
Can you get a dictionary and look up the words "but" and "otherwise" and tell
us what they mean when applied to the sentence from the ISO Standard that
states, ""The main function shall have a return type of type int but otherwise
in all other respects the main functions type is implementation-defined".
Here, I will even give both of you a head start...
http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/b/b0577100.html and
http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/o/o0147100.html
Borland C++ Builder will compile void main, but only if you turn ansi compliance
*off*. This *could* be interpreted as being "implementation defined", but if it
were standard to do this, then it wouldn't require standard compliance to be
turned off.
After you are able tell us what "but otherwise" means, concentrate on this...
So if one's compiler's documentation happens to say anywhere that main may
have the return type void then main may indeed have the return type void and a
program with void main() is a conforming program.
This is the case for at least the following compilers:
Watcom C/C++. The C Library Reference for Watcom's C compiler says that "the
main function can be declared to return void".
IBM VisualAge C/C++. The Language Reference for IBM VisualAge C/C++ says that
main "can also be declared to return void".
Microsoft Visual C/C++. The MSDN documentation says that main "can be declared
as returning void".
...
Other compilers are in between:
The documentation for Borland C/C++ is littered with sample programs that
define a void main() function, but it does not explicitly list this as a legal
definition of main, so - somewhat ironically - most of the example code in
Borland's documentation is non-conforming.
The documentation for Comeau C/C++ implies that main may have a return type
other than int where it discusses the semantics of falling off the end of
main() without a return statement, but does not explicitly specify what
additional definitions of main it allows.
When this page was first published, Comeau C/C++ used void main() in its
examples as well. However, Greg Comeau was shown this web page, and in
response changed the examples to use int main(). He did not correct the
aforementioned implication, however. (Nor did he inform me of the change. I
found out only by accident.)
The documentation for Digital Mars C/C++ also uses void main() in its
examples.
http://homepages.tesco.net/~J.deBoyn...void-main.html
You're still very funny, you know. Keep going, we're enjoying this :)
You would be funny if your case wasn't so sad. You should be on the Jerry
Springer show, along with all those other storytelling losers.
The Sage
================================================== ===========
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage
"The biggest problem in the world, could have been solved
when it was small..." -- Lao Tzu
================================================== ===========
>Reply to article by: SomeDumbGuy <ab***@127.0.0.1> Date written: Thu, 09 Oct 2003 03:34:56 GMT
MsgID:<AH******************@nwrddc01.gnilink.ne t>
I never said it was an "english name", just that in english, which is the
language we are *all* using here, Attila is a feminine name because it ends in
-a.
True, you didn't say it was an english name,
Yes I did.
The quote above is your quote of 'I never said it was an "english
name",...' I agreed with you.
I am not sure what you are trying to say here.
Sorry 'bout that. What I meant was I had said in the english langauge, which we
were all speaking in, Attila is a given name for females. If that still doesn't
make sense, forget it, since you are correct, we do agree anyway.
English has no restrictions on what names you can give your children.
True, but the name is still non-English. Kiko is a woman's name in
Japanese. I can use it, sure. I can even name a boy with Kiko if I so
choose. I can't say it is "male" because it ends with "o." If someone
Japanese were to hear the name they would assume female, regardless of
what I, as an english speaker used it as. There are no restrictions on
my use of it that is true, but because I use it differently than it was
intended does make it "correct."
99% of all English names are non-english. There are lots of German, French,
Italian, Latin, Spanish, Chinese, Japanese...but very little real English names.
But still, people do not give female-sounding names (the -a comes to mind) to
males. There are exceptions, but they are only exceptions and not the rule.
what "but otherwise" literally means.
Actually, 90% of the people in these newsgroups can't figure that out either,
including Mr/Mrs/It Attila.
Your interpretation is possible, that is also true.
However, when the people that *wrote* it state that it was not how it
was meant to be taken, a better (in my option) follow up argument would
be to state something like, "perhaps you should consider re-wording the
line so this will not happen to others."
That is a very intelligent thing to say.
Then you get to say you had a hand in re-writing the C++ standard. :)
As it is you are just going in a circle.
I'm not interested in taking part in that. The future belongs to JAVA anyway.
The Sage
================================================== ===========
My Home Page : http://members.cox.net/the.sage
"The biggest problem in the world, could have been solved
when it was small..." -- Lao Tzu
================================================== ===========
Heck... it's Friday night... I'm bored silly... so I'll take my poke at
the troll....
The_Sage <th******@azrmci.net> wrote in
news:10********************************@4ax.com: Reply to article by: "Dunny" <pa********@ntlworld.com>
Date written: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 09:53:37 +0100
MsgID:<bm************@ID-106816.news.uni-berlin.de>You aren't very literate for living with an English Teacher. Can you
ask your Teacher to get a dictionary and look up the words "but" and
"otherwise" and tell us what they mean when applied to the sentence
from the ISO Standard that states, ""The main function shall have a
return type of type int but otherwise in all other respects the main
functions type is implementation-defined". Of course, this presumes
you really do live with an English Teacher.
Let the record show that that The_Sage has quoted "The main function
shall have a return type of type int but otherwise in all other respects
the main functions type is implementation-defined" from the Standard. If
I recall correctly that isn't an exact quote from the Standard, but for
argument's sake I'll temporarily accept it as a close enough paraphrase.
(I don't have a copy of the Standard myself, and offhand I don't want to
go find where it had been posted before... but the paraphrase looks close
enough.)
Concentrate instead on this -
I'm not letting get off that easy. I asked a simple, reasonable
question, so either answer the question or give us a good excuse for
not wanting to answer it...
Can you get a dictionary and look up the words "but" and "otherwise"
and tell us what they mean when applied to the sentence from the ISO
Standard that states, ""The main function shall have a return type of
type int but otherwise in all other respects the main functions type
is implementation-defined".
Here, I will even give both of you a head start...
http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/b/b0577100.html and
http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/o/o0147100.html
OK... let's look at your definitions and the statement that they are
applying to.
"otherwise". Definition 3 of your referenced dictionary: "In other
respects". Note the word "other" in there. It excludes already
mentioned aspects of a main function's type. The return type of a
function is only part of a function's type.
So... inserting the appropriate definitions in the appropriate places:
"The main function shall have a return type of type int but in all other
respects the main function's type is implementation defined"
Again, I draw your attention to the word "other". (From your favourite
dictionary: http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/o/o0146800.html)
Definition 1b in particular: "Being the remaining ones of several". The
main function's type has more than one component. In particular it has
at least a return type, and a certain number, type, and order of
parameters. The first part of the sentence specifies what the return
type must be, and the second part (y'know, the stuff after the "but")
specifies what the remaining components of main's type must be.
Borland C++ Builder will compile void main, but only if you turn ansi
compliance *off*. This *could* be interpreted as being "implementation
defined", but if it were standard to do this, then it wouldn't require
standard compliance to be turned off.
After you are able tell us what "but otherwise" means, concentrate on
this...
See above.
So if one's compiler's documentation happens to say anywhere that
main may have the return type void then main may indeed have the
return type void
True. If the compiler accepts void main(), then you may use void main()
with that compiler.
and a program with void main() is a conforming
program.
False. Compiler acceptance is not a determining factor in whether some
piece of source code is conforming or not. That would fall back to the
Standard, which, as we see above, precludes main from returning anything
but int. And that's ignoring the fact that you're quoting a chunk of
text that's talking about C and not C++.... read the top of the page that
your quoting from:
void main() is not legal in C++ but is legal in C.
You've come to this page because you've said something similar to
void main() is not legal in the C language. main() is required
to return int.
Note that they specifically mention "the C language", and not 'the C++
language". C != C++.
This is the case for at least the following compilers:
Watcom C/C++. The C Library Reference for Watcom's C compiler says
that "the main function can be declared to return void".
Which only means that Watcom C/C++ will accept void main(). Says nothing
about whether void main() is conforming or not.
IBM VisualAge C/C++. The Language Reference for IBM VisualAge C/C++
says that main "can also be declared to return void".
Which only means that IBM Visual Age C/C++ will accept void main(). Says
nothing about whether void main() is conforming or not.
Microsoft Visual C/C++. The MSDN documentation says that main "can
be declared as returning void".
Which only means that Microsoft Visual C/C++ will accept void main().
Says nothing about whether void main() is conforming or not.
...
Nice elipsis that glosses over the compilers (that this document
mentions) that don't have the same compiler extensions. Not damning
evidence against you since you don't claim that compilers _must_ support
other forms of main... but an interesting choice to omit.
Other compilers are in between:
The documentation for Borland C/C++ is littered with sample programs
that define a void main() function, but it does not explicitly list
this as a legal definition of main, so - somewhat ironically - most
of the example code in Borland's documentation is non-conforming.
Sure... most of the example code in Borland's documentation is non-
conforming C++. What's your point?
The documentation for Comeau C/C++ implies that main may have a
return type other than int where it discusses the semantics of
falling off the end of main() without a return statement, but does
not explicitly specify what additional definitions of main it
allows.
Not having seen the documentation for Comeau C/C++, I can't support or
refute your claims. However, if all it does is mention that falling off
the end of main is equivalent to a "return 0;", then they have done
nothing to support that main may return anything other than int.
When this page was first published, Comeau C/C++ used void main() in
its examples as well. However, Greg Comeau was shown this web page,
and in response changed the examples to use int main(). He did not
correct the aforementioned implication, however. (Nor did he inform
me of the change. I found out only by accident.)
I wasn't aware that all vendors must publish their changes through you.
And it can simply be that they have chosen to amend their examples to
stop using a vendor-specific compiler extension in preference to using
conformant examples. I commend them on their choice to be conformant.
The documentation for Digital Mars C/C++ also uses void main() in
its examples.
http://homepages.tesco.net/~J.deBoyn...ty-of-void-mai
n.html
Again, you point to this page which _explictly_ refutes your claim (Hey,
_you_ supplied the page, not me. So it's reasonable to assume that you
support the content of that page as well). Look at the title. It says
in no uncertain terms that in C++, void main() is not legal. Continue
reading through the article and it is quite careful to keep stating that
void main() isn't legal in C++. What this page has to say about C is
irrelevant to this discussion (and newsgroup). You want to talk about
void main() in C? Go to a C newsgroup. This is Standard C++ only [note
that I removed the asm newsgroup]. I know the last time someone pointed
this out to you, you said something along the lines of "Ignore that, but
look at the list of compilers at the bottom which allow void main()!".
(And again, back to the argument that having a compiler accept a piece of
code does not made the code well-formed w.r.t. the Standard.)
The_Sage wrote: Just because you say so? You don't know shit about english.
Yes, because I say so. I don't need to say anymore - you've lost.
D.
In article <10********************************@4ax.com>,
The_Sage <th******@azrmci.net> wrote: The documentation for Comeau C/C++ implies that main may have a return type
other than int where it discusses the semantics of falling off the end of
main() without a return statement, but does not explicitly specify what
additional definitions of main it allows.
When this page was first published, Comeau C/C++ used void main() in its
examples as well. However, Greg Comeau was shown this web page, and in
response changed the examples to use int main(). He did not correct the
aforementioned implication, however. (Nor did he inform me of the change. I
found out only by accident.)
Please, I already pointed out that this is ridiculous.
If you are the author of that page, you should remove it.
--
Greg Comeau/4.3.3:Full C++03 core language + more Windows backends
Comeau C/C++ ONLINE ==> http://www.comeaucomputing.com/tryitout
World Class Compilers: Breathtaking C++, Amazing C99, Fabulous C90.
Comeau C/C++ with Dinkumware's Libraries... Have you tried it?
On Wed, 08 Oct 2003 17:18:53 -0700, The_Sage
<th******@azrmci.net> wrote: Reply to article by: am*****@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Alan Morgan)
Date written: Wed, 8 Oct 2003 17:25:09 +0000 (UTC)
MsgID:<bm**********@Xenon.Stanford.EDU>
And by the "rules" of the English language, Andrea is a female name,
just like Attila would be in English. In English there are no rules
for names except for two: Anything ending in -a is feminine, and
names do not have to go by any phonetic or etymology standards (as if
English really had some consistent rules -- Ha!).
I just checked with my friend Joshua. He was surprised to discover he
is female and wants to know if he should tell his wife. Please
advise.
What country is he and his parents from originally?
The Sage
Not that it matters, but if you read the Bible, that Joshua was also
male. Many English and European names originally came from the Bible.
--
Cheops' Law:
Nothing ever gets built on schedule or within budget. This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion. |
