YKYBRclcTLW

[Kenneth Brody]

You Know You've Been Reading clc Too Long When...

You switch to another Usenet group, see a thread with the subject
"bread", and think "but bread() isn't standard -- it's a FreeBSD
extension".
P.S. Recognizing "YKYB..." acronyms is a sure sign as well.

--
+-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------+
| Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | #include |
| kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | <std_disclaimer.h|
+-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------+
Don't e-mail me at: <mailto:Th*************@gmail.com>

[BWIGLEY]

"Kenneth Brody" <ke******@spamcop.netwrote in message
news:46***************@spamcop.net...

You Know You've Been Reading clc Too Long When...

You switch to another Usenet group, see a thread with the subject
"bread", and think "but bread() isn't standard -- it's a FreeBSD
extension".

Um... What sort of newsgroup has postings about bread? It sounds...
/interesting/.

[jacob navia]

BWIGLEY wrote:

"Kenneth Brody" <ke******@spamcop.netwrote in message
news:46***************@spamcop.net...

>You Know You've Been Reading clc Too Long When...

You switch to another Usenet group, see a thread with the subject
"bread", and think "but bread() isn't standard -- it's a FreeBSD
extension".

Um... What sort of newsgroup has postings about bread? It sounds...
/interesting/.

Yes, /interesting/!!!

This group is a bore. The only messages are
-----
"I pressed "compile" button but it did not work".

Help MEEEEEE!!!
------
Please do my homework.
-----
I wrote i++=i++; but it doesn't work

WHY???

Always when you start some interesting stuff the same people
will start yelling:

OFF TOPIC!!! OFF TOPIC!!!

Because they would like to get the language back to 1990...

There are no discussions about software design, software maintenance,
debugging and all the things that really interest the programmers!

jacob

[Richard Heathfield]

jacob navia said:

<snip>

This group is a bore.

To you, maybe. Not to others here. If you find it boring, well, nobody
is forcing you to read it or post to it.

The only messages are
-----
"I pressed "compile" button but it did not work".

Help MEEEEEE!!!
------
Please do my homework.
-----
I wrote i++=i++; but it doesn't work

Actually, discussions can and do go considerably deeper than that.

WHY???

Always when you start some interesting stuff the same people
will start yelling:

OFF TOPIC!!! OFF TOPIC!!!

1) What you consider interesting is not necessarily interesting to other
people;
2) What other people consider interesting is not necessarily interesting
to you;
3) Being "interesting" is not sufficient to make a subject topical here;
4) There are ***OTHER NEWSGROUPS*** for discussing the kinds of things
that you want to discuss; for example, the undoubtedly fascinating
subject of lcc-win32 extensions is dealt with in its very own
newsgroup. In ***THIS*** newsgroup, we discuss C.

Because they would like to get the language back to 1990...

No, we'd like to get the language forward to 1999 so that we can all
sing from the same sheet again, but implementors show little sign of
co-operating.

There are no discussions about software design, software maintenance,
debugging and all the things that really interest the programmers!

Not here, no. This newsgroup is about C. Software design, maintenance,
debugging and the rest are all very interesting and indeed vital things
to talk about, but there are ***OTHER NEWSGROUPS*** for discussing such
things. ***OTHER NEWSGROUPS***.

Um, how can I put this? Ah! I know!

Ce newsgroup est au sujet de conception de C. Software, entretien, la
correction et le repos sont toutes les choses très intéressantes et en
effet essentielles pour parler, mais il y a *** l'AUTRE *** de
NEWSGROUP pour discuter de telles choses. *** D'AUTRES NEWSGROUP ***.

(Don't blame me for that translation - blame Babelfish.)

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at the above domain, - www.

[Chris Hills]

In article <46**********************@news.orange.fr>, jacob navia
<ja***@jacob.remcomp.frwrites

>BWIGLEY wrote:

>"Kenneth Brody" <ke******@spamcop.netwrote in message
news:46***************@spamcop.net...

>>You Know You've Been Reading clc Too Long When...

You switch to another Usenet group, see a thread with the subject
"bread", and think "but bread() isn't standard -- it's a FreeBSD
extension".

Um... What sort of newsgroup has postings about bread? It sounds...
/interesting/.

Yes, /interesting/!!!

This group is a bore. The only messages are
-----
"I pressed "compile" button but it did not work".

Help MEEEEEE!!!
------
Please do my homework.
-----
I wrote i++=i++; but it doesn't work

WHY???

Always when you start some interesting stuff the same people
will start yelling:

OFF TOPIC!!! OFF TOPIC!!!

Because they would like to get the language back to 1990...

No the On Topic net nannies include K&R1 to C99
However the ISO C panel are looking at moving part way back from C99 to
C95.....

>There are no discussions about software design, software maintenance,
debugging and all the things that really interest the programmers!

They would argue that you should go to a SW design NG, a SW Maintenance
NG, a debugging NG..... Incidentally all of those NG's will discuss C
as well.
--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
/\/\/ ch***@phaedsys.org www.phaedsys.org \/\/\
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

[Clever Monkey]

BWIGLEY wrote:

"Kenneth Brody" <ke******@spamcop.netwrote in message
news:46***************@spamcop.net...

>You Know You've Been Reading clc Too Long When...

You switch to another Usenet group, see a thread with the subject
"bread", and think "but bread() isn't standard -- it's a FreeBSD
extension".

Um... What sort of newsgroup has postings about bread? It sounds...
/interesting/.

alt.music.sixties?
--
clvrmnky <mailto:sp******@clevermonkey.org>

Direct replies will be blacklisted. Replace "spamtrap" with my name to
contact me directly.

[Christopher Benson-Manica]

Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.invalidwrote:

No, we'd like to get the language forward to 1999 so that we can all
sing from the same sheet again, but implementors show little sign of
co-operating.

<semi OT>Just for the sake of comparison, how long did it take for the
Fortran 90 standard to overtake Fortran 77? (Or did it?)

Ce newsgroup est au sujet de conception de C. Software, entretien, la
correction et le repos sont toutes les choses tr?s int?ressantes et en
effet essentielles pour parler, mais il y a *** l'AUTRE *** de
NEWSGROUP pour discuter de telles choses. *** D'AUTRES NEWSGROUP ***.

Wares, le plus soft? Group de news? :-)

--
C. Benson Manica | I *should* know what I'm talking about - if I
cbmanica(at)gmail.com | don't, I need to know. Flames welcome.

[Keith Thompson]

Chris Hills <ch***@phaedsys.orgwrites:
[...]

However the ISO C panel are looking at moving part way back from C99
to C95.....

[...]

Really? I've never heard that from anyone other than you. Can you
expand on that? (Such information would be both interesting and
topical, though it might be more appropriate for comp.std.c.)

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <* <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

[Spiros Bousbouras]

On 20 Jun, 14:33, jacob navia <[e-mail]:

This group is a bore.

I find it extremely interesting myself. I have
a big backlog of threads I want to read and
I could hardly find the time to read all the
interesting new threads even when I was accessing
usenet on a daily basis.

Always when you start some interesting stuff the same people
will start yelling:

OFF TOPIC!!! OFF TOPIC!!!

They say "off topic" (without using capitals)
when it's off topic not when it's interesting.

Because they would like to get the language back to 1990...

Do they ? Where did you get that idea ?

There are no discussions about software design, software maintenance,
debugging and all the things that really interest the programmers!

If there are issues regarding software design etc. which
are specific to standard C then I believe they would be
on topic here. Otherwise, comp.programming is only
a few keystrokes away.

Anyway , although I'm sure that you know as well as
any other regular that your list of topics which supposedly
exhaust what appears here has little connection with
reality, here are some titles for you to search for:

What makes a "good" programmer ?
Something funny about numbers
Why are C and C++ so popular?

There have been a lot more in the last 12 months or so
but quite annoyingly I don't seem to have stored the titles
anywhere.

[Spiros Bousbouras]

On 21 Jun, 00:40, Spiros Bousbouras <[e-mail]:

On 20 Jun, 14:33, jacob navia <[e-mail]:

This group is a bore.

Anyway , although I'm sure that you know as well as
any other regular that your list of topics which supposedly
exhaust what appears here has little connection with
reality, here are some titles for you to search for:

What makes a "good" programmer ?
Something funny about numbers
Why are C and C++ so popular?

There have been a lot more in the last 12 months or so
but quite annoyingly I don't seem to have stored the titles
anywhere.

I've just located one:
Maps, filters and accumulators

I seem to recall a thread which I think was about the width
of integers and included a macro which would return the
width even if it was huge. But I don't know which words to
search for.

Here's another interesting one:
SICP playfulness in C?

[BWIGLEY]

"jacob navia" <ja***@jacob.remcomp.frwrote in message
news:46**********************@news.orange.fr...

BWIGLEY wrote:

"Kenneth Brody" <ke******@spamcop.netwrote in message
news:46***************@spamcop.net...

You Know You've Been Reading clc Too Long When...

You switch to another Usenet group, see a thread with the subject
"bread", and think "but bread() isn't standard -- it's a FreeBSD
extension".

Um... What sort of newsgroup has postings about bread? It

sounds...

/interesting/.

Yes, /interesting/!!!

This group is a bore. The only messages are

Come on, It's C. It's not comp.lang.sugar-faeries or something. What
do you expect? Anyway, Richard Heathfield can be quite funny
sometimes.

-----
"I pressed "compile" button but it did not work".

Help MEEEEEE!!!
------
Please do my homework.
-----
I wrote i++=i++; but it doesn't work

WHY???
Always when you start some interesting stuff the same people
will start yelling:

OFF TOPIC!!! OFF TOPIC!!!

There'll always be Off Topic stuff, and there'll always be people
complaining about it. Personally I feel that threads like this should
be replied to in the manner that they are asked. If they wanna act
retarded then act retarded back.

Because they would like to get the language back to 1990...

There are no discussions about software design, software

maintenance,

debugging and all the things that really interest the programmers!

Yeah, that sort of thing would be nice.

[Ian Bush]

As if by magic, Christopher Benson-Manica appeared !

Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.invalidwrote:

>No, we'd like to get the language forward to 1999 so that we can all
sing from the same sheet again, but implementors show little sign of
co-operating.

<semi OT>Just for the sake of comparison, how long did it take for the
Fortran 90 standard to overtake Fortran 77? (Or did it?)

Certainly less than a decade. The vast majority of current compilers
are ( supposedly ) fully compliant to the Fortran 95 standard.

The latest Fortran standard is 2003. There are, to my knowledge, no fully
compliant compilers yet, though IBM and NAG are both close. See e.g.
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infoce...w_features.htm

Ian

[Christopher Benson-Manica]

Ian Bush <I.******@ku.ca.ldwrote:

As if by magic, Christopher Benson-Manica appeared !

(It WAS magic.)

<semi OT>Just for the sake of comparison, how long did it take for the
Fortran 90 standard to overtake Fortran 77? (Or did it?)

Certainly less than a decade. The vast majority of current compilers
are ( supposedly ) fully compliant to the Fortran 95 standard.

Hm. Would it be fair to suggest that Fortan 90 brought more needed
features to Fortan than C99 brought to C users, spurring the eventual
acceptance of the new Fortran standard whereas C99 shows little sign
of overtaking C89?

--
C. Benson Manica | I *should* know what I'm talking about - if I
cbmanica(at)gmail.com | don't, I need to know. Flames welcome.

[Ian Bush]

As if by magic, Christopher Benson-Manica appeared !

Ian Bush <I.******@ku.ca.ldwrote:

>As if by magic, Christopher Benson-Manica appeared !

(It WAS magic.)

<semi OT>Just for the sake of comparison, how long did it take for the
Fortran 90 standard to overtake Fortran 77? (Or did it?)

>Certainly less than a decade. The vast majority of current compilers
are ( supposedly ) fully compliant to the Fortran 95 standard.

Hm. Would it be fair to suggest that Fortan 90 brought more needed
features to Fortan than C99 brought to C users, spurring the eventual
acceptance of the new Fortran standard whereas C99 shows little sign
of overtaking C89?

I can't really say whether it is fair to suggest or not - C is very much
my second language and I rarely use it. I read this newsgroup so that
on the occasions that I do need it I don't screw up too badly.

But ... On the acceptance of F90 there was initially a lot of skepticism
from the user base, at least in my experience. However one or two features
seemed nice ( e.g. the new array features and that radical innovation,
dynamic memory allocation ), so the tried that and saw that they
were good. So they tried something else, and then something else ...

Ian