473,322 Members | 1,345 Online
Bytes | Software Development & Data Engineering Community
Post Job

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Join Bytes to post your question to a community of 473,322 software developers and data experts.

Mnemonic

Mnemonic means trying to remember.

Mnemonic means making annotations that remind you.

Speaking about mnemonic I saw this message.

Tor Rustad wrote:
Richard wrote:
>From some of the comments I read here, I often wonder if the people
knocking debuggers have any idea whatsoever of just what they are, how
they work and the results they can achieve.

We are old. Debugging a 300.000 line monster, wasn't very practical on a
VT100 terminal. Something like 24 lines of code on the screen... so a
program listing was usually nearby.
One of the problems with old people is that they tend to live in the
past.

They will always start telling you their "war stories" to
impress in the naive youths how HARD were the old times.

Again and again, without ever paying attention to the bored look of the
people around them...

Who cares about the old times?

TO HELL WITH THE OLD TIMES!

I am too old to live in the past. That was something I could afford
only back then... I am younger now.

TO HELL WITH THE OLD TIMES!

There is no more time to waste looking back into what was
"back then", filling life with too much rubbish that
can be safely forgotten.

This group is looking like those old people groups,
where each one starts the never ending stories, always repeated,

"You remember back then?"

When the Unisys XXX and his padding bits, 36.688 bit word
existed?

Ahhh the PDP11 and the VT100 terminal... Those were the times my friend.

The problem with age is that you tend to be swallowed by your memories.

You loose the future, the curiosity, the opennes of wondering. You
become a prisoner of the past, you abhor change. C99 is way too new.

Let's go back to C89... Those were the times my friend!

TO HELL WITH THE OLD TIMES!
Nov 3 '07 #1
39 3256
jacob navia wrote:

<snipped tedious rant against history>

History teaches humility and perspective and gives a new value to
current life as the result of a collective spirit and labour of many
billions before use.

Trying hard to forget the past is as sure a sign of abnormality as
always wrapped up in it.

PS. BTW by many points of view C itself is a legacy language or nearly
one. Since you want to forget history and legacy so badly, why don't
you consider developing for one of the many shiny new languages popping
up every now and then. I suggest C#/CLI/.NET. It has many of the
features that you are constantly trying to bolt onto C.

Nov 3 '07 #2
santosh wrote:
jacob navia wrote:

<snipped tedious rant against history>

History teaches humility and perspective and gives a new value to
current life as the result of a collective spirit and labour of many
billions before use.

Trying hard to forget the past is as sure a sign of abnormality as
always wrapped up in it.

PS. BTW by many points of view C itself is a legacy language or nearly
one. Since you want to forget history and legacy so badly, why don't
you consider developing for one of the many shiny new languages popping
up every now and then. I suggest C#/CLI/.NET. It has many of the
features that you are constantly trying to bolt onto C.
I do not think that C is a legacy language. And I am not "against
history" obviously. I am against people that live in the past.

You do not forget history, but you do not live in the past. The
past is a guide to the future, not just a remembering without
any goal, like in the groups of some old people like this one.
--
jacob navia
jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
logiciels/informatique
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32
Nov 4 '07 #3
In article <47***********************@news.orange.fr>,
jacob navia <ja***@nospam.orgwrote:
....
>I do not think that C is a legacy language. And I am not "against
history" obviously. I am against people that live in the past.
C, as defined in this newsgroup, *is* a legacy language.

Jacob (and others in the real world, not in this ng [e.g., Microsoft])
want to "embrace and expand" C into something modern and useful (what
one of the santoshes calls "bolting on"). The regs in this NG want no
part of that.

Nov 4 '07 #4
Kenny McCormack wrote:
In article <47***********************@news.orange.fr>,
jacob navia <ja***@nospam.orgwrote:
...
>I do not think that C is a legacy language. And I am not "against
history" obviously. I am against people that live in the past.

C, as defined in this newsgroup, *is* a legacy language.
Is there something wrong with a legacy?

leg.a.cy, n 1 : a gift by will esp. of money or other
personal property : BEQUEST 2 : something received from
an ancestor or predecessor or from the past
-- Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary

When the time comes (or came), will you (did you) refuse your
inheritance?
Jacob (and others in the real world, not in this ng [e.g., Microsoft])
want to "embrace and expand" C into something modern and useful (what
one of the santoshes calls "bolting on"). The regs in this NG want no
part of that.
To the final sentence (only): A-men, brother!

--
Eric Sosman
es*****@ieee-dot-org.invalid
Nov 4 '07 #5
In article <s5******************************@comcast.com>,
Eric Sosman <es*****@ieee-dot-org.invalidwrote:
>Kenny McCormack wrote:
>In article <47***********************@news.orange.fr>,
jacob navia <ja***@nospam.orgwrote:
...
>>I do not think that C is a legacy language. And I am not "against
history" obviously. I am against people that live in the past.

C, as defined in this newsgroup, *is* a legacy language.

Is there something wrong with a legacy?

leg.a.cy, n 1 : a gift by will esp. of money or other
personal property : BEQUEST 2 : something received from
an ancestor or predecessor or from the past
-- Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary

When the time comes (or came), will you (did you) refuse your
inheritance?
Heh heh. While I certainly take your meaning, the fact is that, in
modern computer industry vernacular, the word legacy is always a word of
negative connotation.

I didn't make the rules.

Nov 4 '07 #6
Kenny McCormack wrote:
In article <s5******************************@comcast.com>,
Eric Sosman <es*****@ieee-dot-org.invalidwrote:
>Kenny McCormack wrote:
>>In article <47***********************@news.orange.fr>,
jacob navia <ja***@nospam.orgwrote:
...
I do not think that C is a legacy language. And I am not "against
history" obviously. I am against people that live in the past.
C, as defined in this newsgroup, *is* a legacy language.
Is there something wrong with a legacy?

leg.a.cy, n 1 : a gift by will esp. of money or other
personal property : BEQUEST 2 : something received from
an ancestor or predecessor or from the past
-- Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary

When the time comes (or came), will you (did you) refuse your
inheritance?

Heh heh. While I certainly take your meaning, the fact is that, in
modern computer industry vernacular, the word legacy is always a word of
negative connotation.
Why are you using a six-year-old version of a newsreader
that's more than fifteen years old, and whose origins go back
at least twenty-three years? Each time you launch this piece
of legacy software, written in a legacy language, running on
your legacy computer, do you have a negative experience?

--
Eric Sosman
es*****@ieee-dot-org.invalid
Nov 4 '07 #7
Eric Sosman <es*****@ieee-dot-org.invalidwrites:
Kenny McCormack wrote:
>In article <s5******************************@comcast.com>,
Eric Sosman <es*****@ieee-dot-org.invalidwrote:
>>Kenny McCormack wrote:
In article <47***********************@news.orange.fr>,
jacob navia <ja***@nospam.orgwrote:
...
I do not think that C is a legacy language. And I am not "against
history" obviously. I am against people that live in the past.
C, as defined in this newsgroup, *is* a legacy language.
Is there something wrong with a legacy?

leg.a.cy, n 1 : a gift by will esp. of money or other
personal property : BEQUEST 2 : something received from
an ancestor or predecessor or from the past
-- Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary

When the time comes (or came), will you (did you) refuse your
inheritance?

Heh heh. While I certainly take your meaning, the fact is that, in
modern computer industry vernacular, the word legacy is always a word of
negative connotation.

Why are you using a six-year-old version of a newsreader
that's more than fifteen years old, and whose origins go back
at least twenty-three years? Each time you launch this piece
of legacy software, written in a legacy language, running on
your legacy computer, do you have a negative experience?
You appear to have missed his point. The language and "common usage" of
legacy in the SW world is to mean ancient stuff kept on for
compatibility/budget requirements. It is most definitely a negative
connotation. Regardless of the dictionary meaning. And, FWIW, I agree
with you that the old stuff has its place today. People scoff at me for
using Gnus since its "non gui". Little do they know.

Nov 4 '07 #8
Richard wrote:
You appear to have missed his point. The language and "common usage" of
legacy in the SW world is to mean ancient stuff kept on for
compatibility/budget requirements. It is most definitely a negative
connotation. Regardless of the dictionary meaning. And, FWIW, I agree
with you that the old stuff has its place today. People scoff at me for
using Gnus since its "non gui". Little do they know.
1) If C is a legacy language, as Santosh and the C++
supporters in this group propose, then what is the
purpose of doing anything here? Nobody cares about
C since C is doomed to extinction. Why do they
participate in this newsgroup?

2) In my message I wasn't arguing against history or
against old people. I was pointing out that the
some people in this group are living in the past.
Living in the past is a state of refusal of change,
of anything new, and an adoration of the "old times"
(C89) where everything was pure and uncontaminated.

This is common in old people but not necessarily.
There are young people that are older than my
grandfather. Dead before they were born.

3) The level of discussion of those people is just
polemic. I presented (with source code) a proposal
for a dynamic string container. None of them
answered anything, there were only two answers.
Why?
Because they are utterly unable to discuss
technical matters beyond the endless citing
of the C89 standard...

4) Obviously, the same people that attack me
about me not disclosing the source code of
my compiler system will never discuss a
technical proposal even if I do publish the
source code *in this group*.


--
jacob navia
jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
logiciels/informatique
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32
Nov 4 '07 #9
Eric Sosman <es*****@ieee-dot-org.invalidwrites:
Kenny McCormack wrote:
[snip]
>
Why are you using a six-year-old version of a newsreader
[snip]

Eric, please stop feeding the troll.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Looking for software development work in the San Diego area.
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
Nov 4 '07 #10
On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 00:01:13 +0100, in comp.lang.c , jacob navia
<ja***@jacob.remcomp.frwrote:
>Who cares about the old times?
Santayana anyone?
>There is no more time to waste looking back into what was
"back then", filling life with too much rubbish that
can be safely forgotten.
We can safely assume you have no interest in learning from past
mistakes or successes then.

--
Mark McIntyre

"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it."
--Brian Kernighan
Nov 4 '07 #11
jacob navia wrote:
[...]
3) The level of discussion of those people is just
polemic. I presented (with source code) a proposal
for a dynamic string container. None of them
answered anything, there were only two answers.
Why?
Stop right there, Jacob: Do you claim paranormal powers?
Have you been reading everyone's mind?
Because they are utterly unable to discuss
technical matters beyond the endless citing
of the C89 standard...
Silly me! I thought my reasons for abstaining from that
particular thread were entirely different -- but since you say
otherwise, I must, of course, have been totally mistaken. Thank
you for opening my blind eyes to the Truth that flows from Jacob.

--
Eric Sosman
es*****@ieee-dot-org.invalid
Nov 4 '07 #12
Keith Thompson wrote:
Eric Sosman <es*****@ieee-dot-org.invalidwrites:
>Kenny McCormack wrote:
[snip]
> Why are you using a six-year-old version of a newsreader
[snip]

Eric, please stop feeding the troll.
And your C question was ...?

--
Eric Sosman
es*****@ieee-dot-org.invalid
Nov 4 '07 #13
jacob navia wrote:
TO HELL WITH THE OLD TIMES!
"Ceux qui ne connaissent pas l'Histoire sont condamnés à la revivre"

--
Tor <bw****@wvtqvm.vw | tr i-za-h a-z>
Nov 5 '07 #14
Eric Sosman <es*****@ieee-dot-org.invalidwrites:
Keith Thompson wrote:
>Eric Sosman <es*****@ieee-dot-org.invalidwrites:
>>Kenny McCormack wrote:
[snip]
>> Why are you using a six-year-old version of a newsreader
[snip]
Eric, please stop feeding the troll.

And your C question was ...?
Can you please help to improve the signal-to-noise ratio of this
newsgroup, encouraging more discussion of C, by not feeding the troll?

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Looking for software development work in the San Diego area.
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
Nov 5 '07 #15
In article <ln************@nuthaus.mib.org>,
Keith Thompson <ks***@mib.orgwrote:
>Eric Sosman <es*****@ieee-dot-org.invalidwrites:
>Keith Thompson wrote:
>>Eric Sosman <es*****@ieee-dot-org.invalidwrites:
Kenny McCormack wrote:
[snip]
Why are you using a six-year-old version of a newsreader
[snip]
Eric, please stop feeding the troll.

And your C question was ...?

Can you please help to improve the signal-to-noise ratio of this
newsgroup, encouraging more discussion of C, by not feeding the troll?
Your C question was???

Nov 5 '07 #16
Eric Sosman said:
jacob navia wrote:
>[...]
3) The level of discussion of those people is just
polemic. I presented (with source code) a proposal
for a dynamic string container. None of them
answered anything, there were only two answers.
Why?

Stop right there, Jacob: Do you claim paranormal powers?
Have you been reading everyone's mind?
He hasn't been reading mine, it seems. The reason I rarely bother to say
anything about his proposals to change the language is that I cannot take
seriously the views on C of a man who, it is evident from his own
postings, knows so little about the language and is so hostile to those
who point out his mistakes.

--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Nov 5 '07 #17
In article <Ze******************************@comcast.com>,
Eric Sosman <es*****@ieee-dot-org.invalidwrote:
....
Why are you using a six-year-old version of a newsreader
that's more than fifteen years old, and whose origins go back
at least twenty-three years? Each time you launch this piece
of legacy software, written in a legacy language, running on
your legacy computer, do you have a negative experience?
Who said anything about me? I'm quite happy with my choice of
newsreader/OS/language-of-implementation-of-said-newsreader.

I was just objecting to your seeming attempt to cloud the discussion by
changing the commonly accepted meaning of the word "legacy" (when
applied to computer industry languages, etc). Obviously, the word has
more positive connotations when used in regards to inheritances and
college admissions (this later is intended semi-ironically).

Nov 5 '07 #18
Kenny McCormack wrote:
In article <Ze******************************@comcast.com>,
Eric Sosman <es*****@ieee-dot-org.invalidwrote:
...
> Why are you using a six-year-old version of a newsreader
that's more than fifteen years old, and whose origins go back
at least twenty-three years? Each time you launch this piece
of legacy software, written in a legacy language, running on
your legacy computer, do you have a negative experience?

Who said anything about me? I'm quite happy with my choice of
newsreader/OS/language-of-implementation-of-said-newsreader.
For you, then, "legacy" makes you "happy." Gotcha;
thanks for the clarification; out.

--
Eric Sosman
es*****@ieee-dot-org.invalid
Nov 6 '07 #19
On Nov 3, 5:01 pm, jacob navia <ja...@jacob.remcomp.frwrote:
Mnemonic means trying to remember.

Mnemonic means making annotations that remind you.

Speaking about mnemonic I saw this message.

Tor Rustad wrote:
Richard wrote:
>
>From some of the comments I read here, I often wonder if the people
>knocking debuggers have any idea whatsoever of just what they are, how
>they work and the results they can achieve.
>
We are old. Debugging a 300.000 line monster, wasn't very practical on a
VT100 terminal. Something like 24 lines of code on the screen... so a
program listing was usually nearby.
>

One of the problems with old people is that they tend to live in the
past.

They will always start telling you their "war stories" to
impress in the naive youths how HARD were the old times.

Again and again, without ever paying attention to the bored look of the
people around them...

Who cares about the old times?

TO HELL WITH THE OLD TIMES!

I am too old to live in the past. That was something I could afford
only back then... I am younger now.

TO HELL WITH THE OLD TIMES!

There is no more time to waste looking back into what was
"back then", filling life with too much rubbish that
can be safely forgotten.

This group is looking like those old people groups,
where each one starts the never ending stories, always repeated,

"You remember back then?"

When the Unisys XXX and his padding bits, 36.688 bit word
existed?

Ahhh the PDP11 and the VT100 terminal... Those were the times my friend.

The problem with age is that you tend to be swallowed by your memories.

You loose the future, the curiosity, the opennes of wondering. You
become a prisoner of the past, you abhor change. C99 is way too new.

Let's go back to C89... Those were the times my friend!

TO HELL WITH THE OLD TIMES!

You're misunderstanding some of the reason that historical machines
and architectures are discussed. Obviously they have many odd
properties, but then so do *many* (usually embedded) environments that
C is used in. These days, embedded applications may well be the
predominant use of C. So why not refer to some architectural quirk of
the DSP123-ABC-xyz instead of some oddness of the PDP-11? Because
while we all know what the PDP-11 was, hardly anyone knows anything
about the DSP123-ABC-xyz.

Nov 6 '07 #20
On Nov 4, 2:04 am, jacob navia <ja...@nospam.orgwrote:
santosh wrote:
jacob navia wrote:
[snip]
PS. BTW by many points of view C itself is a legacy language or nearly
one. Since you want to forget history and legacy so badly, why don't
you consider developing for one of the many shiny new languages popping
up every now and then. I suggest C#/CLI/.NET. It has many of the
features that you are constantly trying to bolt onto C.

I do not think that C is a legacy language.
It already is in a number of domains, and I think that number is
growing as newer tools are developed. While still popular for kernel
and embedded programming, I can't think of that much new application
development being done with pure C. The desktop on the Windows side
is firmly in .Net land (C# or VB), and I *think* Apple is finally
dropping the C-based Carbon API in OS X 10.5 (which was meant to be a
temporary measure while developers transitioned over to the Obj-C
Cocoa interface). Unix and Linux development is more of a mixed bag,
I'll grant you, but even there I'm seeing a trend away from C to other
languages like C++ and Java (and as the Mono project gains steam, I
expect a trend away from C++ to C#).

All programming languages have a limited useful lifetime. They never
really die, but as time goes on their niches shrink as the nature of
the computing environment changes (Exhibits A and B: COBOL and
Fortran). C's been around for something like 35 years now, initially
designed in an era of dumb terminals large time-share systems, and
simply doesn't have the toolkit to handle modern-day demands in a
consistent, platform-independent manner. Sure, the Standard has been
extended to add new capabilities, but I doubt we'll ever see the
addition of a platform-independent network layer in the standard
library, for example.

By that same token, I doubt C# and Java will enjoy their current
popularity 30 years from now.

Professionally speaking, I'm pretty much done with C. My company has
officially adopted a C#-based framework for all new products, although
my specific project is C++-based. The last time I had to look for a
general software development job, all the requests were for C#, VB, or
C++ experience.

Nov 7 '07 #21
John Bode wrote:
On Nov 4, 2:04 am, jacob navia <ja...@nospam.orgwrote:
>santosh wrote:
>>jacob navia wrote:

[snip]
>>PS. BTW by many points of view C itself is a legacy language or nearly
one. Since you want to forget history and legacy so badly, why don't
you consider developing for one of the many shiny new languages popping
up every now and then. I suggest C#/CLI/.NET. It has many of the
features that you are constantly trying to bolt onto C.
I do not think that C is a legacy language.
[snip]

Professionally speaking, I'm pretty much done with C. My company has
officially adopted a C#-based framework for all new products, although
my specific project is C++-based. The last time I had to look for a
general software development job, all the requests were for C#, VB, or
C++ experience.
OK. I would propose that you do not participate in this group, that
is dedicated to the C language. Since you consider that language
just legacy, and you do not want to develop anything new in that
language that would be at least a consistent point of view.

Your company, and many others, are going the way of OO and more
complexity, what is a big mistake in my opinion. The simplicity
of C makes it a better choice than C++ in many applications.

C# is a single platform language, and will be the language of
the day until Microsoft discovers a new one. Microsoft made
the MFC classes the "standard" under windows, only to replace it
with Java a few years later. Java was the "new paradigm" until
Sun wanted a share of the pie. At that point Java was dead, to
be replaced by C#; that is THE language that will replace ALL
the others, of course.

I will believe all the hype when I see a real world application like
a text processing application or an Excel clone, or a similar
application in C#.

VB is another story. As you know, the VB.NET version of the language is
incompatible with the earlier version, and people are forced to
REWRITE all their applications in the new VB.NET or face the fact
that the platform where they build has disappeared. Nice. They
at least learned their lesson.

Not you. You will learn your lesson in a few years, when
Microsoft decides that .NET is obsolete (as COM is now)
and you have to rewrite all your software in the new language
of the day.

Good Luck!

--
jacob navia
jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
logiciels/informatique
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32
Nov 7 '07 #22
[I try hard not to reply to Mr Navia, despite th... well, never mind that.
But on this occasion I'm going to make an exception.]

jacob navia said:
John Bode wrote:
>On Nov 4, 2:04 am, jacob navia <ja...@nospam.orgwrote:
<snip>
>>I do not think that C is a legacy language.

[snip]
>Professionally speaking, I'm pretty much done with C.
<snip>
OK. I would propose that you do not participate in this group, that
is dedicated to the C language.
It is very evident that John Bode is a careful and skilled C programmer, as
his many excellent contributions to this newsgroup have shown time and
time again. If he were to stop participating in comp.lang.c, I for one
would miss his positive and knowledgeable input to the group.

Since you consider that language just legacy,
What he actually said is: "Professionally speaking, I'm pretty much done
with C." In other words, he doesn't use it at work. Is there anything to
stop him using it at home? He clearly enjoys using the language, or he
wouldn't continue to frequent this group even though he doesn't have a
current professional use for the language.
and you do not want to develop anything new in that
language that would be at least a consistent point of view.
He hasn't actually said that he doesn't want to develop anything new. He's
just said he doesn't need to use C at work. There is no Usenet rule that
says that one may only contribute to a programming language newsgroup if
one uses that language at work.

If even incompetent, intractable idiots are allowed to use this group (and
they are!), I see no reason why a very able and bright programmer like
John Bode should be forbidden from using it.
Your company, and many others, are going the way of OO and more
complexity, what is a big mistake in my opinion.
We don't know whether John had any input into that decision. It may well be
that the company went the C# route despite his opinion, rather than
because of it. (It wouldn't be the first time a company ignored its bright
people's technical advice.)
The simplicity
of C makes it a better choice than C++ in many applications.
I so rarely agree with Mr Navia that I felt obliged to leave this snippet
in place, for the novelty value.

<snip>
VB is another story. As you know, the VB.NET version of the language is
incompatible with the earlier version, and people are forced to
REWRITE all their applications in the new VB.NET or face the fact
that the platform where they build has disappeared. Nice. They
at least learned their lesson.

Not you. You will learn your lesson in a few years,
Again, this assumes that it was John's decision for his company to move
away from C and into C#, but he has not told us this, so we don't know.

But whatever the truth of the matter, the fact remains that John's C
knowledge is broad and deep, and this newsgroup is the richer for having
access to it. Long may he post here.

<snip>

--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Nov 7 '07 #23
On Wednesday 07 Nov 2007 10:56 pm jacob navia <ja***@nospam.orgwrote
in article <47**********************@news.orange.fr>:
John Bode wrote:
>On Nov 4, 2:04 am, jacob navia <ja...@nospam.orgwrote:
>>santosh wrote:
jacob navia wrote:

[snip]
>>>PS. BTW by many points of view C itself is a legacy language or
nearly one. Since you want to forget history and legacy so badly,
why don't you consider developing for one of the many shiny new
languages popping up every now and then. I suggest C#/CLI/.NET. It
has many of the features that you are constantly trying to bolt
onto C.
I do not think that C is a legacy language.

[snip]

>Professionally speaking, I'm pretty much done with C. My company has
officially adopted a C#-based framework for all new products,
although my specific project is C++-based. The last time I had to
look for a general software development job, all the requests were
for C#, VB, or C++ experience.

OK. I would propose that you do not participate in this group, that
is dedicated to the C language.
Nonsense.
Since you consider that language
just legacy, and you do not want to develop anything new in that
language that would be at least a consistent point of view.
He didn't say he personally considered C legacy and dead. He said his
_company_ favours more recent languages.
Your company, and many others, are going the way of OO and more
complexity, what is a big mistake in my opinion. The simplicity
of C makes it a better choice than C++ in many applications.
Apparently a large majority of desktop applications development houses
think otherwise.

Note BTW, OO languages needn't be complex. They are often written that
way because designing classes is _much_ harder than designing
functions. Also C++, which is very widely used and often pointed to by
OO phobics as an example of the "complexities" of OO programming, is
more complex than an OO language _needs_ to be because it made the
tactical choice of building upon a non-OO base language. There are
arguably better designed alternatives.

<snip>
Not you. You will learn your lesson in a few years, when
Microsoft decides that .NET is obsolete (as COM is now)
and you have to rewrite all your software in the new language
of the day.
Software, whatever language it's written in has a finite lifetime.

Tell me, do you still use CP/M or OS 360? Do you still use EDLIN for
editing, NSCA Mosaic for WWW browsing, mail for email, WordStar for
word processing and so on?

Why should _everyone_ stick with a single language for _every_ kind of
s/w development just because you say so? Different people have
different requirements, which was one reason why more than one
programming language was developed.

PS. Not everyone in the s/w industry can be in the enviable position of
self-employment like you. Sometimes we just have to work for others and
abide by their rules, however different be our personal tastes.

PPS. Whatever his professional reasons it's clear that John Bode is a
highly skilled C programmer and his posts are much valued in this
group. So you telling him to leave the group is totally rude and
uncalled for.

Nov 7 '07 #24
In article <11*********************@z24g2000prh.googlegroups. com>,
John Bode <jo*******@my-deja.comwrote:
....
>C# is a single platform language

This is true, but not the black mark you are trying to paint it as.
The platform is .Net, which has been ported to non-Windows systems
(i.e. Mono -- I've done some C# on my Gentoo box at home).
Experience has shown that trying to run Windows (*) in other than the
MS-approved way, is a losing proposition. I'm speaking as a long ago
OS/2 supporter (who swooned at the promise of running Windows as an OS/2
task) and a present-day Linux supporter (who still swoons at such
possibilities, even though I know better).

You're always going to be a step behind; you're always going to saying
"Well, look, it _almost_ works". VMWare comes the closest, of course,
but that's essentially cheating. And even then, it's not quite the
same.

(*) Yes, I know you said ".NET", not "Windows", but its the same thing.
We all know how MS likes to blur the line between OS and application.

Nov 7 '07 #25
On Nov 7, 11:46 am, Richard Heathfield <r...@see.sig.invalidwrote:
[I try hard not to reply to Mr Navia, despite th... well, never mind that.
But on this occasion I'm going to make an exception.]

jacob navia said:
John Bode wrote:
On Nov 4, 2:04 am, jacob navia <ja...@nospam.orgwrote:

<snip>
>I do not think that C is a legacy language.
[snip]
Professionally speaking, I'm pretty much done with C.

<snip>
OK. I would propose that you do not participate in this group, that
is dedicated to the C language.

It is very evident that John Bode is a careful and skilled C programmer, as
his many excellent contributions to this newsgroup have shown time and
time again. If he were to stop participating in comp.lang.c, I for one
would miss his positive and knowledgeable input to the group.
You *have* seen me get reamed by Dan, Jack, Keith, or Kaz for posting
some really stupid shit, right?

[snip]
>
Your company, and many others, are going the way of OO and more
complexity, what is a big mistake in my opinion.

We don't know whether John had any input into that decision. It may well be
that the company went the C# route despite his opinion, rather than
because of it. (It wouldn't be the first time a company ignored its bright
people's technical advice.)
Not my decision; I'm just a grumpy code monkey who does what he's
told.

FWIW, I'm actually kind of glad that we aren't using C. I'm at my
happiest when on the steep end of a learning curve, and while I won't
claim to have an encyclopedic knowledge about C, there's simply not a
lot to left for me to learn that isn't minutia. At my last C-based
job I wound up being bored out of my skull; the work itself wasn't
challenging (at least from a technical point of view), I wasn't
learning any new tools or techniques, and I eventually lost interest
in what I was doing. My job performance suffered, I was supremely
unhappy, and was seriously considering getting out of software
altogether.

Although it certainly didn't seem like it at the time, getting laid
off (again) was actually a blessing; my next contract forced me to
really *learn* C++[1], not just pretend it was C with some extra
keywords. That got me out of my funk.

I'd actually be perfectly happy if I never had to write another line
of C for pay ever again. And when I get bored with C++ and Java and
C# (and haven't yet been forced into retirement), I'll be perfectly
happy to drink the new flavor of Kool Aid.

1. And bash scripting, and Linux LVM, and Linux disk management,
etc.

Nov 7 '07 #26
On Nov 7, 2:40 pm, gaze...@xmission.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack)
wrote:
In article <1194461308.276491.26...@z24g2000prh.googlegroups. com>,
John Bode <john_b...@my-deja.comwrote:
...
C# is a single platform language
This is true, but not the black mark you are trying to paint it as.
The platform is .Net, which has been ported to non-Windows systems
(i.e. Mono -- I've done some C# on my Gentoo box at home).

Experience has shown that trying to run Windows (*) in other than the
MS-approved way, is a losing proposition. I'm speaking as a long ago
OS/2 supporter (who swooned at the promise of running Windows as an OS/2
task) and a present-day Linux supporter (who still swoons at such
possibilities, even though I know better).

You're always going to be a step behind; you're always going to saying
"Well, look, it _almost_ works". VMWare comes the closest, of course,
but that's essentially cheating. And even then, it's not quite the
same.

(*) Yes, I know you said ".NET", not "Windows", but its the same thing.
We all know how MS likes to blur the line between OS and application.
I won't disagree with anything you said, and I freely admit that the
Mono port is far from perfect or complete. However, the fact that the
effort exists at all is encouraging. If nothing else, the Next New
Thing will have both Sun and Microsoft's examples to build upon.

Nov 7 '07 #27
John Bode said:
On Nov 7, 11:46 am, Richard Heathfield <r...@see.sig.invalidwrote:
<snip>
>It is very evident that John Bode is a careful and skilled C programmer,
as his many excellent contributions to this newsgroup have shown time
and time again. If he were to stop participating in comp.lang.c, I for
one would miss his positive and knowledgeable input to the group.

You *have* seen me get reamed by Dan, Jack, Keith, or Kaz for posting
some really stupid shit, right?
Yeah, absolutely, but so what? Everyone goes through that stage. (I know I
did!) It's not the mistakes we make that matter, but how we react to them
when we find out about them.

--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Nov 7 '07 #28
C and C#

Why we haven't seen any big application written in C#?

The whole concept of C# (the virtual machine stuff) provokes a
performance hit of a factor of TEN at least.

You know the msh?

Is the microsoft shell, written in C#. Running in a top rated
machine, msh takes like 5 minutes to do this:

dir /S *.* | grep notfound

(in Unix shell it would be ls -R | grep notfound)

In a fairly big directory, it took 4 SECONDS to the CMD
shell written in C to do the same.

Yes, for GUI applications, where performance is not so important since
C# is just all the time calling the low level procedures written in C
that doesn't matter. But for any serious application C# will take a BIG
time performance hit. The same for Java.

This is a fact. A fact is also that C# was designed at the end of
the exponential growth in computer performance. People designing
C# thought that machines in 2006 would be running at 10GHZ, and that
computer power would be so cheap that they could afford having a
language whose performance was horrible.

But they miscalculated. Right after the first .NET implementation
came out, Intel, AMD, and Sun hit the GHZ WALL. As everyone now knows,
it is VERY difficult to go beyond 3GHZ.

VERY difficult. And that was it. Yes, machines are faster today than
last year, but not by much, and the parallel architectures being
written into silicon now go largely unused...

The languages of the future will be parallel. Not "object oriented",
even if object oriented software can be adapted to parallel
processing. But the emphasis is in "parallel execution" and that means
parallel data structures.

That is another discussion altogether.

Coming back to C#. The performance hit is lower now than what it
was 2-3 years ago... and it will be less next year. Maybe in 10
years we will have powerful computers that will be able to run C# as it
were a C program. Who knows.

But for the time being, C# is just dead, Microsoft notwithstanding.

Obviously, for small in house applications, where easy of programming
is much more important, C# will be used a lot. And anyway, if you
need some speed in your C# programs, I know of a C compiler that
interfaces to C# through COM, that will happily give you the needed
boost!

You just buy it from a known vendor and plug it in. It will make
for a big boost to your C# engine.

:-)

--
jacob navia
jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
logiciels/informatique
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32
Nov 7 '07 #29
jacob navia wrote:
John Bode wrote:
.... snip ...
>
>Professionally speaking, I'm pretty much done with C. My company
has officially adopted a C#-based framework for all new products,
although my specific project is C++-based. The last time I had
to look for a general software development job, all the requests
were for C#, VB, or C++ experience.

OK. I would propose that you do not participate in this group, that
is dedicated to the C language. Since you consider that language
just legacy, and you do not want to develop anything new in that
language that would be at least a consistent point of view.

Your company, and many others, are going the way of OO and more
complexity, what is a big mistake in my opinion. The simplicity
of C makes it a better choice than C++ in many applications.

C# is a single platform language, and will be the language of
the day until Microsoft discovers a new one. Microsoft made
the MFC classes the "standard" under windows, only to replace it
with Java a few years later. Java was the "new paradigm" until
Sun wanted a share of the pie. At that point Java was dead, to
be replaced by C#; that is THE language that will replace ALL
the others, of course.

I will believe all the hype when I see a real world application
like a text processing application or an Excel clone, or a
similar application in C#.

VB is another story. As you know, the VB.NET version of the
language is incompatible with the earlier version, and people
are forced to REWRITE all their applications in the new VB.NET
or face the fact that the platform where they build has
disappeared. Nice. They at least learned their lesson.

Not you. You will learn your lesson in a few years, when
Microsoft decides that .NET is obsolete (as COM is now)
and you have to rewrite all your software in the new language
of the day.
Well done, Jacob. The only portion that can really receive
criticism is your very first paragraph, and that criticism is
minor.

You might also concentrate on gentling your criticisms. Bear in
mind that you do not know the entire situation.

--
Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
<http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
Try the download section.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Nov 8 '07 #30
Please quote context. I don't know who or what you were replying to.

jacob navia wrote:
C and C#

Why we haven't seen any big application written in C#?
Other than the .NET version of Microsoft Office, as John Bode said upthread?
The whole concept of C# (the virtual machine stuff) provokes a
performance hit of a factor of TEN at least.

You know the msh?
No, and a case study of one application proves nothing about the
language it was written in.
Yes, for GUI applications, where performance is not so important since
C# is just all the time calling the low level procedures written in C
that doesn't matter. But for any serious application C# will take a BIG
time performance hit. The same for Java.
And your evidence for this is...?
This is a fact.
Not until you back it up.
A fact is also that C# was designed at the end of
the exponential growth in computer performance. People designing
C# thought that machines in 2006 would be running at 10GHZ, and that
computer power would be so cheap that they could afford having a
language whose performance was horrible.

But they miscalculated. Right after the first .NET implementation
came out, Intel, AMD, and Sun hit the GHZ WALL. As everyone now knows,
it is VERY difficult to go beyond 3GHZ.
Well that's one story. Another is that it's useful to have languages
with built-in support for threads, networking and GUIs, and to have them
run on a virtual machine.
The languages of the future will be parallel. Not "object oriented",
Thanks, but I think I'll take my forecasts from slightly more reliable
sources.
even if object oriented software can be adapted to parallel
processing. But the emphasis is in "parallel execution" and that means
parallel data structures.

That is another discussion altogether.

Coming back to C#. The performance hit is lower now than what it
was 2-3 years ago... and it will be less next year. Maybe in 10
years we will have powerful computers that will be able to run C# as it
were a C program. Who knows.
Your entire argument seems to be that "C has significantly better
performance than C#" yet you offer no evidence for this whatsoever. On
top of this, most software doesn't have "must perform as fast as
possible" in the requirements - if C# is fast enough, why go lower-level?

There are many other reasons a business will use C# instead of C:

* C# has native support for networks, threads, and other useful things;
in C one must rely on libraries to do this, and the libraries may be
even less portable than C#
* Legacy code, or a particularly useful library, is in C#
* The existing programmers already know C#
* C# application development time may be faster than in C [although I
have no evidence for this, and it depends on the skills of the workers
anyway]
But for the time being, C# is just dead, Microsoft notwithstanding.
Oh really? And your evidence for this is?
Obviously, for small in house applications, where easy of programming
is much more important,
I think ease of programming is just as important for a great many other
types of project.
C# will be used a lot. And anyway, if you
need some speed in your C# programs, I know of a C compiler that
interfaces to C# through COM, that will happily give you the needed
boost!
Now this is the first thing I actually agree with. If performance really
is your concern, best to get something you can measure for bottlenecks
quickly, and rewrite them at a lower-level to get better performance.

Tell me Jacob, what brought on this polemic (since you love that word)
against C#?

I for one have never used C#, and I'm happy with C for the work I do -
and in fact C# would be entirely unsuitable. But if others with
different requirements find that C# suits them better than C - what's
the problem? None of your arguments have convinced me one jot that C# is
not a useful language.

As the old mantra goes, business requirements often outweigh technical
requirements in language choice.

--
Philip Potter pgp <atdoc.ic.ac.uk
Nov 8 '07 #31
On Nov 8, 4:30 am, Philip Potter <p...@see.sig.invalidwrote:
Please quote context. I don't know who or what you were replying to.

jacob navia wrote:
C and C#
Why we haven't seen any big application written in C#?

Other than the .NET version of Microsoft Office, as John Bode said upthread?
<as we lurch ever further OT>

Actually, don't quote me on that; I'm not certain that Office has been
completely transitioned over to managed code yet. I've seen some
mumblage that parts of the suite have been converted, though.

I do know that MS is pretty much betting the farm on .Net, and I
expect future versions of MS products to be all .Net, all the time.

Nov 8 '07 #32
On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 00:52:54 +0100, in comp.lang.c , jacob navia
<ja***@nospam.comwrote:
>C and C#

Why we haven't seen any big application written in C#?
Because you're not looking in the right place. In London, New York,
Frankfurt, Tokyo, Madrid and even Paris you'll find a lot of 'em,
churning billions of dollars through each day. At high speed.
>The whole concept of C# (the virtual machine stuff) provokes a
performance hit of a factor of TEN at least.
Apparently you've zero experience of real-world virtual machine
environments. Look up Azul sometime. Look up z/OS.
>that doesn't matter. But for any serious application C# will take a BIG
time performance hit. The same for Java.
And this would be why these languages are commonplace in, for example,
the forex trading world, where realtime global distribution of price
and trading data is *essential*.
>But for the time being, C# is just dead,
*shrug*

--
Mark McIntyre

"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it."
--Brian Kernighan
Nov 8 '07 #33
John Bode <jo*******@my-deja.comwrote:
On Nov 8, 4:30 am, Philip Potter <p...@see.sig.invalidwrote:
jacob navia wrote:
Why we haven't seen any big application written in C#?
Other than the .NET version of Microsoft Office, as John Bode said upthread?

<as we lurch ever further OT>

Actually, don't quote me on that; I'm not certain that Office has been
completely transitioned over to managed code yet. I've seen some
mumblage that parts of the suite have been converted, though.

I do know that MS is pretty much betting the farm on .Net, and I
expect future versions of MS products to be all .Net, all the time.
Which makes them a losing proposition for those of us who do not
currently have the .COM framework, and do not intend to spend a lot of
modem time downloading it, and do not trust it enough to install it.

Ah well, yet more reason to make my next computer a Unix box. At least
that supports C.

Richard
Nov 9 '07 #34
Mark McIntyre <ma**********@spamcop.netwrote:
On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 00:52:54 +0100, in comp.lang.c , jacob navia
that doesn't matter. But for any serious application C# will take a BIG
time performance hit. The same for Java.

And this would be why these languages are commonplace in, for example,
the forex trading world, where realtime global distribution of price
and trading data is *essential*.
And they run those on .COM? Jeez. No wonder the markets have been
crashing all over the place recently. Probably all installed the same M$
"update".

Richard
Nov 9 '07 #35
Mark McIntyre <ma**********@spamcop.netwrites:
And this would be why these languages are commonplace in, for example,
the forex trading world, where realtime global distribution of price
and trading data is *essential*.
Well may be but on what data store do they work?

Regards
Friedrich

--
Please remove just-for-news- to reply via e-mail.
Nov 9 '07 #36
In article <47****************@news.xs4all.nl>,
Richard Bos <rl*@hoekstra-uitgeverij.nlwrote:
>Mark McIntyre <ma**********@spamcop.netwrote:
>On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 00:52:54 +0100, in comp.lang.c , jacob navia
>that doesn't matter. But for any serious application C# will take a BIG
time performance hit. The same for Java.

And this would be why these languages are commonplace in, for example,
the forex trading world, where realtime global distribution of price
and trading data is *essential*.

And they run those on .COM? Jeez. No wonder the markets have been
crashing all over the place recently. Probably all installed the same M$
"update".

Richard
You raise an interesting point. One of things that is interesting about
studying history is looking at what events and practices caused
societies to crash. One example is the theory that lead (the chemical
element) from the aquaducts slowly poisoned the Romans. Another is the
story of Easter Island.

I can imagine some future historians looking back on .NET as the cause
of the big crash of the 21st century.

Nov 9 '07 #37
Mark McIntyre wrote:
On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 00:52:54 +0100, in comp.lang.c , jacob navia
<ja***@nospam.comwrote:
>C and C#

Why we haven't seen any big application written in C#?

Because you're not looking in the right place. In London, New York,
Frankfurt, Tokyo, Madrid and even Paris you'll find a lot of 'em,
churning billions of dollars through each day. At high speed.
>The whole concept of C# (the virtual machine stuff) provokes a
performance hit of a factor of TEN at least.

Apparently you've zero experience of real-world virtual machine
environments. Look up Azul sometime. Look up z/OS.
It is funny how you throw stuff around, thinking that
it will impress people:

AZUL (http://www.azulsystems.com/products/...processing.htm)

has NOTHING to do with dot net:
<quote>
Applications from heterogeneous hosts running different versions of
Java (1.4 or 1.5) can all tap into Compute Appliances at the same and
support Linux, Solaris, HP-UX and AIX operating systems.
<end quote>
>
>that doesn't matter. But for any serious application C# will take a BIG
time performance hit. The same for Java.

And this would be why these languages are commonplace in, for example,
the forex trading world, where realtime global distribution of price
and trading data is *essential*.
OBVIOUS.

The business world has ALWAYS followed Microsoft since the Microsoft
Disk Operating System times (MSDOS). So what?

They payed for it years and years, and they do the same mistake now,
and they will do it again tomorrow. This is not a reason to do the
same and jump into the "Microsoft language of the day" anytime soon.
--
jacob navia
jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
logiciels/informatique
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32
Nov 9 '07 #38
jacob navia wrote:
Mark McIntyre wrote:
>On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 00:52:54 +0100, in comp.lang.c , jacob navia
<ja***@nospam.comwrote:
>>C and C#

Why we haven't seen any big application written in C#?
<snip>
>And this would be why these languages are commonplace in, for example,
the forex trading world, where realtime global distribution of price
and trading data is *essential*.

OBVIOUS.

The business world has ALWAYS followed Microsoft since the Microsoft
Disk Operating System times (MSDOS). So what?
So in one message you say C# is dead, and in another you say it has the
support of the business world? What, praytell, do you mean by the
statement "C# is dead" then?

If you feel that the language is flawed, then good for you. You may even
be right. But so long as a language has business support, it will not be
dead. (This is the reason COBOL is still, to some extent, alive.)

--
Philip Potter pgp <atdoc.ic.ac.uk
Nov 9 '07 #39
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 17:31:33 +0100, in comp.lang.c , jacob navia
<ja***@nospam.comwrote:
>Mark McIntyre wrote:
>On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 00:52:54 +0100, in comp.lang.c , jacob navia
<ja***@nospam.comwrote:
>>Why we haven't seen any big application written in C#?

Because you're not looking in the right place. In London, New York,
Frankfurt, Tokyo, Madrid and even Paris you'll find a lot of 'em,
churning billions of dollars through each day. At high speed.
I notice you ignored this part.
>>The whole concept of C# (the virtual machine stuff) provokes a
performance hit of a factor of TEN at least.

Apparently you've zero experience of real-world virtual machine
environments. Look up Azul sometime. Look up z/OS.

It is funny how you throw stuff around, thinking that
it will impress people:
Shrug. I was just thinking that its funny how you throw stuff around
without thinking *at all*.
>AZUL (http://www.azulsystems.com/products/...processing.htm)

has NOTHING to do with dot net:
Its a hardware java virtual environment. You were wittering on about
virtual machine environments as if they were inevitably slow.
><quote>
Applications from heterogeneous hosts running different versions of
Java (1.4 or 1.5) can all tap into Compute Appliances at the same and
support Linux, Solaris, HP-UX and AIX operating systems.
<end quote>
Thanks - I just spent about £400K on an Azul environment to run an
industry-standard securities trading system written in Java, I _think_
I know what Azul does.
>The business world has ALWAYS followed Microsoft since the Microsoft
Disk Operating System times (MSDOS). So what?
You have *absolutely no clue at all*.

Large chunks of the financial markets ran on VMS till less than a
decade ago. Today, Solaris and other big-iron unices are fighting for
server space with Linux grids and Windows blades.
--
Mark McIntyre

"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it."
--Brian Kernighan
Nov 10 '07 #40

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

Similar topics

7
by: Jonathan N. Little | last post by:
When doing a final check on my stylesheets the CSS Validator flag lines like this one as an error: ADDRESS A { color: gold; } Error is: # Line: 31 Context : ADDRESS A Invalid number :...
1
by: Lex | last post by:
I have a c# app that has a OwnerDrawn menu items. Is there and easy way to use DrawString to draw the underline under the mnemonic character? BTW - I figured out how to detected if we should...
162
by: techievasant | last post by:
hello everyone, Iam vasant from India.. I have a test+interview on C /C++ in the coming month so plz help me by giving some resources of FAQS, interview questions, tracky questions, multiple...
3
by: Grant | last post by:
Gday, My form has a text box and a label. The label is next to the textbox and has a mnemonic set for the first letter. My question is how to highlight the textbox when the user selects the...
0
by: Valerie Hough | last post by:
I have derived a class from MenuItem so that I can associate IDs of my choosing with each item (a la C++). I have created a ContextMenu in the constructor of an owner draw list box and added a...
3
by: Donal Kelly | last post by:
hi, I'm building a GUI in C# and I want the buttons to have a mnemonic character attached to the button. I cannot seem to do this in C#, where it was very simple to do in Visual C++. Thanks,...
0
by: Raith | last post by:
I have a form with various mnemonic (accellerator) keys set up, they all work fine except the password box ("&Password"). Is this perhaps because that's a default for Print? Is there a way to get...
60
by: aarklon | last post by:
Hi all, Is there any mnemonic for remembering C precedence rules???? I have just coined the word TUBSREBLCAC where T --- top level operators U ---- unary operators B ----- binary...
1
isladogs
by: isladogs | last post by:
The next Access Europe meeting will be on Wednesday 6 Mar 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC) and finishing at about 19:15 (7.15PM). In this month's session, we are pleased to welcome back...
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: jfyes | last post by:
As a hardware engineer, after seeing that CEIWEI recently released a new tool for Modbus RTU Over TCP/UDP filtering and monitoring, I actively went to its official website to take a look. It turned...
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: PapaRatzi | last post by:
Hello, I am teaching myself MS Access forms design and Visual Basic. I've created a table to capture a list of Top 30 singles and forms to capture new entries. The final step is a form (unbound)...
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
by: Faith0G | last post by:
I am starting a new it consulting business and it's been a while since I setup a new website. Is wordpress still the best web based software for hosting a 5 page website? The webpages will be...

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.