|
 |
On Jan 15, 3:29 am, Flash Gordon <s...@spam.causeway.com> wrote:
> Gareth Owen wrote:
> > gaze...@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) writes:
>
> >> In article <87d41e4i39....@gmail.com>, Gareth Owen <gwo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> Flash Gordon <s...@spam.causeway.com> writes:
>
> >>>>>...
(
1
2
3
... Last Page)
Mark Adler
|
|
222 |
1,009 |
|
|
|
On Jan 18, 6:28 pm, Peter Nilsson <ai...@acay.com.au> wrote:
> Squeamizh <sque...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demun...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > > Joe Wright <joewwri...@comcast.net> writes:
> > > > Phil Carmody wrote:
> > > >> Joe Wright <joewwri...@comcast.net> writes:
> ...
(
1
2
)
happy
|
|
37 |
431 |
|
|
|
Vicent Giner-Bosch wrote:
> I've been searching at this forum and at the Internet for style guides
> for C and/or C++, and I've found this one:
>
> http://www.psgd.org/paul/docs/cstyle/cstyle.htm
>
> Also, I've read some threads about C style matters. I think there is
> really a lot of...
Vicent Giner-Bosch
|
15th December 2010 19:01
by pete 
|
6 |
234 |
|
|
|
lawrence.jones@siemens.com writes:
> In comp.std.c Francis Glassborow <francis.glassborow@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> However the question is whether that value will be 1. I stick with my
>> view that requiring (or even allowing) a read after writing will be a
>> code breaker if i is volatile. I...
(
1
2
3
)
sfuerst
|
|
68 |
646 |
|
|
|
On Jan 18, 7:15 pm, Keith Thompson <ks...@mib.org> wrote:
> Michael Foukarakis <electricde...@gmail.com> writes:
> > On Jan 17, 12:53 am, Richard Heathfield <r...@see.sig.invalid> wrote:
> >> > 2) Why do I not get 96.03 as the wiki promises?
>
> >> C does not define the behaviour of a program...
(
1
2
)
frank
|
|
45 |
436 |
|
|
|
On 18 Jan, 03:55, "lancer6...@yahoo.com" <lancer6...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to know if it is possible to mask multiple bytes at once.
> For example, if I have a char array of 5 elements, and I have a mask
> 0xFF01F7 that I would like to apply on the first 3 elements of the
>...
lancer6238@yahoo.com
|
|
5 |
229 |
|
|
|
In article <4b534a8a$0$17819$426a74cc@news.free.fr>, fgrieu@gmail.com
says...
>
> /*
> Two independent puzzles about the present C program, which
> compiles and produce OK when run (in a hosted environment).
>
> 1) Shorten as much as possible the line following the comment,
> keeping the...
Francois Grieu
|
|
10 |
229 |
|
|
|
On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 18:56:08 -0700, "BGB / cr88192"
<cr88192@hotmail.com> wrote:
>8MB stack is for Linux, but not for Windows, which uses 4MB...
Note that the term "stack" is not even mentioned in the C Standard.
Albert
|
15th December 2010 19:01
by jaysome
|
10 |
229 |
|
|
|
Lew Pitcher wrote:
> On January 18, 2010 15:27, in comp.lang.c, ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de wrote:
>
>> Assuming that a program is in such a desperate situation,
>> that one wants to abort immediatly (for example, no more
>> memory is available), when should one use
>>
>> exit( 99 )
>>
>>...
Stefan Ram
|
15th December 2010 19:01
by frank
|
3 |
234 |
|
|
|
"Niklas Holsti" <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> wrote in message
news:4b54246f$0$3863$4f793bc4@news.tdc.fi...
> Boudewijn Dijkstra wrote:
>> Op Sat, 16 Jan 2010 01:52:21 +0100 schreef Datesfat Chicks
>> <datesfat.chicks@gmail.com>:
>>> This is slightly off-topic, as it involves implementation...
Datesfat Chicks
|
|
5 |
227 |
|
|
|
On 2010-01-18, kaustubh <kaustubh.cool@gmail.com> wrote:
> %hd does the trick. In real world programming, using short might be an
> overkill, but I'm still a student. I took it as an opportunity to
> learn more.
Good attitude, overall. Sooner or later you'll probably need to know
this...
kaustubh
|
15th December 2010 19:01
by Seebs
|
7 |
233 |
|
|
|
On Sun, 17 Jan 2010 10:53:40 -0700, BGB / cr88192 wrote:
>> tl;dr version: some code is so tied to specific hardware that the only way
>> you can run it on anything else involves VHDL/Verilog simulation.
>
> errm, I doubt this...
>
> most full-system emulators fake things at the level of...
BGB / cr88192
|
15th December 2010 19:01
by Nobody
|
19 |
226 |
|
|
|
On 15 Jan, 16:43, dj3va...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca.invalid wrote:
> In article <5de738e1-b64c-470c-a097-4020a2397...@j5g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
> Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nos...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >On 13 Jan, 16:43, dj3va...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca.invalid wrote:
> >> In article...
(
1
2
3
)
karthikbalaguru
|
|
61 |
655 |
|
|
|
"Keith Thompson" <kst-u@mib.org> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:lnpr5aaqb9.fsf@nuthaus.mib.org...
> "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> writes:
>> "Keith Thompson" <kst-u@mib.org> ha scritto nel messaggio
>> news:lnk4vjcoxv.fsf@nuthaus.mib.org...
>>> "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> writes:
>>>> "Keith Thompson"...
Richard Harter
|
15th December 2010 19:01
by io_x
|
16 |
222 |
|
|
|
On 1/17/2010 4:22 PM, Coolm@x wrote:
> Hi all,
> I want to write my own explode (split) function and I need copy string
> char by char. I learn pointers and my knowledge about them isn't so big.
>
> int func(char delimiter, char *expression, char **values) {
> (...)
> //why I can't write...
Coolm@x
|
|
2 |
240 |
|
|
|
On 16 Jan 2010 at 22:35, lawrence.jones@siemens.com wrote:
> Because without some kind of concurrency (whether real or virtual),
> there's no way to tell whether volatile does anything or not.
Looking at the assembly code produced by the compiler usually gives you
a pretty good idea.
(
1
2
)
Francois Grieu
|
|
37 |
436 |
|
|
|
In article <ia34l59f5t5mfu4q5ql330mtgq6b3vk99i@4ax.com>,
Steve Hayes <hayesstw@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 16:28:50 +0000, Tim Streater <timstreater@waitrose.com>
>wrote:
>
>>Well done for spotting what Spinny does all the time!
>
>What cat? What highway?
"Timothy" and I-90...
Kenny McCormack
|
|
4 |
220 |
|
|
|
Mark L Pappin wrote:
> Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> writes:
>
>> Richard Heathfield <rjh@see.sig.invalid> writes:
>>
>>> Nick Keighley wrote:
>>>> On 7 Jan, 20:53, "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_h...@havenone.cmm> wrote:
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>>> A
Kenny McCormack
|
|
21 |
210 |
|
|
|
>> I would like that instead of exitting with an error, division by zero
>> should instead return
>> * INTMAX (for Integer diviosn)
>> * NAN (for FP division)
>>
>> Is there a way to achieve it? (compiler option or a macro)
>>
>> Thanks
>
>The lcc-win compiler can do this, if you buy a...
Gordon Burditt
|
|
0 |
219 |
|
|
|
io_x wrote:
> "Interrupt" <neildavy14@yahoo.co.uk> ha scritto nel messaggio
> news:9486a474-85b7-4b4e-a177-01cc411b367b@h9g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
> Hi folks, I'm trying to teach myself C, I'm finding it pretty hard
> going!! Something's don't make sense- for example I've written a bit
>...
Interrupt
|
15th December 2010 19:01
by osmium
|
14 |
212 |
|
|
|
Nayab wrote:
> Hi Friends,
> I have a program in C which i am compilim in
> Turbo C++ Version 3.0 is giving error
> by saying initgraph and all other graphics related functions are not
> defined.
> I have included graphics.h but still facing problem.
> Can anybody tell...
Nayab
|
|
2 |
205 |
|
|
|
On 13 Jan 2010 at 3:11, Keith Thompson wrote:
> My reading is that void is an identifier (a kind of
> preprocessing-token) in translation phases 3 through 6. In phase 7,
> it's converted from a preprocessing token to a token; at this point,
> it is a keyword and *not* and identifier.
>
>...
(
1
2
3
)
Eric Sosman
|
|
86 |
630 |
|
|
|
In article <hirmao$5e6$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
Beej Jorgensen <beej@beej.us> wrote:
>I would bet it is quicker, since searching for a substring is an easier
>task than parsing XML.
Yes, provided you're sure that the XML file will have exactly that
string. But from an XML point of...
dads
|
|
3 |
817 |
|
|
|
Nobody wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 21:44:27 -0600, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>
>>>> Declaring the function "static" gives the compiler more scope for
>>>> optimisation, as it can determine exhaustively the contexts in which the
>>>> function may be called.
>>> This could allow it to take...
eryer
|
|
11 |
205 |
|
|
|
"deepak" <deepakpjose@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4779b124-24ba-41dd-9434-5fb22e2d6469@14g2000yqp.googlegroups.com...
> Hi,
>
> Could some one tell how signed and unsigned value considered in CPU.
> Will they check most significant bit based on type of variable and
> process
> one way...
deepak
|
|
3 |
197 |
|
|
|
On Jan 15, 10:57 pm, ralt...@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) wrote:
> Keith Thompson <ks...@mib.org> wrote:
> > ralt...@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) writes:
> > > Beej Jorgensen <b...@beej.us> wrote:
> > >> On 01/06/2010 09:17 AM, Francis Glassborow wrote:
> > >> > The problem is with the 'pseudo-random'....
(
1
2
3
... Last Page)
spinoza1111
|
|
766 |
1,008 |
|
|
|
Ram wrote:
> On Jan 15, 8:35 pm, pete <pfil...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>>Ram wrote:
>>
>>>On Jan 15, 6:53 pm, pete <pfil...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>Ram wrote:
>>
>>>>>Hi,
Ram
|
15th December 2010 19:00
by pete
|
6 |
192 |
|
|
|
On Jan 13, 3:13 pm, Keith Thompson <ks...@mib.org> wrote:
> frank <fr...@example.invalid> writes:
>
>
>
> > I've seen now several versions of
> > i = (j / (RAND_MAX + 1.0)) * N;
> > What is happening to 1222567701 / (RAND_MAX + 1.0) * 26?
> > Of what type is (RAND_MAX + 1.0) ?
>
(
1
2
)
frank
|
15th December 2010 19:00
by frank
|
46 |
392 |
|
|
|
On Jan 15, 2:23 am, Richard Heathfield <r...@see.sig.invalid> wrote:
> > I think I ended up on the C side because of the pull from unix.
>
> As in "Oh I do like to be beside the C side"? I knew Unix was
> attractive, but I didn't realise it was tidal.
>
>
I think he just gravitated towards...
io_x
|
|
3 |
191 |
|
|
|
David Brown wrote:
> Nothing stops the compiler from doing this sort of thing in /theory/.
> But /practice/ is a different matter. It is not often that the compiler
> can find out what code (of a size large enough to be called an
> "algorithm") actually does - and it has to be sure that any...
Walter Banks
|
|
0 |
191 |
|
|
|
On 2010-01-15, Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> wrote:
> So, does The Standard forbid any implementation-specific extensions to be
> defined within the standard header files?
It does if they're not in the namespace reserved for implementation
extensions.
-s
--
Copyright 2010, all...
frank
|
15th December 2010 19:00
by Seebs
|
24 |
191 |
|
|
|
Nick Keighley wrote:
> On 14 Jan, 13:37, Richard Heathfield <r...@see.sig.invalid> wrote:
<snip>
>> At this level, the fstack contents are going to be somewhat cryptic -
>> just a function name and some parameter values - but at the application
>> level they could be more informative:...
(
1
2
3
... Last Page)
cuiyouzhi0000@gmail.com
|
|
199 |
813 |
|
|
|
Nick <3-nospam@temporary-address.org.uk> writes:
> Which means, I think, that a function that sometimes returns a value and
> sometimes doesn't is perfectly all right as long as the different
> behaviours match the appropriate calls.
Yes. Well, it's "perfectly all right" in the sense that...
happy
|
|
28 |
206 |
|
|
|
"Paul" <-> writes:
>> As far as the C language goes, there is nothing wrong
>> with it. In terms of program design, it might or
>> might not be a good choice, depending on what the
>> other constraints and requirements are. It's hard
>> to say whether something is a good solution without...
Paul
|
|
5 |
198 |
|
|
|
On 14 Jan, 22:30, Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demun...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:
> Ben Pfaff <b...@cs.stanford.edu> writes:
> > Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demun...@yahoo.co.uk> writes:
>
> >> Ben Pfaff <b...@cs.stanford.edu> writes:
> >>> john <j...@nospam.com> writes:
>
> >>>> I'm trying to sort a...
Ben Pfaff
|
|
5 |
199 |
|
|
|
jacob navia wrote:
> I have started reading
> "Advanced data structures" from Peter Brass.
<snip>
> I find this book excellent. Everything is written in C, it
> is clear, and explains very well the (quite difficult) stuff.
I'm glad you like it. I haven't read it, but you make it sound...
(
1
2
3
... Last Page)
Richard Heathfield
|
15th December 2010 19:00
by Nobody
|
170 |
853 |
|
|
|
In article <hindj8$cle$4@news.xmission.com>,
Kenny McCormack <gazelle@shell.xmission.com> wrote:
>To get an idea of what a psycho Seebsie is, check out spinoza111's
>postings in CLC. They are long, and often very intricate and involved
>(yes, a time investment is required), but he has...
Kenny McCormack
|
|
2 |
198 |
|
|
|
Charlton Wilbur wrote:
>>>>>> "KT" == Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> writes:
>
> KT> Charlton Wilbur <cwilbur@chromatico.net> writes:
>
> >> Posting a possibly correct solution -- I only skimmed it -- that
> >> is more rigorous and thorough than the homework plagiarist likely
> ...
wahid
|
|
27 |
187 |
|
|
|
In article <c248de5e-7eb7-409a-b5e7-39559092db93@j4g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>,
Peter Nilsson <airia@acay.com.au> wrote:
>i...@localhost.claranet.nl (Ike Naar) wrote:
>> 3000 numbers have 2999 differences.
>
>Which is why the OP had the next line...
>
> > #define MAXDIFF 2999
>
>Which...
Albert
|
|
12 |
210 |
|
|
|
Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> writes:
> "Lee Billows" <webmaster@ezProg.com> writes:
>>
>> "Noob" <root@127.0.0.1> ??????:hii8ab$7na$1@speranza.aioe.org...
>>> Keith Thompson wrote:
>>>
>>>> How exactly is that relevent to the Underhanded C Contest?
>>>
>>> Did you miss the underhanded...
Phil Carmody
|
|
9 |
209 |
|
|
|
On 2010-01-01, Francis Glassborow <francis.glassborow@btinternet.com> wrote:
> an interpreter. Clue, Forth is a Threaded Interpreted Language.
That is false. Forth is also a compiled language.
A Forth word can in fact have separately-defined compilation and
interpretation semantics.
A...
(
1
2
3
... Last Page)
dukeofperl@ml1.net
|
|
119 |
814 |
|
|
|
On Jan 14, 8:12 am, happy <hppymit...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hello all, Below is a code snippet in C
>
> #include<stdio.h>
> int main (void)
> {
> static char *s = {“black”, “white”, “yellow”, “violet”};
> char **ptr = {s+3, s+2, s+1, s}, ***p;
> p = ptr;
> **++p;
happy
|
|
1 |
187 |
|
|
Keith Thompson wrote:
....
> Certainly, but I'm not aware that helping students cheat is on topic
> anywhere.
Not even alt.cheat.cheat.cheat? ;-)
wahid
|
|
13 |
103 |
|
|
|
James Dow Allen <jdallen2000@yahoo.com> writes:
> On Jan 13, 12:22 am, Tim Rentsch <t...@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote:
>> James Dow Allen <jdallen2...@yahoo.com> writes:
>> > to avoid 'goto commoncase;' is uninteresting compared
>> > to the goto in
>> > ...
James Dow Allen
|
|
17 |
114 |
|
|
|
Kaz Kylheku <kkylheku@gmail.com> writes:
> On 2010-01-13, Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> Say I wrote:
>>
>> // includes elided
>> int code_to_talk_to_chip_specific_copro(int funcid, ...)
>> {
>> va_list va;
>> uint32_t addr;
>> int ret;
Phil Carmody
|
|
6 |
107 |
|
|
|
On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 22:50:11 -0800 (PST), manu <manumg007@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Im trying to populate structure from csv files. Each csv file is of
> 3MB and there are 24 files in total.A function will populate the
> structure from these files. The same function when called twice,...
manu
|
|
6 |
97 |
|
|
|
On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 21:10:16 -0800, Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org>
wrote:
> John <cuiyouzhi0000@gmail.com> writes:
> > void **arr;
> >
> > arr = (void **) malloc (sizeof(void *) * row + size * row * col);
>
> Casting the result of malloc is unnecessary and can mask errors.
(
1
2
3
)
John
|
|
72 |
293 |
|
|
|
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 16:11:13 -0800 (PST), cerr <ron.eggler@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > > > > > sndlen=strlen(res);
> > > > > > reclen=send(log_sock, res, sndlen, 0);
> > > > > > if (reclen != sndlen) {
> > > > > > if (reclen==-1){
> > > > > > ...
(
1
2
3
)
cerr
|
|
64 |
314 |
|
|
|
On 2010-01-13, Richard Bos <raltbos@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> Dann Corbit <dcorbit@connx.com> wrote:
>
>> 22g2000yqr.googlegroups.com>, bkatt@cfl.rr.com says...
>> > Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Splint is almost totally useless when applied to unannotated C source.
>> >
>> > Yes, but "splint...
kevin
|
|
14 |
109 |
|
|
|
raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) writes:
> Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> wrote:
>> raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) writes:
>> > Francis Glassborow <francis.glassborow@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> >> TonyMc wrote:
>> >> > Nick <3-nospam@temporary-address.org.uk> writes:
>> >> >> 24*60*60 and...
(
1
2
3
... Last Page)
Scott
|
|
93 |
430 |
|
|
|
Richard Bos wrote:
> Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Tom St Denis wrote:
>>> On Jan 7, 12:19 pm, Marco <prenom_no...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> Totally agree - if not written in standard C (unfortunately that still
>>>> means C90 today) then most folks just won't want it
>>>...
(
1
2
3
... Last Page)
m
|
|
113 |
398 |
|
|
|
Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> writes:
> Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:
>
>> Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> writes:
> <snip?
>>> Barry is correct from the point of view of portable code, but an
>>> indeterminate value is always either a valid (but unknown) value of...
Ben Bacarisse
|
|
6 |
108 |
|
|
|
Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> writes:
>
Here's another point of view. There is never undefined behavior
regardless of whether a newline is written or not. Here's
paragraph 2 in 7.19.2 again:
A text stream is an ordered sequence of characters composed into
_lines_, each line...
happy
|
|
22 |
93 |
|
|
|
Kaz Kylheku <kkylheku@gmail.com> writes:
> On 2009-12-30, Johannes Schaub (litb) <schaub-johannes@web.de> wrote:
>> Hello all. What makes these two codes different:
>>
>> union A {
>> int a;
>> float b;
>> };
>>
Johannes Schaub (litb)
|
|
7 |
115 |
|
|
|
Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> writes:
> I have just heard the sad news that Dik Winter died on the 28th of
> December, a couple of months before he was due to retire.
> http://www.cwi.nl/en/2009/1044/Dik-Winter
Very sad to hear of Dik Winter's passing. Thank you Ben
for relaying...
(
1
2
)
Ben Bacarisse
|
|
47 |
203 |
|
|
|
"nicolas.sitbon" <nicolas.sitbon@gmail.com> writes:
> Hi all,
> My question is simple but I can't find the answer in the standard (C99
> TC3).
> is this permitted?
>
> union
> {
> const void * ro;
nicolas.sitbon
|
|
7 |
112 |
|
|
|
Kaz Kylheku <kkylheku@gmail.com> writes:
> On 2009-12-28, Johannes Schaub (litb) <schaub-johannes@web.de> wrote:
>>> When you're dealing with multidimensional arrays, the compiler can
>>> genearate code which assumes that no bounds are violated.
>>>
>>> So for instance if you have some...
Johannes Schaub (litb)
|
|
17 |
115 |
|
|
|
Tim Rentsch wrote:
<snip>
> The Standard seems to allow the possibility that arrays of fixed
> length (and having more than one element) have different
> alignment requirements than arrays with one element (or
> equivalently, than arrays of unknown length). 6.2.5p13 says:
>
> Each...
Alok Singhal
|
|
17 |
113 |
|
|
|
Richard McBeef wrote:
> Richard McBeef wrote:
>> Lowell Gilbert wrote:
>>> Richard McBeef <cho.seung-hui@vt.edu> writes:
>>>
>>>> Yes, I have googled this but have found many
>>>> different sites.
>>>> When you people cite the standard which
>>>> website specifically are you referencing?...
Lowell Gilbert
|
|
3 |
128 |
|
|
|
pete <pfiland@mindspring.com> writes:
> Kenneth Brody wrote:
>> pete wrote:
>>
>>> Beej Jorgensen wrote:
>>>
>>>> o For the value computation of (i,i++,i) to be complete, i++'s side
>>>> effects must be complete.
>>>
(
1
2
3
... Last Page)
amit.codename13@gmail.com
|
|
146 |
438 |
