C

[mervete...@gmail.com]

1. Design an algorithm to print hello world to the screen.
a. Write pseudo code of your solution first. (10 pts)
b. Write the c code for your solution. (20 pts)
2. Design an algorithm that takes an integer value from the user and notifies the user either this number is even or odd.
a. Write pseudo code of your solution first. (20 pts)
b. Write the c code for your solution. (20 pts)
3. (30pts) Write the c code of the algorithm given in the slide 18 of 03.ppt.

[Richard Heathfield]

I claim 100 points for the following solutions:

1a. Print hello world to the screen.
1b.
#include <stdlib.h>
int main(void){system("echo hello world");return 0;}
2a. take integer value from the user
notify user either this number is even or odd
1b.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
int main(void){
getchar();system("echo this number is even or odd");
return 0;}
3.
$ cat "the slide 18 of 03.ppt"
Print hello world to the screen.
$ cat printhw.c
#include <stdlib.h>
int main(void){system("echo hello world");return 0;}

--
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within

[Sjouke Burry]

Go take a hike:1000 points.

[Keith Thompson]

Send me a copy of slide 18 and I'll be glad to do this for you.
I'll need your instructor's e-mail address. I'll also need your
name to be sure you get proper credit for my work.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks...@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

[Gareth Owen]

Richard Heathfield <r...@cpax.org.uk> writes:

> 1a. Print hello world to the screen.
> 1b.
> #include <stdlib.h>
> int main(void){system("echo hello world");return 0;}

Richard Heathfield posting an answer that is non-portable,
implementation defined code??!?!?

Truly, this must have been an utterly idiotic question.

[Osmium]

<mervete...@gmail.com> wrote:

> 1. Design an algorithm to print hello world to the screen.
> a. Write pseudo code of your solution first. (10 pts)

I really don't like that course. Those two are pointless to the point that
they are harmful. Neither of those approach the threshold where it makes
sense to do them. You might devise an algorithm to make a sandwich, it
doesn't make sense to most people to devise an algorithm to eat a piece of
sliced bread. If the course is about masticating, OK, but not if it is how
to be a cook.

It's as though rules were given to automaton to devise lesson plans - and it
followed the rules slavishly. Slavish is what automatons DO. .

[Richard Heathfield]

On 16/03/16 19:23, Gareth Owen wrote:
> Richard Heathfield <r...@cpax.org.uk> writes:
>
>> 1a. Print hello world to the screen.
>> 1b.
>> #include <stdlib.h>
>> int main(void){system("echo hello world");return 0;}
>
> Richard Heathfield posting an answer that is non-portable,
> implementation defined code??!?!?

You think that's bad? I nearly did this:

int main(void)
{
unsigned char *p = (unsigned char *)0xb8000000UL;
const char *s = "hello world";
while(*s)
{
*p++ = *s++;
*p++ = 0x46;
}
return 0;
}

and it's actually a better answer, because it really does write to the
screen, even if you try to redirect it.

[Rick C. Hodgin]

Richard Heathfield wrote:
> and it's actually a better answer, because it really does write
> to the screen, even if you try to redirect it.

No it doesn't. It will fail in all cases except real-mode code running
under strict BIOS defaults, or V86 mode running similarly.

Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin

[Malcolm McLean]

Exactly.

C has a built-in function to print messages to the screen.
Now to actually write that function, based on fundamentals
like the screen character memory map, is quite challenging,
something for the end of C 101, and it would make sense
to plot out the pseudo code.

But everyone learns printf() first thing, before they really
understand what it is doing, because you need it to get
the results of other, simpler, user-written routines.

It does make sense to write "hello world" first thing, to test
that your C compiler is set up correctly, and you can compose,
compile, run, read the output of, and edit a program. Those
are the very basics and quite often there's some glitch which
needs sorting before you can do anything at all.

[Randy Howard]

With a few specific types of video card only.

--
Randy Howard
(replace the obvious text in the obvious way if you wish to contact me
directly)

[Chad]

Oh wow.

[Gareth Owen]

Randy Howard <rhowa...@EverybodyUsesIt.com> writes:

> On 3/16/16 5:22 PM, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
>> Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>> and it's actually a better answer, because it really does write
>>> to the screen, even if you try to redirect it.
>>
>> No it doesn't. It will fail in all cases except real-mode code running
>> under strict BIOS defaults, or V86 mode running similarly.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Rick C. Hodgin
>>
>
> With a few specific types of video card only.

Of course, if you want to do it in a more portable manner, call INT 10h

#oldschool #itspossiblerichardwasntbeingentirelyserious

[Richard Heathfield]

In Randy's defence, I think it's entirely possible that his reply was a
somewhat ironic follow-up to the original objection, a sort of sarcastic
version of "whoosh". Randy is not a stupid man.

[Rick C. Hodgin]

Richard Heathfield wrote:
> In Randy's defence, I think it's entirely possible that his reply was
> a somewhat ironic follow-up to the original objection, a sort of
> sarcastic version of "whoosh". Randy is not a stupid man.

The original poster's post is obviously a homework assignment,
but that does not give you the right to pick up a stick and start
beating them over the head by poking fun at them.

It was rude, mean, and you owe that person an apology.

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <8b9fe638-55aa-4ddf...@googlegroups.com>,

This is rich, coming from you.

Given that you're the biggest stick-swinger in this group.

--
Just for a change of pace, this sig is *not* an obscure reference to
comp.lang.c...

[fir]

thomson is more primitive - once ago he accustomed some fellow of the homework and wanted to 'snith' (as in brooklyn say? i dont slike this word) as he was 12-year old glass-wearing bully at school, - it fits to his general scheme of being group insulter
and self imaginable bully-chef of this group

im making fun ofc im not so lowmind to treat this simpletonic
bully seriously

[Rick C. Hodgin]

Kenny McCormack wrote:
> This is rich, coming from you.
>
> Given that you're the biggest stick-swinger in this group.

You say that only because you will not accept the free gift of
salvation offeres by Jesus Christ. You refuse to acknowledge
that you are a sinner in need of forgiveness. You are content
to stand boldly before the face of God and scream at the
top of your lungs, "I DON'T NEED YOU! GO AWAY! LET ME
LIVE **MY** LIFE!!!"

You refuse to acknowledge that He gave you life.
You refuse to acknowledge that He made this universe you live in.
You refuse to acknowledge that He loves you, and is extending
to you a free "Get Out Of Hell" card, choosing instead to get
a good running start and dive headlong into the fiery flames of
torment from which you will never return.

You refuse to see the truth, so you are wholly content to believe
the lie, and it will cost you everything forever. Your voice will
never be heard again. Your name will never be remembered. The
path you've chosen will not serve you well, and you will writhe in
utter torment forever ... unless you repent.

You are at that place, Kenny. So of course you will call up down,
and right wrong, and wrong right, and proper guidance improper
guidance. You won't see the truth so you spew forth from your
own condemnation vile, blackness of the foulest odor and appearance.

So many people do not realize the state they're in. There is no
hope on the course you've set. There is no bright future just
up ahead. There is no future at all. You are dead men walking,
and you will perish eternally unless you repent. You will be utterly
and completely cast down forever and ever.

It's time to wake up to reality. The signs of His return are everywhere.
There isn't much time, and when the final trumpet sounds, that's
it.

Don't let it end that way. Take heed of His warning. Receive from
Him the free gift of forgiveness, and Life.

[Arnuld]

> On Wed, 16 Mar 2016 12:02:16 -0700, Keith Thompson wrote:

> Send me a copy of slide 18 and I'll be glad to do this for you. I'll
> need your instructor's e-mail address. I'll also need your name to be
> sure you get proper credit for my work.

First Richard and now you Keith....

you both are as cute as you were 10 years ago when I started :)



--
Arnuld
https://lispmachine.wordpress.com/2012/06/28/c-new-operator/

[Malcolm McLean]

On Thursday, March 17, 2016 at 9:48:39 AM UTC, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> Kenny McCormack wrote:
> > This is rich, coming from you.
> >
> > Given that you're the biggest stick-swinger in this group.
>
> You say that only because you will not accept the free gift of
> salvation offeres by Jesus Christ. You refuse to acknowledge
> that you are a sinner in need of forgiveness.
>

I strongly suspect Kenny is a Catholic atheist.
It's rare for Catholic atheists to deny the doctrine of human
sinfulness.

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <1cadc787-9199-462d...@googlegroups.com>,
Malcolm McLean <malcolm...@btinternet.com> wrote:
...

>I strongly suspect Kenny is a Catholic atheist.

Why do you say that?

>It's rare for Catholic atheists to deny the doctrine of human
>sinfulness.

Why do you say that?

--
"Remember when teachers, public employees, Planned Parenthood, NPR and PBS
crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401Ks, took trillions in
TARP money, spilled oil in the Gulf of Mexico, gave themselves billions in
bonuses, and paid no taxes? Yeah, me neither."

[mark.b...@gmail.com]

Would you care to explain what the point of your post is?

Did you want us to take the test for you?

Did you want a discussion of the quality of the test?

It's hard to see what you were trying to achieve...

[Keith Thompson]

It's not hard to see at all. He wants us to do his homework for him.

[Malcolm McLean]

On Thursday, March 17, 2016 at 4:51:49 PM UTC, Kenny McCormack wrote:
> In article <1cadc787-9199-462d...@googlegroups.com>,
> Malcolm McLean <malcolm...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> ...
> >I strongly suspect Kenny is a Catholic atheist.
>
> Why do you say that?
>

Celtic name, like mine, and general attitude.

>
> >It's rare for Catholic atheists to deny the doctrine of human
> >sinfulness.
>
> Why do you say that?
>

The Protestants rejected the sacrament of confession, whilst still paying
lip service to the doctrine of human sinfulness. So Protestant atheists
tend to take that to its logical conclusion, developing theories like
Marxism which were based on the principle of human perfectibility.
Catholic atheists tend not to do that.

[fir]

W dniu czwartek, 17 marca 2016 13:30:41 UTC+1 użytkownik Arnuld napisał:
> > On Wed, 16 Mar 2016 12:02:16 -0700, Keith Thompson wrote:
>
> > Send me a copy of slide 18 and I'll be glad to do this for you. I'll
> > need your instructor's e-mail address. I'll also need your name to be
> > sure you get proper credit for my work.
>
> First Richard and now you Keith....
>
> you both are as cute as you were 10 years ago when I started :)
>
>
>

add yet DB to that and that will make Rehaketedebeheb aka 'The Weird Trio'

[BartC]

On 17/03/2016 18:05, Malcolm McLean wrote:
> On Thursday, March 17, 2016 at 4:51:49 PM UTC, Kenny McCormack wrote:
>> In article <1cadc787-9199-462d...@googlegroups.com>,
>> Malcolm McLean <malcolm...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> ...
>>> I strongly suspect Kenny is a Catholic atheist.
>>
>> Why do you say that?
>>
> Celtic name, like mine, and general attitude.

I've always thought 'Kenny McCormack' was named after a character from
South Park. But I now see the spelling is a little different.

>>
>>> It's rare for Catholic atheists to deny the doctrine of human
>>> sinfulness.
>>
>> Why do you say that?
>>
> The Protestants rejected the sacrament of confession, whilst still paying
> lip service to the doctrine of human sinfulness. So Protestant atheists
> tend to take that to its logical conclusion, developing theories like
> Marxism which were based on the principle of human perfectibility.
> Catholic atheists tend not to do that.

I'm a Catholic, and an atheist (I guess), and I haven't a clue what
that's all about. (I couldn't even tell you the difference between
Catholics and Protestants. And please don't enlighten me; this is the
wrong group, and I really don't care!)

--
Bartc

[Keith Thompson]

Malcolm McLean <malcolm...@btinternet.com> writes:
[...]

>> In article <1cadc787-9199-462d...@googlegroups.com>,
>> Malcolm McLean <malcolm...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> ...

>> > ... Catholic atheist. ...
>>
[...]

>>
> Celtic name, like mine, and general attitude.
>>
>> >It's rare for Catholic atheists to deny the doctrine of human
>> >sinfulness.
>>

[...]

>>
> The Protestants rejected the sacrament of confession, whilst still paying

[...]

Malcolm, *please*, just stop it.

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <ln7fh1e...@kst-u.example.com>,

Keith "Kiki" Thompson <ks...@mib.org> wrote:
>Malcolm McLean <malcolm...@btinternet.com> writes:
>[...]
>>> In article <1cadc787-9199-462d...@googlegroups.com>,
>>> Malcolm McLean <malcolm...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>> ...
>>> > ... Catholic atheist. ...
>>>
>[...]
>>>
>> Celtic name, like mine, and general attitude.
>>>
>>> >It's rare for Catholic atheists to deny the doctrine of human
>>> >sinfulness.
>>>
>[...]
>>>
>> The Protestants rejected the sacrament of confession, whilst still paying
>[...]
>
>Malcolm, *please*, just stop it.

Wouldn't it be a lot easier on you and on everybody else if you just put
Malcolm in your killfile, as you have so graciously done for me oh those
many years ago?

Quite seriously, isn't that the spirit of Usenet - that each man is
responsible for his own killfile but should not concern himself with what
others are allowed to see?

[fir]

keith is self imaginable boss who is allowed by himself to
insult you and me, killfile us in public, agitate we are
trolls and do other weirdos - you will not change him he
is just Troll Insulter driven by some BASIC..
everybody is happy with that , he arranges primitive sutuations
based by his own insults, but anyway it is stupid but standable
- what can you do (we could contra-agitate in defence ;)
This could at least let me feel like men from the Sherwood woods ;o
im atacked by imaginable nothingham sheriff, we'are (the keith imaginabvble) outlaws xd - and it even seems we must accept this dream-roles to get into his mind (as he enforces it) - inception you seen this movie

[Ken Brody]

On 3/16/2016 6:22 PM, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> and it's actually a better answer, because it really does write
>> to the screen, even if you try to redirect it.
>
> No it doesn't. It will fail in all cases except real-mode code running
> under strict BIOS defaults, or V86 mode running similarly.

His original version already had system-dependent code in it. This just
makes it even more so. :-)

--
Kenneth Brody

[Ken Brody]

On 3/17/2016 2:47 AM, Gareth Owen wrote:
> Randy Howard <rhowa...@EverybodyUsesIt.com> writes:
>
>> On 3/16/16 5:22 PM, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
>>> Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>>> and it's actually a better answer, because it really does write
>>>> to the screen, even if you try to redirect it.
>>>
>>> No it doesn't. It will fail in all cases except real-mode code running
>>> under strict BIOS defaults, or V86 mode running similarly.
>>>

>> With a few specific types of video card only.
>
> Of course, if you want to do it in a more portable manner, call INT 10h
>
> #oldschool #itspossiblerichardwasntbeingentirelyserious

Or "CALL 5".

--
Kenneth Brody

[Ken Brody]

Sorry, but when the OP doesn't even edit this part of the assignment:

> Write the c code of the algorithm given in the slide 18 of 03.ppt.

I have to side on the "he deserved it".

Unless this is Poe's Law in action.

--
Kenneth Brody

[Rick C. Hodgin]

Do you remember this one?

C> debug
-g=c800:5

??

[Randy Howard]

On 3/17/16 2:20 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
> On 17/03/16 06:47, Gareth Owen wrote:
>> Randy Howard <rhowa...@EverybodyUsesIt.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 3/16/16 5:22 PM, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
>>>> Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>>>> and it's actually a better answer, because it really does write
>>>>> to the screen, even if you try to redirect it.
>>>>
>>>> No it doesn't. It will fail in all cases except real-mode code running
>>>> under strict BIOS defaults, or V86 mode running similarly.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Rick C. Hodgin
>>>>
>>>
>>> With a few specific types of video card only.
>>
>> Of course, if you want to do it in a more portable manner, call INT 10h
>>
>> #oldschool #itspossiblerichardwasntbeingentirelyserious
>
> In Randy's defence, I think it's entirely possible that his reply was a
> somewhat ironic follow-up to the original objection, a sort of sarcastic
> version of "whoosh". Randy is not a stupid man.

Awww. I'm all verklempt. (sp?)

I'm mainly wondering how clc turned into a weaker, more feudal version
of IRC in the last few years.

Apart from never-ending homework problem thread, it seems to be mostly
"I'd like to have an argument" from Monty Python. Forgive me if I'm
not taking this *(^$@ seriously enough for some of you at the moment.

[fir]

this group problem is amazingly boring low quality content.. maybe people here are to old so they dont want to learn any thing fresh they just probably prefer to repeat basics to kill the time - where whole realms of fresh knowledge (take for example gpu related things or more advanced apps and ideas topics are waiting (and they are not quite offtopic, becouse if c was born on cpu it does not mean he now dont lives
on gpu too - same with apps, it doesent mean that only basics are ontopic here, some more advanced application coding in c
imo should be also welcome)
but you got what you got

[Malcolm McLean]

On Thursday, March 17, 2016 at 6:23:03 PM UTC, Keith Thompson wrote:
> Malcolm McLean <malcolm...@btinternet.com> writes:
> [...]
> >> In article <1cadc787-9199-462d...@googlegroups.com>,
> >> Malcolm McLean <malcolm...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> >> ...
> >> > ... Catholic atheist. ...
> >>
> [...]
> >>
> > Celtic name, like mine, and general attitude.
> >>
> >> >It's rare for Catholic atheists to deny the doctrine of human
> >> >sinfulness.
> >>
> [...]
> >>
> > The Protestants rejected the sacrament of confession, whilst still paying
> [...]
>
> Malcolm, *please*, just stop it.
>

Sorry.
Sometimes with Kenny I just can't help it.

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <bf95269f-4402-4e2c...@googlegroups.com>,

Malcolm McLean <malcolm...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>On Thursday, March 17, 2016 at 6:23:03 PM UTC, Keith Thompson wrote:
>> Malcolm McLean <malcolm...@btinternet.com> writes:
>> [...]
>> >> In article <1cadc787-9199-462d...@googlegroups.com>,
>> >> Malcolm McLean <malcolm...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> >> ...
>> >> > ... Catholic atheist. ...
>> >>
>> [...]
>> >>
>> > Celtic name, like mine, and general attitude.
>> >>
>> >> >It's rare for Catholic atheists to deny the doctrine of human
>> >> >sinfulness.
>> >>
>> [...]
>> >>
>> > The Protestants rejected the sacrament of confession, whilst still paying
>> [...]
>>
>> Malcolm, *please*, just stop it.
>>
>Sorry.
>Sometimes with Kenny I just can't help it.

No, by all means, continue posting your excellent material.

Seriously, I think you are about the only other person (other than YHN) on
any/all of the newsgroups that I participate in, who doesn't post crap.
You actually post real stuff - the sort of conversation that you could
imagine occurring between friends. Just about everything else that is
posted on Usenet groups is either:

1) Obvious cut-and-paste jobs.
or:
2) Self-aggrandizement, of one form or another. [*]

I wouldn't worry about Keith - as I posted earlier, I'm surprised he hasn't
killfiled you already. In any case, you'll never curry his favor, so I
wouldn't bother trying.

[*] A good test is to take a typical post - on any group of your choosing -
and ask yourself whether that would ever occur between actual, real world
face-to-face, friends. (With a parenthetical of: If it did, would they
still be friends afterwards?)

[fir]

my view of the group not 'touches' a friendahips anyway - but i would like to just get a content that is interesting /
locally unknown / usable - damn 99% of this group is opposite : boring / already known / unusable
and dont say that interesting unknown and usable content is impossible - there are a tons of it in www world - but if it would be bringed here it could be easier to get - groups are potentially good becouse learning on something can go much easier

but here as it is you can read this group 5 years, of 50 years drop dead and dont learn
literally nothing - it os maybe by the oldiees who are already not able to learn
anything (im middle aged but still would like to learn oryginally new content)

sorry for a boring piece of text but
this is how i see it

[fir]

W dniu piątek, 18 marca 2016 11:32:51 UTC+1 użytkownik Kenny McCormack napisał:
>

> 1) Obvious cut-and-paste jobs.

it is not even it - if they could
cut and paste some interesting content from the www they would need previously read it
- but i suspect they are even not able to read it - so they talk 5 years about literally nothing (it strikes me as i had participated 15 years ago in such talks but time goes by how many years are you able talk still the same topics without a drop
of advance?) - where literally TONS of good content sprads the WWW - and if you will read the www instead here you can learn a LOTs

sad is only as i said that the knowledge from www is harder to read and this is imo some kind of waste i must learn it alone instead of discussing it on a usenet (thats what i complain)

[Randy Howard]

On 3/18/16 4:02 AM, fir wrote:

>> Randy Howard <rhowa...@EverybodyUsesIt.com> wrote:
>> I'm mainly wondering how clc turned into a weaker, more feudal version
>> of IRC in the last few years.
>>
>> Apart from never-ending homework problem thread, it seems to be mostly
>> "I'd like to have an argument" from Monty Python. Forgive me if I'm
>> not taking this *(^$@ seriously enough for some of you at the moment.

> this group problem is amazingly boring low quality content..

Well, feel free to add some amazingly exciting high quality content.

Might be difficult though, as done correctly, C is rather unexciting
and just does what you tell it to do.

> maybe people here are to old so they dont want to learn any thing fresh
> they just probably prefer to repeat basics to kill the time - where
> whole realms of fresh knowledge (take for example gpu related things

I seriously doubt the people are too old. If they disagree with you
(or others) it is probably because they think you are wrong,
regardless of their physical age.

Far more likely, a few young larval stage programmers are suffering
from the typical over-the-top dose of Dunning-Kruger so common to
that category, and simply don't understand the advice that is being
given to them by seasoned professional programmers. If you play close
attention, you will notice that more than a few go to exorbitant
lengths to try and help out those that are obviously making an
effort to learn.

> more advanced apps and ideas topics are waiting (and they are not
> quite offtopic, becouse if c was born on cpu it does not mean
> he now dont lives on gpu too - same with apps, it doesent mean
> that only basics are ontopic here, some more advanced application
> coding in c imo should be also welcome) but you got what you got

I'm not quite sure how this morphed into a topicality argument. It
seems like that is your pet peeve, so every thread is a good
opportunity to bring it up again. I admit that I may not fully
understand you, because, if you'll forgive a restating of the obvious,
there is clearly a spoken language barrier involved here.

All that said, I am fairly confident that there are far more
appropriate places to discuss gpu programming. The reason you might
want to find them, is the odds of you finding similarly interested
people to converse there is far greater. Unless you just wish to
preach to the uninterested, that would seem to be the most logical
approach.

Ex: I'm quite interested in music theory and notation myself. It's
obviously possible to write code in C (or a host of other languages)
to do work of that sort. Despite that, I know quite well this is
not the best place, or even an appropriate place to discuss the
details of that work, and other forums populated by people that
*are* interested in the topic are far more likely to yield useful
results.

[Richard Heathfield]

On 18/03/16 15:50, Randy Howard wrote:

<snip>

> Ex: I'm quite interested in music theory and notation myself. It's
> obviously possible to write code in C (or a host of other languages)
> to do work of that sort. Despite that, I know quite well this is
> not the best place, or even an appropriate place to discuss the
> details of that work, and other forums populated by people that
> *are* interested in the topic are far more likely to yield useful
> results.

Likewise, yes it is, no it isn't, and yes, they are. I think.

If you happen to know of any relevant newsgroups, I'd be interested to
hear about them. Failing that, there's always comp.programming...

--
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within

[Keith Thompson]

Please try harder. Do you use a killfile?

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <lnh9g3e...@kst-u.example.com>,

Keith Thompson <ks...@mib.org> wrote:
>Malcolm McLean <malcolm...@btinternet.com> writes:
>> On Thursday, March 17, 2016 at 6:23:03 PM UTC, Keith Thompson wrote:
>[...]
>>> Malcolm, *please*, just stop it.
>>>
>> Sorry.
>> Sometimes with Kenny I just can't help it.
>
>Please try harder. Do you use a killfile?

Physician, heal thyself!

Seriously, why don't you just KF Malcolm and be done with it???

--
"I heard somebody say, 'Where's Nelson Mandela?' Well,
Mandela's dead. Because Saddam killed all the Mandelas."

George W. Bush, on the former South African president who
is still very much alive, Sept. 20, 2007

[Randy Howard]

On 3/18/16 10:53 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
> On 18/03/16 15:50, Randy Howard wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Ex: I'm quite interested in music theory and notation myself. It's

...

> If you happen to know of any relevant newsgroups, I'd be interested to
> hear about them. Failing that, there's always comp.programming...

A few open source projects are of potential interest. Musescore and
Lilypond. I suspect you won't like what is implied by the next bit,
but here goes. Both have active IRC channels (on freenode), where
developers and users actively discuss (remarkably civilly btw) those
things. There is also a music theory group, but it's a mixed bag at
best, mainly college and high school students working on early
composition experiments.

[Richard Heathfield]

On 18/03/16 16:14, Randy Howard wrote:
> On 3/18/16 10:53 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> On 18/03/16 15:50, Randy Howard wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> Ex: I'm quite interested in music theory and notation myself. It's
>
> ...
>
>> If you happen to know of any relevant newsgroups, I'd be interested to
>> hear about them. Failing that, there's always comp.programming...
>
> A few open source projects are of potential interest. Musescore and
> Lilypond.

Yes, I use Lilypond myself. What I'm interested in, though, is... uh...
this is so off-topic I'm uncomfortable discussing it here. Do you
subscribe to comp.programming?

> I suspect you won't like what is implied by the next bit,
> but here goes. Both have active IRC channels

You're right...

> (on freenode)

...and now you're even more right.

[Randy Howard]

On 3/18/16 11:20 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
> Yes, I use Lilypond myself. What I'm interested in, though, is... uh...
> this is so off-topic I'm uncomfortable discussing it here. Do you
> subscribe to comp.programming?

Yes, although it seems incredibly dead of late, or my feed is not
reliable.

>> I suspect you won't like what is implied by the next bit,
>> but here goes. Both have active IRC channels
>
> You're right...
>
>> (on freenode)
>

> ....and now you're even more right.

Fair enough, although, those particular channels don't seem to suffer
from the usual drivel for some reason.

[Richard Heathfield]

On 18/03/16 16:28, Randy Howard wrote:
> On 3/18/16 11:20 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> Yes, I use Lilypond myself. What I'm interested in, though, is... uh...
>> this is so off-topic I'm uncomfortable discussing it here. Do you
>> subscribe to comp.programming?
>
> Yes, although it seems incredibly dead of late, or my feed is not
> reliable.

No, it's pretty dead, so perhaps a topic on music programming will count
as CPR.

I was going to post something in there on the subject right now, but it
wouldn't have said much. I'll try to get back to it early next week, by
which time, who knows? I might even have something worth saying. (Or
not, as the case may be.)

[fir]

W dniu piątek, 18 marca 2016 16:51:12 UTC+1 użytkownik Randy Howard napisał:
> On 3/18/16 4:02 AM, fir wrote:
> >> Randy Howard <rhowa...@EverybodyUsesIt.com> wrote:
> >> I'm mainly wondering how clc turned into a weaker, more feudal version
> >> of IRC in the last few years.
> >>
> >> Apart from never-ending homework problem thread, it seems to be mostly
> >> "I'd like to have an argument" from Monty Python. Forgive me if I'm
> >> not taking this *(^$@ seriously enough for some of you at the moment.
>
> > this group problem is amazingly boring low quality content..
>

yawn, i was just talking on that,

its not only gpu - though i think gpu c is proper here same as cpu c - and the first will be much fresher
its also abo0ut many many interesting topics (mixing c with something other)
c if interesting often appears with a mix of something other as c is to narrow

[fir]

W dniu piątek, 18 marca 2016 17:03:58 UTC+1 użytkownik Kenny McCormack napisał:
> In article <lnh9g3e...@kst-u.example.com>,
> Keith Thompson <ks...@mib.org> wrote:
> >Malcolm McLean <malcolm...@btinternet.com> writes:
> >> On Thursday, March 17, 2016 at 6:23:03 PM UTC, Keith Thompson wrote:
> >[...]
> >>> Malcolm, *please*, just stop it.
> >>>
> >> Sorry.
> >> Sometimes with Kenny I just can't help it.
> >
> >Please try harder. Do you use a killfile?
>
> Physician, heal thyself!
>
> Seriously, why don't you just KF Malcolm and be done with it???
>

becouse he wouldnt controll others

[Osmium]

"fir" wrote:

>this group problem is amazingly boring low quality content.. maybe people
>here are to old so they dont want to learn any thing fresh they just
>probably prefer to repeat basics to kill the time - where whole realms of
>fresh knowledge (take for example gpu related things or more advanced apps
>and ideas topics are waiting (and they are not quite offtopic, becouse if c
>was born on cpu it does not mean he now dont lives
on gpu too - same with apps, it doesent mean that only basics are ontopic
here, some more advanced application coding in c
imo should be also welcome)
but you got what you got

Perhaps you could get someone to set up a blog for you? Then you and your
close personal friends could talk about whatver suits your facy at the
moment.

You might even establish your own language, for a working title think of it
as Klingon 2.0

[fir]

sure, and i belive the level would be much higher - but this has not much related to poor state of this group, which i anyway dont care, so much as you seem mistakenle deduce it - I only said to somebody was not livin in any illusion as to this place

[Malcolm McLean]

On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 3:58:39 PM UTC, Keith Thompson wrote:
> Malcolm McLean <malcolm...@btinternet.com> writes:
> > On Thursday, March 17, 2016 at 6:23:03 PM UTC, Keith Thompson wrote:
> [...]
> >> Malcolm, *please*, just stop it.
> >>
> > Sorry.
> > Sometimes with Kenny I just can't help it.
>
> Please try harder. Do you use a killfile?
>

Obviously I haven't killfiled Kenny or I wouldn't respond to him.

But my view is that killfiles should be kept private. It's not there to antagonise
people or to be used as a weapon, but simply to filter out content that annoys
or upsets, and that could well be a reflection on me rather than the person
killfiled.

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <3afddd86-498a-4fa7...@googlegroups.com>,

Agreed - which is why I never talk about my killfile - other than,
occasionally, to mention someone I select *for*, but never against. In
particular, Kiki has long been on my "select" list, because you can't buy
the kind of insanely amusing stuff he posts.

But Kiki feels otherwise - he has frequently and openly posted about the
people he has killfiled - and I just think he should killfile you, since he
is always complaining about what you post.

--
Mike Huckabee has yet to consciously uncouple from Josh Duggar.

[fir]

we could wait and see if thompson will outlaw mclean,
mclean is talking with outlaws and this is a thing keith
dont like