C\C++
Peter Ammon
site.
http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/pa44/princess/
ObC: The source code is ANSI C, I swear.
-Peter
Jirka Klaue
> Meet C\C++. Feel free to direct people who want help with "C\C++" to my
> site.
Also these people who ask for "C/C++"? ;-)
Jirka
Arthur J. O'Dwyer
No, you'd want to direct them to a "mirror" site. :)
-Arthur
Joona I Palaste
> http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/pa44/princess/
Damn Microsoft to Hell. That disease is spreading further and further.
Already I've seen people (really!) write web URLs in the form:
http:\\some.site.somewhere
even though those URLs would only *work* on brain-damaged Microsoft
browsers.
How soon until greengrocers start writing "apples $1\pound" or
something?
--
/-- Joona Palaste (pal...@cc.helsinki.fi) ---------------------------\
| Kingpriest of "The Flying Lemon Tree" G++ FR FW+ M- #108 D+ ADA N+++|
| http://www.helsinki.fi/~palaste W++ B OP+ |
\----------------------------------------- Finland rules! ------------/
"Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside a dog, it's too dark
to read anyway."
- Groucho Marx
Arthur J. O'Dwyer
On Tue, 1 Apr 2003, Joona I Palaste wrote:
>
> Peter Ammon <pa...@cornell.edu> scribbled the following:
> > Meet C\C++. Feel free to direct people who want help with "C\C++" to my
> > site.
> How soon until greengrocers start writing "apples $1\pound" or
> something?
*Someone* didn't read the site... ;-)
It has nothing to do with C or C++, and is therefore OT on this
newsgroup. His point was that in the improbable case that anyone
ever asks for "C\C++", we can redirect them there. If anyone
remembers his URL. Which nobody will.
-Arthur
Dan Pop
>Already I've seen people (really!) write web URLs in the form:
>http:\\some.site.somewhere
>even though those URLs would only *work* on brain-damaged Microsoft
>browsers.
These days, fewer and fewer people care about the other browsers...
Dan
--
Dan Pop
DESY Zeuthen, RZ group
Email: Dan...@ifh.de
Joona I Palaste
> On Tue, 1 Apr 2003, Joona I Palaste wrote:
>> Peter Ammon <pa...@cornell.edu> scribbled the following:
>> > Meet C\C++. Feel free to direct people who want help with "C\C++" to my
>> > site.
>> How soon until greengrocers start writing "apples $1\pound" or
>> something?
> *Someone* didn't read the site... ;-)
*Someone* didn't understand what I was taking issue with.
> It has nothing to do with C or C++, and is therefore OT on this
> newsgroup. His point was that in the improbable case that anyone
> ever asks for "C\C++", we can redirect them there. If anyone
> remembers his URL. Which nobody will.
I was not complaining about "C/C++" versus "C" or "C++". I was
complaining about "\" versus "/".
--
/-- Joona Palaste (pal...@cc.helsinki.fi) ---------------------------\
| Kingpriest of "The Flying Lemon Tree" G++ FR FW+ M- #108 D+ ADA N+++|
| http://www.helsinki.fi/~palaste W++ B OP+ |
\----------------------------------------- Finland rules! ------------/
"A computer program does what you tell it to do, not what you want it to do."
- Anon
Joona I Palaste
> Arthur J. O'Dwyer <a...@andrew.cmu.edu> scribbled the following:
>> On Tue, 1 Apr 2003, Joona I Palaste wrote:
>>> Peter Ammon <pa...@cornell.edu> scribbled the following:
>>> > Meet C\C++. Feel free to direct people who want help with "C\C++" to my
>>> > site.
>>> How soon until greengrocers start writing "apples $1\pound" or
>>> something?
>> *Someone* didn't read the site... ;-)
> *Someone* didn't understand what I was taking issue with.
>> It has nothing to do with C or C++, and is therefore OT on this
>> newsgroup. His point was that in the improbable case that anyone
>> ever asks for "C\C++", we can redirect them there. If anyone
>> remembers his URL. Which nobody will.
> I was not complaining about "C/C++" versus "C" or "C++". I was
> complaining about "\" versus "/".
OK, *now* I read the site, and I must say that (1) I understand what
the OP was talking about, and (2) that is the most idiotic name for a
language I've seen for quite some time. No wonder it misled me.
--
/-- Joona Palaste (pal...@cc.helsinki.fi) ---------------------------\
| Kingpriest of "The Flying Lemon Tree" G++ FR FW+ M- #108 D+ ADA N+++|
| http://www.helsinki.fi/~palaste W++ B OP+ |
\----------------------------------------- Finland rules! ------------/
"B-but Angus! You're a dragon!"
- Mickey Mouse
Joona I Palaste
> In <b6c7qi$pgv$1...@oravannahka.helsinki.fi> Joona I Palaste <pal...@cc.helsinki.fi> writes:
>>Already I've seen people (really!) write web URLs in the form:
>>http:\\some.site.somewhere
>>even though those URLs would only *work* on brain-damaged Microsoft
>>browsers.
> These days, fewer and fewer people care about the other browsers...
It has reached a point where people are saying people *should* not care
about the other browsers. Sad.
--
/-- Joona Palaste (pal...@cc.helsinki.fi) ---------------------------\
| Kingpriest of "The Flying Lemon Tree" G++ FR FW+ M- #108 D+ ADA N+++|
| http://www.helsinki.fi/~palaste W++ B OP+ |
\----------------------------------------- Finland rules! ------------/
"The truth is out there, man! Way out there!"
- Professor Ashfield
Dan Pop
>Joona I Palaste <pal...@cc.helsinki.fi> scribbled the following:
>> Arthur J. O'Dwyer <a...@andrew.cmu.edu> scribbled the following:
>>> On Tue, 1 Apr 2003, Joona I Palaste wrote:
>>>> Peter Ammon <pa...@cornell.edu> scribbled the following:
>>>> > Meet C\C++. Feel free to direct people who want help with "C\C++" to my
>>>> > site.
>
>>>> How soon until greengrocers start writing "apples $1\pound" or
>>>> something?
>
>>> *Someone* didn't read the site... ;-)
>
>> *Someone* didn't understand what I was taking issue with.
>
>>> It has nothing to do with C or C++, and is therefore OT on this
>>> newsgroup. His point was that in the improbable case that anyone
>>> ever asks for "C\C++", we can redirect them there. If anyone
>>> remembers his URL. Which nobody will.
>
>> I was not complaining about "C/C++" versus "C" or "C++". I was
>> complaining about "\" versus "/".
>
>OK, *now* I read the site, and I must say that (1) I understand what
>the OP was talking about, and (2) that is the most idiotic name for a
>language I've seen for quite some time. No wonder it misled me.
On the contrary, it's a perfectly suitable name for its intended purpose.
Are you humour-impaired or what?
rjh
> Peter Ammon <pa...@cornell.edu> scribbled the following:
>> Meet C\C++. Feel free to direct people who want help with "C\C++" to my
>> site.
>
>> http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/pa44/princess/
>
>> ObC: The source code is ANSI C, I swear.
>
> Damn Microsoft to Hell. That disease is spreading further and further.
Nothing to do with Microsoft.
When Peter started working on his new language, he *did* use the forward
slash in its name; he changed it at my request, since I had already started
work on a language called C/C++, which I had intended to announce here
today, for very similar reasons to Peter. Regrettably, mine wasn't ready in
time, despite my spending far too much time on it recently.
I'm very glad that Peter's new language /is/ ready for today.
Joona - Peter isn't exactly a newbie around here; might it not have been
courteous to give him the benefit of the doubt?
<snip>
--
Richard Heathfield : bin...@eton.powernet.co.uk
"Usenet is a strange place." - Dennis M Ritchie, 29 July 1999.
C FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
K&R answers, C books, etc: http://users.powernet.co.uk/eton
Bertrand Mollinier Toublet
trying to compile it, my compiler complained about the following piece
of code:
struct array {
unsigned capacity;
unsigned count;
const void** contents;
};
void deleteArray(array* a) {
if (a==NULL) arrayError("Attempt to delete NULL array");
free(a->contents);
free(a);
}
The complaint has to do with the free function call, where the compiler
complains that the const qualifiers are different between the actual
parameter and the formal parameter.
Now, my understanding is that const void** contents has type pointer to
pointer to const-qualified void. Given that a type pointer to object is
compatable with a pointer to void (which is expected by free), there
should not be any complaint from the compiler.
Now, I wouldn't dare suggest that a respectable compiler as the one I am
using shall be bugged down, so I'd like someone to explain me how
confused I am...
--
Bertrand Mollinier Toublet
Currently looking for employment in the San Francisco Bay Area
http://bmt-online.dapleasurelounge.com/
Peter Ammon
Joona I Palaste <pal...@cc.helsinki.fi> wrote:
> Joona I Palaste <pal...@cc.helsinki.fi> scribbled the following:
> > Arthur J. O'Dwyer <a...@andrew.cmu.edu> scribbled the following:
> >> On Tue, 1 Apr 2003, Joona I Palaste wrote:
> >>> Peter Ammon <pa...@cornell.edu> scribbled the following:
> >>> > Meet C\C++. Feel free to direct people who want help with "C\C++" to my
> >>> > site.
>
> >>> How soon until greengrocers start writing "apples $1\pound" or
> >>> something?
>
> >> *Someone* didn't read the site... ;-)
>
> > *Someone* didn't understand what I was taking issue with.
>
> >> It has nothing to do with C or C++, and is therefore OT on this
> >> newsgroup. His point was that in the improbable case that anyone
> >> ever asks for "C\C++", we can redirect them there. If anyone
> >> remembers his URL. Which nobody will.
>
> > I was not complaining about "C/C++" versus "C" or "C++". I was
> > complaining about "\" versus "/".
>
> OK, *now* I read the site, and I must say that (1) I understand what
> the OP was talking about, and (2) that is the most idiotic name for a
> language I've seen for quite some time. No wonder it misled me.
Success! :)
-Peter
Jeremy Yallop
> I was having a look at the sworn ANSI C code of Princess, and as I was
> trying to compile it, my compiler complained about the following piece
> of code:
>
> struct array {
> unsigned capacity;
> unsigned count;
> const void** contents;
> };
>
> void deleteArray(array* a) {
> if (a==NULL) arrayError("Attempt to delete NULL array");
> free(a->contents);
> free(a);
> }
>
> The complaint has to do with the free function call, where the compiler
> complains that the const qualifiers are different between the actual
> parameter and the formal parameter.
The code is valid and the complaint is unjustified. Only "direct"
qualifiers of the T are involved when assigning T * to void *. If T
is a derived type, such as pointer to S, then any qualifiers on the
referenced type (S) are irrelevant.
> Now, my understanding is that const void** contents has type pointer to
> pointer to const-qualified void. Given that a type pointer to object is
> compatable with a pointer to void (which is expected by free), there
> should not be any complaint from the compiler.
The argument types in a (prototyped) function call don't have to be
compatible with the parameter types but they do have to be
"assignable".
> Now, I wouldn't dare suggest that a respectable compiler as the one I am
> using shall be bugged down, so I'd like someone to explain me how
> confused I am...
Which compiler is it, out of interest?
Jeremy.
Tak-Shing Chan
> Are you humour-impaired or what?
Dan and humour? Is this for real? :-)
Tak-Shing
Bertrand Mollinier Toublet
> Bertrand Mollinier Toublet wrote:
>
>>I was having a look at the sworn ANSI C code of Princess, and as I was
>>trying to compile it, my compiler complained about the following piece
>>of code:
>>
>>struct array {
>> unsigned capacity;
>> unsigned count;
>> const void** contents;
>>};
>>
>>void deleteArray(array* a) {
>> if (a==NULL) arrayError("Attempt to delete NULL array");
>> free(a->contents);
>> free(a);
>>}
>>
>>The complaint has to do with the free function call, where the compiler
>>complains that the const qualifiers are different between the actual
>>parameter and the formal parameter.
>
>
> The code is valid and the complaint is unjustified. Only "direct"
> qualifiers of the T are involved when assigning T * to void *. If T
> is a derived type, such as pointer to S, then any qualifiers on the
> referenced type (S) are irrelevant.
>
>>Now, I wouldn't dare suggest that a respectable compiler as the one I am
>>using shall be bugged down, so I'd like someone to explain me how
>>confused I am...
>
>
> Which compiler is it, out of interest?
>
That's Microsoft's compiler for Visual C++ 6.0 (with a few service packs
IIRC).
Surprinsigly, I looked through the Microsoft Knowledge base, for e.g. a
bug report about this, and found nothing relevant...