Re: do { quit; } else { }

Liste des GroupesRevenir à l c 
Sujet : Re: do { quit; } else { }
De : bc (at) *nospam* freeuk.com (bart)
Groupes : comp.lang.c
Date : 10. Apr 2025, 00:49:51
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <vt712u$1m84p$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 09/04/2025 23:07, Tim Rentsch wrote:
bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
 
On 09/04/2025 00:27, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>
bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>
If you want to make a point or ask a question about C code,
SHOW THE CODE.  And show all of it.  Don't make people guess
by showing only some of the code or by giving just a description.
>
I'm showing the code but you keep snipping it!  [...]
>
No, I don't.  Don't be so obtuse.  I included the code I was
originally commenting on, in my first followup.  My comment about
showing code was about your second posting.  Let me repeat the two
important paragraphs (quoted above) taken from that posting:
>
I get an incompatible error (from the example you snipped) even when I
remove both struct tags.
>
The phrase "even when I remove both struct tags" describes code, it
doesn't show the code.
>
I showed this example a few lines later [in an earlier posting]
which has both struct tags omitted:
 There is a simple lesson that you need to learn:
Please don't be patronising. We are not kids in your PL class.

When someone is responding to a post, they are responding ONLY to
the content in the posting they are responing to;  not to some
earlier posting in the same thread, not to a different posting
submitted two weeks ago, not to what you meant to say but didn't,
not to thoughts in your head but that you didn't say, but ONLY TO
WHAT IS SAID IN THE POSTING BEING RESPONDED TO.
 If you can learn to follow this simple rule everyone in the
newsgroup will be better off, including you.
I'm not sure what your gripe is other than maybe I picked up on something you got wrong. The discussion was about two struct types like this:
    typedef struct tag1 {...} T1;
    typedef struct tag2 {...} T2;
and whether T1 and T2 were compatible or not. You said:
"and those types are not compatible, because the two struct tags are different."
In this case the tags would be "tag1" and "tag2". I then said:
"I get an incompatible error (from the example you snipped) even when I
remove both struct tags."
That means removing "tag1" and "tag2" so the example above looks like this:
    typedef struct {...} T1;
    typedef struct {...} T2;
Here, you can't say the struct tags are different, as they are not visible! Maybe there are internal ones that differ, but that is not obvious. What /can/ be seen from the source is two distinct types.
But it seems you've lost interest in that, and are berating me for not illustrating what:
    typedef struct tag1 {...} T1;
    typedef struct tag2 {...} T2;
might look like with "both tags removed". I think you also wanted me to illustrate what it might look like when both have the same tag, after I said they would clash in both in same scope. That is, you wanted an example like this:
    typedef struct tag1 {...} T1;
    {typedef struct tag1 {...} T2; ... }
(This one was interesting to me (obviously no longer to you) because the tags are now clearly identical, yet T1/T2 are still incompatible.
As I concluded, your assertion about compatibility being based on tags being the same or not didn't seem right.)

Date Sujet#  Auteur
4 Apr 25 * do { quit; } else { }625Thiago Adams
4 Apr 25 +* Re: do { quit; } else { }2bart
4 Apr 25 i`- Re: do { quit; } else { }1Thiago Adams
4 Apr 25 +* Re: do { quit; } else { }11Kaz Kylheku
4 Apr 25 i+* Re: do { quit; } else { }3Thiago Adams
4 Apr 25 ii`* Re: do { quit; } else { }2Kaz Kylheku
4 Apr 25 ii `- Re: do { quit; } else { }1Chris M. Thomasson
4 Apr 25 i+* Re: do { quit; } else { }4Kaz Kylheku
4 Apr 25 ii+* Re: do { quit; } else { }2Thiago Adams
4 Apr 25 iii`- Re: do { quit; } else { }1Thiago Adams
8 Apr 25 ii`- Re: do { quit; } else { }1candycanearter07
5 Apr 25 i`* Re: do { quit; } else { }3Janis Papanagnou
5 Apr 25 i +- Re: do { quit; } else { }1Janis Papanagnou
6 Apr 25 i `- Re: do { quit; } else { }1Michael S
4 Apr 25 +* Re: do { quit; } else { }608Tim Rentsch
4 Apr 25 i`* Re: do { quit; } else { }607Thiago Adams
6 Apr 25 i +* Re: do { quit; } else { }600Tim Rentsch
6 Apr 25 i i+* Re: do { quit; } else { }550Michael S
6 Apr 25 i ii`* Re: do { quit; } else { }549Tim Rentsch
6 Apr 25 i ii `* Re: do { quit; } else { }548Michael S
7 Apr 25 i ii  `* Re: do { quit; } else { }547Tim Rentsch
7 Apr 25 i ii   `* Re: do { quit; } else { }546Michael S
7 Apr 25 i ii    +* Re: do { quit; } else { }542bart
8 Apr 25 i ii    i`* Re: do { quit; } else { }541David Brown
8 Apr 25 i ii    i `* Re: do { quit; } else { }540bart
8 Apr 25 i ii    i  +* Re: do { quit; } else { }535David Brown
8 Apr 25 i ii    i  i`* Re: do { quit; } else { }534bart
8 Apr 25 i ii    i  i +* Re: do { quit; } else { }78Tim Rentsch
8 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i`* Re: do { quit; } else { }77bart
8 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i +* Re: do { quit; } else { }74Tim Rentsch
8 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i`* Re: do { quit; } else { }73bart
9 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i `* Re: do { quit; } else { }72Tim Rentsch
9 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i  `* Re: do { quit; } else { }71bart
9 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i   +- Re: do { quit; } else { }1Chris M. Thomasson
9 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i   +- Re: do { quit; } else { }1Chris M. Thomasson
9 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i   `* Re: do { quit; } else { }68Tim Rentsch
10 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    +* Re: do { quit; } else { }63bart
10 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    i+* Re: do { quit; } else { }61Kaz Kylheku
10 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii+* Re: do { quit; } else { }2Michael S
10 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    iii`- Re: do { quit; } else { }1Kaz Kylheku
10 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii`* Re: do { quit; } else { }58bart
10 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii +* Re: do { quit; } else { }43Keith Thompson
10 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii i+* Re: do { quit; } else { }39bart
10 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii ii+* Re: Endless complaints [was Re: do { quit; } else { }]16bart
10 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii iii+* Re: Endless complaints [was Re: do { quit; } else { }]14Janis Papanagnou
11 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii iiii`* Re: Endless complaints [was Re: do { quit; } else { }]13bart
11 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii iiii +- Re: Endless complaints [was Re: do { quit; } else { }]1Keith Thompson
11 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii iiii +- Re: Endless complaints [was Re: do { quit; } else { }]1Kaz Kylheku
11 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii iiii `* Re: Endless complaints [was Re: do { quit; } else { }]10David Brown
11 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii iiii  `* Re: Endless complaints [was Re: do { quit; } else { }]9bart
11 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii iiii   +* Re: Endless complaints [was Re: do { quit; } else { }]5Michael S
11 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii iiii   i`* Re: Endless complaints [was Re: do { quit; } else { }]4bart
11 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii iiii   i `* Re: Endless complaints [was Re: do { quit; } else { }]3Michael S
11 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii iiii   i  +- Re: Endless complaints [was Re: do { quit; } else { }]1Janis Papanagnou
11 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii iiii   i  `- Re: Endless complaints [was Re: do { quit; } else { }]1bart
11 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii iiii   +- Re: Endless complaints [was Re: do { quit; } else { }]1David Brown
11 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii iiii   +- Re: Endless complaints1Tim Rentsch
11 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii iiii   `- Re: Endless complaints [was Re: do { quit; } else { }]1Keith Thompson
10 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii iii`- Re: Endless complaints [was Re: do { quit; } else { }]1Keith Thompson
10 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii ii`* Re: do { quit; } else { }22Keith Thompson
11 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii ii `* Re: do { quit; } else { }21bart
11 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii ii  `* Re: do { quit; } else { }20Keith Thompson
11 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii ii   `* Re: do { quit; } else { }19Michael S
11 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii ii    +- Re: do { quit; } else { }1David Brown
11 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii ii    +* Re: do { quit; } else { }16Kaz Kylheku
11 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii ii    i+* Re: do { quit; } else { }2bart
11 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii ii    ii`- Re: do { quit; } else { }1Keith Thompson
13 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii ii    i`* Re: do { quit; } else { }13Michael S
12 May 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii ii    i `* Re: do { quit; } else { }12Tim Rentsch
12 May 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii ii    i  `* Re: do { quit; } else { }11David Brown
12 May 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii ii    i   `* Re: do { quit; } else { }10Keith Thompson
13 May 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii ii    i    `* Re: do { quit; } else { }9David Brown
14 May 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii ii    i     `* Re: do { quit; } else { }8James Kuyper
14 May 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii ii    i      +* Re: do { quit; } else { }6Keith Thompson
14 May 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii ii    i      i+* Re: do { quit; } else { }4James Kuyper
14 May 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii ii    i      ii`* Re: do { quit; } else { }3David Brown
14 May 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii ii    i      ii +- Re: do { quit; } else { }1Kaz Kylheku
15 May 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii ii    i      ii `- Re: do { quit; } else { }1James Kuyper
14 May 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii ii    i      i`- Re: do { quit; } else { }1David Brown
14 May 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii ii    i      `- Re: do { quit; } else { }1Tim Rentsch
11 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii ii    `- Re: do { quit; } else { }1Keith Thompson
6 May 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii i`* Re: do { quit; } else { }3Tim Rentsch
6 May 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii i `* Re: do { quit; } else { }2Keith Thompson
6 May 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii i  `- Re: do { quit; } else { }1Tim Rentsch
10 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii `* Re: do { quit; } else { }14Kaz Kylheku
10 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii  +* Re: do { quit; } else { }11bart
10 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii  i+* Re: do { quit; } else { }2Kaz Kylheku
11 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii  ii`- Re: do { quit; } else { }1bart
11 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii  i+* Re: do { quit; } else { }6Tim Rentsch
11 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii  ii`* Re: do { quit; } else { }5Keith Thompson
11 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii  ii `* Re: do { quit; } else { }4Tim Rentsch
11 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii  ii  `* Re: do { quit; } else { }3Keith Thompson
11 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii  ii   +- Re: do { quit; } else { }1bart
5 May 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii  ii   `- Re: do { quit; } else { }1Tim Rentsch
11 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii  i+- Re: do { quit; } else { }1Keith Thompson
11 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii  i`- Re: do { quit; } else { }1Keith Thompson
10 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii  +- Re: do { quit; } else { }1bart
10 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    ii  `- Re: do { quit; } else { }1Kaz Kylheku
11 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i i    i`- Re: do { quit; } else { }1Tim Rentsch
9 May 25 i ii    i  i i i    `* Re: do { quit; } else { }4Bonita Montero
9 May 25 i ii    i  i i i     `* Re: do { quit; } else { }3Richard Heathfield
9 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i +- Re: do { quit; } else { }1Richard Damon
9 Apr 25 i ii    i  i i `- Re: do { quit; } else { }1David Brown
9 Apr 25 i ii    i  i `* Re: do { quit; } else { }455David Brown
8 Apr 25 i ii    i  +- Re: do { quit; } else { }1Tim Rentsch
9 Apr 25 i ii    i  `* Re: do { quit; } else { }3Ike Naar
8 Apr 25 i ii    `* Re: do { quit; } else { }3Tim Rentsch
6 Apr 25 i i`* Re: do { quit; } else { }49Michael S
7 May 25 i `* Re: do { quit; } else { }6Wuns Haerst
6 Apr 25 +- Re: do { quit; } else { }1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
6 Apr 25 +- Re: do { quit; } else { }1David Brown
18 Apr 25 `- Re: do { quit; } else { }1Mikko

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal