Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?)

On 04/05/2025 16:43, Richard Heathfield wrote:

On 04/05/2025 13:04, David Brown wrote:

On 04/05/2025 05:03, Tim Rentsch wrote:

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

On 25/03/2025 11:55, Tim Rentsch wrote:

>
<snip>
>
Tim, /please/ stop necroposting.  When a long thread died out over a month ago, it is usually because the participants lost interest, or felt that anything worth saying on the topic had been said,

 ...and all too often anything not worth saying.
 

or perhaps that the conversation had strayed too off topic or become too heated.

 If the resurrection is to make an interesting observation about C, I think I could stand an exception, couldn't you?
 

Yes, that /could/ be a possible reason for the resurrection.  You'd still need to think if it was worth it or not - I'm sure most of us could think of lots of observations about C that we would think of as interesting, but usually not worth posting about.  And if it were really interesting, maybe starting a new thread would make more sense than posting to a dead thread.
However, I saw nothing interesting about C in Tim's post - or anything particularly interesting and new to the thread about linguistics.
Perhaps /you/ thought his reply was worth bringing the thread back to life - I can only speak for myself.

>
Consider drawing the line at one week - I recommend you do not reply to posts older than that unless you have something quite exceptional to share.

 Apparently you could. :-)