Re: do { quit; } else { }

On Tue, 08 Apr 2025 10:59:50 -0700
Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> wrote:

Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:
 

On Mon, 07 Apr 2025 05:45:19 -0700
Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> wrote:
 

Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:
 

On Sun, 06 Apr 2025 07:32:16 -0700
Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> wrote:
 

Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:
 

On Sun, 06 Apr 2025 05:47:47 -0700
Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> wrote:
 

Furthermore, even if there had been a posting that concerns
only a gcc extension and nothing else, and is one I didn't
respond to, that doesn't excuse your action.  It isn't like
this is the first time you have posted something here that
is not about C but only about your fantasy language, and
also not the first time the unsuitability of such postings
has been pointed out.  You're a repeat offender.  So stop
pretending you are being picked on for no reason. 

>
Could you recommend a more appropriate place for Thiago and
others where they can discuss C-like fantasy languages? 

>
The newsgroup comp.lang.misc seems like a natural candidate.
I don't know if comp.lang.misc has an official charter, but at
least to me new features of any widely used programming language
would appear to fall under the umbrella of comp.lang.misc. 

>
My question was not completely abstract.
I did consider starting a discussion about possibility of
inclusion of stackless co-routines into one of the future
editions of C. Naturally, my ideas at this state are extremely
in-concrete, much more so then the post of Thiago Adams that
started this thread. So, if I ever come to it, which by itself is
not very likely, do you think that comp.lang.misc would be better
place than comp.lang.c ? 

>
Before giving an answer I would like to ask some questions.
>
* How much does the (still fuzzy) idea depend on running in a C
  environment?  Is it very specific to C, or might it be applicable
  to other procedural/imperative languages (for example, Pascal)?
>
* How much does the current C language impact what you expect to
  propose?  Which aspects of C need to be taken into consideration
  in forming the proposal, and how strongly do those considerations
  affect the specifics of what would be proposed? 

 
[...]
 
My apologies;  I gave the wrong impression.  I didn't mean I wanted
to see the answers myself.  What I did mean is that the questions
are good for you (or someone else) to ask of themselves

Even more interesting question to ask myself is why I want stackless
coroutines in C to be different from how they were recently added to
C++ and Rust - two languages that are relatively similar to C in their
assumed execution models. Relatively, that is.

to decide
whether comp.lang.c or comp.lang.misc (or possibly some other group)
is a better place for a posting.
 

I took a look at comp.lang.misc.
It does not appear to have much of the life of its own. Nearly all
threads that lasted for more that 5 messages did so due to crossposts
from other groups.

Given that the details seem to be still a bit fuzzy, I tend to think
comp.lang.misc is a better place to start.  But after thinking about
the questions you might decide otherwise.
 

* Assuming you get to a point where you are happy with the details
  of a proposed extension, how likely is it that you would write a
  proposal for the C standard committee, and make the effort needed
  to shepherd it through the process of being accepted for a future
  C standard? 

>
Not likely.  I would have to somehow convince somebody else to do
it. 

 
I see.  Well, good luck with that.  :)

I know that I would need it.