Sujet : Re: Endless complaints [was Re: do { quit; } else { }]
De : Keith.S.Thompson+u (at) *nospam* gmail.com (Keith Thompson)
Groupes : comp.lang.cDate : 11. Apr 2025, 01:41:35
Autres entêtes
Organisation : None to speak of
Message-ID : <874iyv4ji8.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
User-Agent : Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
bart <
bc@freeuk.com> writes:
On 10/04/2025 23:18, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
[...]
*If* you're really interested in the topic, and since all the other
posters obviously gave up to continue explaining their sight to you,
why don't you accept that suggestion and read the standard document
to have clarity about the topic? [FYI; this was a rhetoric question.]
>
I've read the document, or the relevant section. According to that, DB
was wrong, and TR was half-right.
Great. So you've actually read the part of the standard that discusses
type compatibility. I trust we'll hear no complaints from you about
being asked to read the standard, or at least that specific parts of it.
Next time, perhaps you can just read the standard in the first place
rather than whining about being asked to do so.
I'll assume for now that your conclusion is basically correct,
though I don't know what you mean when you say that TR was
"half-right". As I recall, they disagreed on whether two certain
types were compatible. I don't see how any conclusion is possible
other than that one of them was right and the other was wrong.
Unless they were looking at different pairs of types, but I don't
care enough to look into that possibility.
Neither of them is willing to back down, while no one else is willing
to back me up: KT will not say anything against his mates,
What are you talking about? I've said that one of them was wrong
(and literally nobody has said that they're both right; you made
that up). I don't know what more you expect from me. I'm unwilling
to dig through this thread to determine exactly what types, in what
context, they disagree about, and then decide for myself which of
them was right, because I just don't care enough about it.
[snip]
Someone made a statement about type compatibility. Someone else
disagreed with that statement. The way to resolve the question is to
consult the standard and see what its rules say about the two types.
You have now done so. Why are you still talking about this?
-- Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.comvoid Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
do { quit; } else { }
Re: do { quit; } else { }