comp.lang.c

Liste des Groupes Pages :12345678910111213141516171819202122232425
Date Sujet#  Auteur
4 Nov 24    i  +* Re: else ladders practice5fir
4 Nov 24    i  i+* Re: else ladders practice3fir
4 Nov 24    i  ii`* Re: else ladders practice2Bart
4 Nov 24    i  ii `- Re: else ladders practice1fir
4 Nov 24    i  i`- Re: else ladders practice1fir
5 Nov 24    i  `- Re: else ladders practice1Tim Rentsch
4 Nov 24    `* Re: else ladders practice2Janis Papanagnou
5 Nov 24     `- Re: else ladders practice1Tim Rentsch
28 Nov 24 * what you can do with bitfields5fir
29 Nov 24 `* Re: what you can do with bitfields4Lawrence D'Oliveiro
30 Nov 24  `* Re: what you can do with bitfields3fir
30 Nov 24   `* Re: what you can do with bitfields2BGB
1 Dec 24    `- Re: what you can do with bitfields1fir
30 Nov 24 o Why we don't have suffix for char, short ?1Thiago Adams
24 Nov 24 * 80386 C compiler36Paul Edwards
24 Nov 24 +* Re: 80386 C compiler6fir
24 Nov 24 i+* Re: 80386 C compiler2fir
25 Nov 24 ii`- Re: 80386 C compiler1Paul Edwards
24 Nov 24 i`* Re: 80386 C compiler3Bart
25 Nov 24 i `* Re: 80386 C compiler2BGB
25 Nov 24 i  `- Re: 80386 C compiler1Paul Edwards
24 Nov 24 +* Re: 80386 C compiler24Janis Papanagnou
25 Nov 24 i`* Re: 80386 C compiler23Paul Edwards
25 Nov 24 i `* Re: 80386 C compiler22Kaz Kylheku
25 Nov 24 i  +* Re: 80386 C compiler20Rosario19
26 Nov 24 i  i`* Re: 80386 C compiler19Kaz Kylheku
26 Nov 24 i  i +* Re: 80386 C compiler7Keith Thompson
26 Nov 24 i  i i+* Re: 80386 C compiler5Paul Edwards
27 Nov 24 i  i ii`* Re: 80386 C compiler4Keith Thompson
27 Nov 24 i  i ii `* Re: 80386 C compiler3Paul Edwards
27 Nov 24 i  i ii  `* Re: 80386 C compiler2Keith Thompson
27 Nov 24 i  i ii   `- Re: 80386 C compiler1Paul Edwards
28 Nov 24 i  i i`- Re: 80386 C compiler1Tim Rentsch
27 Nov 24 i  i +* Re: 80386 C compiler9David Brown
27 Nov 24 i  i i`* Re: 80386 C compiler8Kaz Kylheku
27 Nov 24 i  i i +* Re: 80386 C compiler6James Kuyper
27 Nov 24 i  i i i`* Re: 80386 C compiler5Kaz Kylheku
28 Nov 24 i  i i i `* Re: 80386 C compiler4James Kuyper
30 Nov 24 i  i i i  `* Re: 80386 C compiler3Kaz Kylheku
30 Nov 24 i  i i i   +- Re: 80386 C compiler1Tim Rentsch
30 Nov 24 i  i i i   `- Re: 80386 C compiler1James Kuyper
28 Nov 24 i  i i `- Re: 80386 C compiler1David Brown
28 Nov 24 i  i +- Re: 80386 C compiler1Tim Rentsch
30 Nov 24 i  i `- Re: 80386 C compiler1Rosario19
26 Nov 24 i  `- Re: 80386 C compiler1Paul Edwards
25 Nov 24 `* Re: 80386 C compiler5Lynn McGuire
26 Nov 24  `* Re: 80386 C compiler4Keith Thompson
26 Nov 24   `* Re: 80386 C compiler3Lynn McGuire
26 Nov 24    `* Re: 80386 C compiler2Keith Thompson
26 Nov 24     `- Re: 80386 C compiler1BGB
22 Nov 24 * what inline means?3Thiago Adams
24 Nov 24 `* Re: what inline means?2fir
25 Nov 24  `- Re: what inline means?1Thiago Adams
6 Nov 24 * on named blocks concept31fir
6 Nov 24 `* Re: on named blocks concept30Thiago Adams
6 Nov 24  `* Re: on named blocks concept29Thiago Adams
6 Nov 24   +- Re: on named blocks concept1fir
6 Nov 24   `* Re: on named blocks concept27fir
6 Nov 24    +* Re: on named blocks concept5Thiago Adams
6 Nov 24    i`* Re: on named blocks concept4fir
6 Nov 24    i `* Re: on named blocks concept3Bart
7 Nov 24    i  `* Re: on named blocks concept2fir
7 Nov 24    i   `- Re: on named blocks concept1fir
7 Nov 24    `* Re: on named blocks concept21Bonita Montero
7 Nov 24     `* Re: on named blocks concept20fir
7 Nov 24      +* Re: on named blocks concept18Bonita Montero
7 Nov 24      i`* Re: on named blocks concept17fir
7 Nov 24      i `* Re: on named blocks concept16Bonita Montero
7 Nov 24      i  `* Re: on named blocks concept15fir
7 Nov 24      i   +- Re: on named blocks concept1fir
7 Nov 24      i   `* Re: on named blocks concept13Bonita Montero
7 Nov 24      i    +* Re: on named blocks concept10fir
7 Nov 24      i    i`* Re: on named blocks concept9Bonita Montero
7 Nov 24      i    i `* Re: on named blocks concept8fir
8 Nov 24      i    i  `* Re: on named blocks concept7Bonita Montero
8 Nov 24      i    i   `* Re: on named blocks concept6fir
8 Nov 24      i    i    `* Re: on named blocks concept5Bonita Montero
8 Nov 24      i    i     `* Re: on named blocks concept4fir
8 Nov 24      i    i      `* Re: on named blocks concept3Bonita Montero
9 Nov 24      i    i       `* Re: on named blocks concept2fir
9 Nov 24      i    i        `- Re: on named blocks concept1Bonita Montero
10 Nov 24      i    `* Re: on named blocks concept2Janis Papanagnou
13 Nov 24      i     `- Re: on named blocks concept1fir
7 Nov 24      `- Re: on named blocks concept1fir
12 Nov 24 * [prog. in c] how to make stable paricles4fir
12 Nov 24 +- Re: [prog. in c] how to make stable paricles1fir
12 Nov 24 +- Re: [prog. in c] how to make stable paricles1fir
12 Nov 24 `- Re: [prog. in c] how to make stable paricles1fir
7 Nov 24 * clang and gcc are not converging on constexpr3Thiago Adams
8 Nov 24 `* Re: clang and gcc are not converging on constexpr2Thiago Adams
11 Nov 24  `- Re: clang and gcc are not converging on constexpr1Opus
11 Oct 24 * constexpr keyword is unnecessary106Thiago Adams
11 Oct 24 +* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary25Bonita Montero
11 Oct 24 i`* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary24Thiago Adams
11 Oct 24 i `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary23Bonita Montero
11 Oct 24 i  `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary22Thiago Adams
12 Oct 24 i   +* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary16Bonita Montero
12 Oct 24 i   i`* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary15Thiago Adams
12 Oct 24 i   i `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary14Bonita Montero
12 Oct 24 i   i  `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary13Thiago Adams
13 Oct 24 i   i   `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary12Bonita Montero
13 Oct 24 i   i    +* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary2Thiago Adams
13 Oct 24 i   i    i`- Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary1Bonita Montero
15 Oct 24 i   i    `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary9DFS
15 Oct 24 i   i     `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary8Bonita Montero
15 Oct 24 i   i      `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary7Bart
15 Oct 24 i   i       +* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary3Thiago Adams
15 Oct 24 i   i       i+- Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary1Bonita Montero
16 Oct 24 i   i       i`- Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary1Janis Papanagnou
15 Oct 24 i   i       `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary3Kaz Kylheku
16 Oct 24 i   i        +- Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary1Bonita Montero
16 Oct 24 i   i        `- Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary1Janis Papanagnou
13 Oct 24 i   `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary5Kaz Kylheku
13 Oct 24 i    `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary4Thiago Adams
13 Oct 24 i     +- Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary1Bonita Montero
13 Oct 24 i     `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary2Kaz Kylheku
13 Oct 24 i      `- Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary1Thiago Adams
12 Oct 24 +* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary21Bart
12 Oct 24 i`* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary20Thiago Adams
13 Oct 24 i `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary19Bart
13 Oct 24 i  `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary18Thiago Adams
13 Oct 24 i   `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary17Bonita Montero
13 Oct 24 i    `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary16Thiago Adams
13 Oct 24 i     +* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary11Bonita Montero
13 Oct 24 i     i`* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary10Thiago Adams
13 Oct 24 i     i `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary9Bonita Montero
13 Oct 24 i     i  `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary8Janis Papanagnou
13 Oct 24 i     i   `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary7Bonita Montero
13 Oct 24 i     i    `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary6Janis Papanagnou
13 Oct 24 i     i     `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary5Bonita Montero
13 Oct 24 i     i      +* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary2Thiago Adams
13 Oct 24 i     i      i`- Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary1Bonita Montero
13 Oct 24 i     i      `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary2Janis Papanagnou
13 Oct 24 i     i       `- Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary1Bonita Montero
13 Oct 24 i     `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary4Michael S
13 Oct 24 i      `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary3Thiago Adams
13 Oct 24 i       `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary2Michael S
13 Oct 24 i        `- Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary1Thiago Adams
19 Oct 24 `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary59Keith Thompson
19 Oct 24  +- Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary1Bonita Montero
19 Oct 24  `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary57Thiago Adams
19 Oct 24   +* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary53David Brown
19 Oct 24   i+* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary9Bart
20 Oct 24   ii`* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary8David Brown
20 Oct 24   ii `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary7Keith Thompson
21 Oct 24   ii  +- Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary1Opus
21 Oct 24   ii  `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary5David Brown
21 Oct 24   ii   `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary4Keith Thompson
21 Oct 24   ii    `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary3Chris M. Thomasson
22 Oct 24   ii     `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary2Kaz Kylheku
22 Oct 24   ii      `- Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary1Chris M. Thomasson
19 Oct 24   i+* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary40Thiago Adams
19 Oct 24   ii+* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary36Keith Thompson
20 Oct 24   iii+* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary33Thiago Adams
20 Oct 24   iiii`* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary32Keith Thompson
20 Oct 24   iiii +- Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary1Michael S
20 Oct 24   iiii `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary30Thiago Adams
22 Oct 24   iiii  `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary29Bonita Montero
22 Oct 24   iiii   `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary28Thiago Adams
26 Oct 24   iiii    `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary27Vir Campestris
26 Oct 24   iiii     +* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary24James Kuyper
26 Oct 24   iiii     i+* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary6Janis Papanagnou
27 Oct 24   iiii     ii`* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary5Tim Rentsch
4 Nov 24   iiii     ii `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary4Tim Rentsch
4 Nov 24   iiii     ii  `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary3Lowell Gilbert
4 Nov 24   iiii     ii   +- Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary1Kaz Kylheku
7 Nov 24   iiii     ii   `- Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary1Tim Rentsch
27 Oct 24   iiii     i+* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary2Tim Rentsch
27 Oct 24   iiii     ii`- Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary1David Brown
27 Oct 24   iiii     i+- Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary1David Brown
28 Oct 24   iiii     i`* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary14Kaz Kylheku
28 Oct 24   iiii     i `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary13Thiago Adams
29 Oct 24   iiii     i  +* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary10Kaz Kylheku
29 Oct 24   iiii     i  i+* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary8Thiago Adams
29 Oct 24   iiii     i  ii+* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary5Thiago Adams
29 Oct 24   iiii     i  iii`* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary4David Brown
29 Oct 24   iiii     i  iii +* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary2Thiago Adams
29 Oct 24   iiii     i  iii i`- Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary1David Brown
30 Oct 24   iiii     i  iii `- Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary1Janis Papanagnou
29 Oct 24   iiii     i  ii`* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary2Kaz Kylheku
5 Nov 24   iiii     i  ii `- Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary1Tim Rentsch
5 Nov 24   iiii     i  i`- Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary1Tim Rentsch
29 Oct 24   iiii     i  `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary2Richard Harnden
29 Oct 24   iiii     i   `- Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary1Thiago Adams
27 Oct 24   iiii     `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary2Tim Rentsch
27 Oct 24   iiii      `- Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary1David Brown
20 Oct 24   iii`* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary2Thiago Adams
20 Oct 24   iii `- Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary1Bonita Montero
20 Oct 24   ii`* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary3David Brown
20 Oct 24   ii `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary2Bart
20 Oct 24   ii  `- Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary1David Brown
19 Oct 24   i`* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary3Keith Thompson
20 Oct 24   i +- Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary1Thiago Adams
20 Oct 24   i `- Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary1David Brown
19 Oct 24   `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary3Michael S
19 Oct 24    `* Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary2Thiago Adams
19 Oct 24     `- Re: constexpr keyword is unnecessary1Keith Thompson
29 Oct 24 * [pc] new image codec idea considerations4fir
29 Oct 24 +* Re: [pc] new image codec idea considerations2fir
29 Oct 24 i`- Re: [pc] new image codec idea considerations1fir
4 Nov 24 `- Re: [pc] new image codec idea considerations1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
3 Nov 24 o [ANN] (preview) “libmsgque” is the connection between "C" and the “Programming Language Micro-Kernel” (PLMK).1aotto1968
30 Oct 24 o A flawless model is all the basics.1wij
27 Oct 24 * Re: Is there a way in Fortran to designate an integer value as integer*8 ?4Lawrence D'Oliveiro
29 Oct 24 +- Re: Is there a way in Fortran to designate an integer value as integer*8 ?1Lynn McGuire
29 Oct 24 `* Re: Is there a way in Fortran to designate an integer value as integer*8 ?2James Kuyper
29 Oct 24  `- Re: Is there a way in Fortran to designate an integer value as integer*8 ?1Waldek Hebisch
4 Jul 24 * technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?309aotto1968
5 Jul 24 +* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?306Lawrence D'Oliveiro
5 Jul 24 i`* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?305BGB
5 Jul 24 i +* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?2Lawrence D'Oliveiro
5 Jul 24 i i`- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1yeti
5 Jul 24 i +* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?275Keith Thompson
5 Jul 24 i i+- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
5 Jul 24 i i+* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?272BGB
5 Jul 24 i ii+* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?18Ben Bacarisse
5 Jul 24 i iii`* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?17BGB
6 Jul 24 i iii +* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?14Ben Bacarisse
6 Jul 24 i iii i+* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?9BGB
6 Jul 24 i iii ii+* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?2David Brown
6 Jul 24 i iii iii`- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1BGB
7 Jul 24 i iii ii`* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?6Ben Bacarisse
7 Jul 24 i iii ii +* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?2Keith Thompson
7 Jul 24 i iii ii i`- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1Tim Rentsch
7 Jul 24 i iii ii `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?3BGB
7 Jul 24 i iii ii  `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?2bart
7 Jul 24 i iii ii   `- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1BGB
6 Jul 24 i iii i`* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?4Malcolm McLean
6 Jul 24 i iii i `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?3BGB
6 Jul 24 i iii i  `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?2bart
7 Jul 24 i iii i   `- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1BGB
6 Jul 24 i iii `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?2Janis Papanagnou
6 Jul 24 i iii  `- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1BGB
5 Jul 24 i ii`* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?253Keith Thompson
6 Jul 24 i ii `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?252Lawrence D'Oliveiro
6 Jul 24 i ii  +* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?236BGB
6 Jul 24 i ii  i+- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1BGB
6 Jul 24 i ii  i+* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?6James Kuyper
6 Jul 24 i ii  ii`* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?5BGB
9 Jul 24 i ii  ii `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?4David Brown
9 Jul 24 i ii  ii  `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?3Michael S
9 Jul 24 i ii  ii   +- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1David Brown
9 Jul 24 i ii  ii   `- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1BGB
7 Jul 24 i ii  i`* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?228Keith Thompson
7 Jul 24 i ii  i +* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?223BGB
7 Jul 24 i ii  i i`* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?222James Kuyper
7 Jul 24 i ii  i i `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?221BGB
8 Jul 24 i ii  i i  `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?220James Kuyper
8 Jul 24 i ii  i i   `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?219Kaz Kylheku
8 Jul 24 i ii  i i    +- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1BGB

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal