comp.lang.c

Liste des Groupes Pages :1234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132
Date Sujet#  Auteur
12 Jul 24 i ii  i i    i  ii i    i  i     `- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1James Kuyper
11 Jul 24 i ii  i i    i  ii i    i  `- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1Tim Rentsch
10 Jul 24 i ii  i i    i  ii i    `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?7Janis Papanagnou
10 Jul 24 i ii  i i    i  ii i     `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?6bart
10 Jul 24 i ii  i i    i  ii i      +- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1David Brown
10 Jul 24 i ii  i i    i  ii i      +* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?3Keith Thompson
10 Jul 24 i ii  i i    i  ii i      i`* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?2bart
11 Jul 24 i ii  i i    i  ii i      i `- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1Keith Thompson
12 Jul 24 i ii  i i    i  ii i      `- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1Janis Papanagnou
9 Jul 24 i ii  i i    i  ii `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?8Kaz Kylheku
10 Jul 24 i ii  i i    i  ii  `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?7bart
10 Jul 24 i ii  i i    i  ii   +* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?5Keith Thompson
10 Jul 24 i ii  i i    i  ii   i`* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?4bart
10 Jul 24 i ii  i i    i  ii   i `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?3Keith Thompson
10 Jul 24 i ii  i i    i  ii   i  `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?2bart
10 Jul 24 i ii  i i    i  ii   i   `- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1Keith Thompson
10 Jul 24 i ii  i i    i  ii   `- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1Kaz Kylheku
9 Jul 24 i ii  i i    i  i+- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1David Brown
9 Jul 24 i ii  i i    i  i`- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1Keith Thompson
9 Jul 24 i ii  i i    i  +- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1Michael S
9 Jul 24 i ii  i i    i  `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?6BGB
9 Jul 24 i ii  i i    i   `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?5James Kuyper
9 Jul 24 i ii  i i    i    `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?4BGB
10 Jul 24 i ii  i i    i     `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?3David Brown
10 Jul 24 i ii  i i    i      `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?2BGB
10 Jul 24 i ii  i i    i       `- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1David Brown
9 Jul 24 i ii  i i    `- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1Tim Rentsch
10 Jul 24 i ii  i `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?4Lawrence D'Oliveiro
10 Jul 24 i ii  i  +- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1Keith Thompson
10 Jul 24 i ii  i  `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?2James Kuyper
10 Jul 24 i ii  i   `- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1Kaz Kylheku
6 Jul 24 i ii  +* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?9James Kuyper
6 Jul 24 i ii  i+* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?5bart
10 Jul 24 i ii  ii+- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
10 Jul 24 i ii  ii+* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?2James Kuyper
10 Jul 24 i ii  iii`- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1bart
12 Aug 24 i ii  ii`- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1Tim Rentsch
6 Jul 24 i ii  i`* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?3Keith Thompson
7 Jul 24 i ii  i `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?2James Kuyper
7 Jul 24 i ii  i  `- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1Keith Thompson
6 Jul 24 i ii  `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?6Keith Thompson
10 Jul 24 i ii   `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?5Lawrence D'Oliveiro
10 Jul 24 i ii    +- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1James Kuyper
10 Jul 24 i ii    +- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1Keith Thompson
10 Jul 24 i ii    `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?2Kaz Kylheku
10 Jul 24 i ii     `- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1Ben Bacarisse
6 Jul 24 i i`- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
5 Jul 24 i +* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?26bart
5 Jul 24 i i+- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1BGB
6 Jul 24 i i`* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?24Lawrence D'Oliveiro
6 Jul 24 i i +* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?17Keith Thompson
6 Jul 24 i i i+- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1Janis Papanagnou
6 Jul 24 i i i`* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?15Lawrence D'Oliveiro
6 Jul 24 i i i +- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1Ben Bacarisse
6 Jul 24 i i i +- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1Keith Thompson
7 Jul 24 i i i +* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?10James Kuyper
10 Jul 24 i i i i`* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?9Lawrence D'Oliveiro
10 Jul 24 i i i i `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?8James Kuyper
11 Jul 24 i i i i  `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?7Lawrence D'Oliveiro
11 Jul 24 i i i i   +* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?2David Brown
11 Jul 24 i i i i   i`- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1Malcolm McLean
11 Jul 24 i i i i   +* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?3bart
11 Jul 24 i i i i   i`* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?2Chris M. Thomasson
12 Jul 24 i i i i   i `- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1Chris M. Thomasson
11 Jul 24 i i i i   `- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1James Kuyper
7 Jul 24 i i i +- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1Tim Rentsch
25 Aug 24 i i i `- Re: technology discussion ? does the world need a "new" C ?1dave thompson 2
6 Jul 24 i i +- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1Janis Papanagnou
6 Jul 24 i i +- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1James Kuyper
6 Jul 24 i i `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?4bart
7 Jul 24 i i  `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?3Keith Thompson
7 Jul 24 i i   `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?2bart
7 Jul 24 i i    `- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1Keith Thompson
5 Jul 24 i `- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1lexi hale
7 Jul 24 `* Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?2Bonita Montero
7 Jul 24  `- Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?1aotto1968
15 Sep 24 * A very slow program21Student Project
16 Sep 24 +- Re: A very slow program1Kaz Kylheku
16 Sep 24 +* Re: A very slow program3Paul
2 Oct 24 i`* Re: A very slow program2Vir Campestris
2 Oct 24 i `- Re: A very slow program1Paul
2 Oct 24 +* Re: A very slow program14Bonita Montero
3 Oct 24 i+* OT: Re: A very slow program12Vir Campestris
4 Oct 24 ii`* Re: OT: Re: A very slow program11Bonita Montero
20 Oct 24 ii `* Re: OT: Re: A very slow program10Vir Campestris
20 Oct 24 ii  +* Re: OT: Re: A very slow program2Kenny McCormack
26 Oct 24 ii  i`- Re: OT: Re: A very slow program1Vir Campestris
21 Oct 24 ii  +* Re: OT: Re: A very slow program6Bonita Montero
26 Oct 24 ii  i`* Re: OT: Re: A very slow program5Vir Campestris
26 Oct 24 ii  i `* Re: OT: Re: A very slow program4Bonita Montero
26 Oct 24 ii  i  `* Re: OT: Re: A very slow program3Vir Campestris
27 Oct 24 ii  i   `* Re: OT: Re: A very slow program2Bonita Montero
28 Oct 24 ii  i    `- Re: OT: Re: A very slow program1Vir Campestris
22 Oct 24 ii  `- Re: OT: Re: A very slow program1Richard Harnden
3 Oct 24 i`- Re: A very slow program1Paul
2 Oct 24 `* Re: A very slow program2Janis Papanagnou
2 Oct 24  `- Re: A very slow program1Keith Thompson
23 Oct 24 * SIGFPE5Fred J. Tydeman
23 Oct 24 `* Re: SIGFPE4Andrey Tarasevich
24 Oct 24  +* Re: SIGFPE2Fred J. Tydeman
24 Oct 24  i`- Re: SIGFPE1James Kuyper
24 Oct 24  `- Re: SIGFPE1Fred J. Tydeman
28 Aug 24 * about some potentially interesting unicode operators24fir
28 Aug 24 +* Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators21Blue-Maned_Hawk
28 Aug 24 i+* Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators17Keith Thompson
28 Aug 24 ii+- Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators1Keith Thompson
29 Aug 24 ii`* Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators15Lawrence D'Oliveiro
29 Aug 24 ii `* Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators14Keith Thompson
29 Aug 24 ii  +* Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators10Janis Papanagnou
29 Aug 24 ii  i`* Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators9Janis Papanagnou
29 Aug 24 ii  i `* Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators8Keith Thompson
29 Aug 24 ii  i  `* Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators7Michael S
29 Aug 24 ii  i   +* Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators2Michael S
30 Aug 24 ii  i   i`- Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators1Michael S
29 Aug 24 ii  i   `* Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators4Keith Thompson
30 Aug 24 ii  i    `* Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators3Lawrence D'Oliveiro
30 Aug 24 ii  i     `* Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators2Keith Thompson
31 Aug 24 ii  i      `- Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
29 Aug 24 ii  +* Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators2Lawrence D'Oliveiro
23 Oct 24 ii  i`- Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators1Otto J. Makela
29 Aug 24 ii  `- Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators1David Brown
29 Aug 24 i`* Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators3Lawrence D'Oliveiro
29 Aug 24 i +- Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators1Janis Papanagnou
29 Aug 24 i `- Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators1fir
29 Aug 24 +- Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
5 Sep 24 `- Re: about some potentially interesting unicode operators1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
12 Oct 24 * ChatGPT explains why by rebuttal of the halting problem proofs is correct47olcott
12 Oct 24 +* Re: ChatGPT explains why by rebuttal of the halting problem proofs is correct41Chris M. Thomasson
12 Oct 24 i`* Re: ChatGPT explains why by rebuttal of the halting problem proofs is correct40Jan van den Broek
12 Oct 24 i `* Re: ChatGPT explains why by rebuttal of the halting problem proofs is correct39Janis Papanagnou
12 Oct 24 i  `* Re: ChatGPT explains why by rebuttal of the halting problem proofs is correct38Chris M. Thomasson
13 Oct 24 i   `* Re: ChatGPT explains why by rebuttal of the halting problem proofs is correct37Kaz Kylheku
14 Oct 24 i    `* ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect36olcott
14 Oct 24 i     +* Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect14Chris M. Thomasson
15 Oct 24 i     i+- Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect1Chris M. Thomasson
16 Oct 24 i     i+* Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect10Mike Terry
16 Oct 24 i     ii+* Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect6Chris M. Thomasson
19 Oct 24 i     iii`* Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect5Mike Terry
19 Oct 24 i     iii +- Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect1olcott
20 Oct 24 i     iii +* Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect2Chris M. Thomasson
21 Oct 24 i     iii i`- ChatGPT 4.0 soundly refutes this key rebuttal of my work1olcott
20 Oct 24 i     iii `- Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect1Chris M. Thomasson
19 Oct 24 i     ii`* Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect3olcott
19 Oct 24 i     ii `* Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect2Chris M. Thomasson
19 Oct 24 i     ii  `- Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect1olcott
19 Oct 24 i     i+- Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect1olcott
21 Oct 24 i     i`- Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect1olcott
15 Oct 24 i     +* Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect17tTh
15 Oct 24 i     i+* Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect13Chris M. Thomasson
15 Oct 24 i     ii`* Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect12Mike Terry
15 Oct 24 i     ii +* Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect9Chris M. Thomasson
15 Oct 24 i     ii i+* Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect7Mike Terry
15 Oct 24 i     ii ii+- Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect1Mike Terry
15 Oct 24 i     ii ii`* Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect5Chris M. Thomasson
15 Oct 24 i     ii ii +- Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect1Chris M. Thomasson
16 Oct 24 i     ii ii `* Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect3Mike Terry
16 Oct 24 i     ii ii  +- Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect1Chris M. Thomasson
19 Oct 24 i     ii ii  `- Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect1olcott
19 Oct 24 i     ii i`- Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect1olcott
19 Oct 24 i     ii `* Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect2olcott
19 Oct 24 i     ii  `- Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect1Chris M. Thomasson
17 Oct 24 i     i+* Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect2Bonita Montero
19 Oct 24 i     ii`- Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect1olcott
19 Oct 24 i     i`- Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect1olcott
15 Oct 24 i     `* Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect4Chris M. Thomasson
15 Oct 24 i      +- Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect1Chris M. Thomasson
19 Oct 24 i      `* Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect2olcott
19 Oct 24 i       `- Re: ChatGPT explains why rebuttals of my work are incorrect1Chris M. Thomasson
12 Oct 24 +- Re: ChatGPT explains why by rebuttal of the halting problem proofs is correct1Chris M. Thomasson
13 Oct 24 `* C function HHH correctly reports that DDD never terminates --- boiled down to two sentences4olcott
13 Oct 24  `* Re: C function HHH correctly reports that DDD never terminates --- boiled down to two sentences3tTh
13 Oct 24   `* Re: C function HHH correctly reports that DDD never terminates --- boiled down to two sentences2olcott
15 Oct 24    `- Re: C function HHH correctly reports that DDD never terminates --- boiled down to two sentences1Chris M. Thomasson
20 Oct 24 o Re: I have always been correct about emulating termination analyzers --- PROOF1olcott
16 Oct 24 * constexpr - C23 thoughts and opinions revisited2Thiago Adams
16 Oct 24 `- Re: constexpr - C23 thoughts and opinions revisited1Bonita Montero
13 Oct 24 * c initialization algorithm7Thiago Adams
14 Oct 24 `* Re: c initialization algorithm6Kaz Kylheku
14 Oct 24  `* Re: c initialization algorithm5Tim Rentsch
14 Oct 24   `* Re: c initialization algorithm4Thiago Adams
15 Oct 24    `* Re: c initialization algorithm3Thiago Adams
15 Oct 24     `* Re: c initialization algorithm2Thiago Adams
15 Oct 24      `- Re: c initialization algorithm1Kaz Kylheku
8 Oct 24 o curiosity about constexpr1Thiago Adams
28 Sep 24 * [stats]Frequent Numbers5Stefan Ram
28 Sep 24 +- Re: [stats]Frequent Numbers1Thiago Adams
29 Sep 24 +- Re: [stats]Frequent Numbers1James Kuyper
30 Sep 24 +- Re: [stats]Frequent Numbers1Waldek Hebisch
3 Oct 24 `- Re: [stats]Frequent Numbers1Stefan Ram
3 Sep 24 * Code guidelines25Thiago Adams
3 Sep 24 +* Re: Code guidelines22David Brown
3 Sep 24 i`* Re: Code guidelines21Thiago Adams
3 Sep 24 i +* Re: Code guidelines5David Brown
3 Sep 24 i i`* Re: Code guidelines4Thiago Adams
3 Sep 24 i i +- Re: Code guidelines1David Brown
3 Sep 24 i i +- Re: Code guidelines1Chris M. Thomasson
22 Sep 24 i i `- Re: Code guidelines1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
3 Sep 24 i `* Re: Code guidelines15Thiago Adams
3 Sep 24 i  `* Re: Code guidelines14David Brown
3 Sep 24 i   `* Re: Code guidelines13Thiago Adams
3 Sep 24 i    +* Re: Code guidelines5Thiago Adams
4 Sep 24 i    i`* Re: Code guidelines4David Brown
4 Sep 24 i    i `* Re: Code guidelines3Thiago Adams
4 Sep 24 i    i  +- Re: Code guidelines1Thiago Adams
4 Sep 24 i    i  `- Re: Code guidelines1David Brown
4 Sep 24 i    +* Re: Code guidelines3David Brown
4 Sep 24 i    i`* Re: Code guidelines2Keith Thompson
4 Sep 24 i    i `- Re: Code guidelines1David Brown
4 Sep 24 i    +* Re: Code guidelines2Kaz Kylheku
4 Sep 24 i    i`- Re: Code guidelines1David Brown
1 Oct 24 i    `* Re: Code guidelines2Vir Campestris
1 Oct 24 i     `- Re: Code guidelines1Kaz Kylheku
3 Sep 24 +- Re: Code guidelines1Kaz Kylheku
3 Sep 24 `- Re: Code guidelines1Blue-Maned_Hawk
21 Sep 24 * program to remove duplicates28fir
21 Sep 24 +* Re: program to remove duplicates5fir
21 Sep 24 i`* Re: program to remove duplicates4fir
21 Sep 24 i `* Re: program to remove duplicates3fir
21 Sep 24 i  `* Re: program to remove duplicates2fir
21 Sep 24 i   `- Re: program to remove duplicates1fir
21 Sep 24 +* Re: program to remove duplicates19Chris M. Thomasson
21 Sep 24 i`* Re: program to remove duplicates18fir
22 Sep 24 i +- Re: program to remove duplicates1Chris M. Thomasson
22 Sep 24 i `* Re: program to remove duplicates16Lawrence D'Oliveiro
22 Sep 24 i  +* Re: program to remove duplicates14fir
22 Sep 24 i  i+- Re: program to remove duplicates1Chris M. Thomasson
22 Sep 24 i  i+- Re: program to remove duplicates1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
22 Sep 24 i  i`* Re: program to remove duplicates11Paul
22 Sep 24 i  i +* Re: program to remove duplicates9fir
22 Sep 24 i  i i`* Re: program to remove duplicates8Bart
22 Sep 24 i  i i +* Re: program to remove duplicates3fir
22 Sep 24 i  i i i`* Re: program to remove duplicates2fir
22 Sep 24 i  i i i `- Re: program to remove duplicates1fir
22 Sep 24 i  i i `* Re: program to remove duplicates4fir
22 Sep 24 i  i i  `* Re: program to remove duplicates3fir
22 Sep 24 i  i i   `* Re: program to remove duplicates2fir
22 Sep 24 i  i i    `- Re: program to remove duplicates1fir
22 Sep 24 i  i `- Re: program to remove duplicates1Chris M. Thomasson
22 Sep 24 i  `- Re: program to remove duplicates1DFS
22 Sep 24 +- Re: program to remove duplicates1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
1 Oct 24 `* Re: program to remove duplicates2Josef Möllers
1 Oct 24  `- Off Topic (Was: program to remove duplicates)1Kenny McCormack
21 Sep 24 * how to make a macro work as a single line if stmt without braces61Mark Summerfield
21 Sep 24 +- Re: how to make a macro work as a single line if stmt without braces1Lawrence D'Oliveiro
21 Sep 24 +* Re: how to make a macro work as a single line if stmt without braces50David Brown
21 Sep 24 i`* Re: how to make a macro work as a single line if stmt without braces49Andrey Tarasevich
21 Sep 24 i +- Re: how to make a macro work as a single line if stmt without braces1Bart
21 Sep 24 i +- Re: how to make a macro work as a single line if stmt without braces1Opus
21 Sep 24 i +* Re: how to make a macro work as a single line if stmt without braces5Keith Thompson
22 Sep 24 i i`* Re: how to make a macro work as a single line if stmt without braces4Andrey Tarasevich

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal