Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > C Programming > Re: [cpp] Is this valid?

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: [cpp] Is this valid?

 
 
Mark McIntyre
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-12-2003
On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 23:25:25 GMT, in comp.lang.c , Default User
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
>
>Mark McIntyre wrote:
>
>> Me too. Please reread my original posting before shooting from teh
>> hip.

>
>
>Where in the post that started this topic do you find the OP discussing
>some UNIX utility?


Frankly, and not offense Brian, you and the others arguing in this
thread are starting to get right up yourselves with your remarks. In
my original posting I said quite clearly that his question was topical
but that "cpp" was a unix utility which was not, and that in CLC it
was worth making sure you didn't phrase questions in such a way as to
appear to be asking a platform specific question. If you want to carry
on arguing with me then I suggest you do it in alt.anal,retentives.


--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.com/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc.html>


----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Mark McIntyre
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-12-2003
On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 01:55:37 +0200, in comp.lang.c , "copx"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>I used it as an abbreviation for "C preprocessor"..
>So Marks complains are invalid.


*sigh*.

My "complaint", if you or any of the other folk responding in this
thread had actually read it, was to point out that although your
question was topical. cpp is the name of a unix utility and you could
be confusing people

--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.com/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc.html>


----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Kelsey Bjarnason
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-12-2003
[snips]

On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 13:29:55 +0100, Mark McIntyre wrote:

> Frankly, and not offense Brian, you and the others arguing in this
> thread are starting to get right up yourselves with your remarks. In
> my original posting I said quite clearly that his question was topical
> but that "cpp" was a unix utility which was not, and that in CLC it
> was worth making sure you didn't phrase questions in such a way as to
> appear to be asking a platform specific question. If you want to carry
> on arguing with me then I suggest you do it in alt.anal,retentives.


A good post, thesis clearly stated, issues well delineated. Two minor
points, though; alt.anal,retentives doesn't seem to exist and, if it did,
it would likely be spelled as alt.anal.retentives.



--
http://rkc.silversapphire.com
Managed Migration from Windows to Linux


 
Reply With Quote
 
Default User
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-12-2003


Mark McIntyre wrote:

> >
> >Where in the post that started this topic do you find the OP discussing
> >some UNIX utility?

>
> Frankly, and not offense Brian, you and the others arguing in this
> thread are starting to get right up yourselves with your remarks.


I am taking offense. You made a mistake.

> In
> my original posting I said quite clearly that his question was topical
> but that "cpp" was a unix utility which was not, and that in CLC it
> was worth making sure you didn't phrase questions in such a way as to
> appear to be asking a platform specific question. If you want to carry
> on arguing with me then I suggest you do it in alt.anal,retentives.



No you did not say that. I'll post your own words again:

FWIW "cpp" is not strictly part of C, its a tool in (probably) a unix
implementation. Other implementations do the same thing differently.
Although your question was topical I believe, its best not to think
about it in terms of specific implementations in CLC.


Show me where you say anything like your retcon up above.


I'm starting to have real sympathy for Dan Pop right now.




Brian Rodenborn
 
Reply With Quote
 
Arthur J. O'Dwyer
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-13-2003

On Sat, 12 Jul 2003, copx wrote:
>
> "Ben Pfaff" <(E-Mail Removed)> schrieb ...
> > Mark McIntyre <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
> >
> > > FWIW "cpp" is not strictly part of C, its a tool in (probably) a unix
> > > implementation. Other implementations do the same thing differently.
> > > Although your question was topical I believe, its best not to think
> > > about it in terms of specific implementations in CLC.

> >
> > It depends on whether you think of cpp as the name of a program
> > or an abbreviation for "C preprocessor".

>
> I used it as an abbreviation for "C preprocessor"..
> So Marks complains are invalid.


I've seen people use "ect" as an abbreviation for "et cetera." Does
that make "ect" correct usage? Of course not!

Mark simply pointed out, before lots of people jumped on him, that
'cpp' was NOT a standard name for the C preprocessor. In fact, on
most systems 'cpp' is not the C preprocessor at all -- it's a
non-standard macro processing utility with default support for things
like line numbering. If you had used 'gcc' as an "abbreviation" for
"C compiler", someone probably would have told you off too.

Now everyone shut up and go back to work.

-Arthur

 
Reply With Quote
 
Default User
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-13-2003


"Arthur J. O'Dwyer" wrote:

> Mark simply pointed out, before lots of people jumped on him, that
> 'cpp' was NOT a standard name for the C preprocessor. In fact, on
> most systems 'cpp' is not the C preprocessor at all -- it's a
> non-standard macro processing utility with default support for things
> like line numbering. If you had used 'gcc' as an "abbreviation" for
> "C compiler", someone probably would have told you off too.


No, Mark did NOT point that out. He assumed that's what the OP was
talking about. It's fairly traditional for people to use acronyms in
headers, and that's what MOST intelligent people were able to figure out
once they read the damn post. Only Mark seemed to have trouble. If he'd
said in his original post, "by the way, cpp isn't a typical abreviation
for the C preprocessor, but a UNIX utility" nobody would have had a
problem with him.


> Now everyone shut up and go back to work.


Likewise.



Brian Rodenborn
 
Reply With Quote
 
Mark McIntyre
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-13-2003
On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 12:53:44 -0700, in comp.lang.c , Kelsey Bjarnason
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
>A good post, thesis clearly stated, issues well delineated. Two minor
>points, though; alt.anal,retentives doesn't seem to exist and, if it did,
>it would likely be spelled as alt.anal.retentives.


>


indeed !

--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.com/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc.html>


----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
 
Reply With Quote
 
Mark McIntyre
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-13-2003
On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 20:23:49 GMT, in comp.lang.c , Default User
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>> >
>> >Where in the post that started this topic do you find the OP discussing
>> >some UNIX utility?

>>
>> Frankly, and not offense Brian, you and the others arguing in this
>> thread are starting to get right up yourselves with your remarks.

>
>I am taking offense.


tough tits

>You made a mistake.


no, you did, in not bothering to read my post, and then in being
sufficiently brass-necked not to know when to shut up.
>
>Show me where you say anything like your retcon up above.


what the fsck is this "retcon" crapola.? don't bother to anwser ,this
thread is plonked.

>I'm starting to have real sympathy for Dan Pop right now.


You're starting to turn into him, so I have no doubt about it.

--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.com/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc.html>


----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
 
Reply With Quote
 
Mark McIntyre
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-13-2003
On Sun, 13 Jul 2003 21:16:23 GMT, in comp.lang.c , Default User
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
>
>"Arthur J. O'Dwyer" wrote:
>
>> Mark simply pointed out, before lots of people jumped on him, that
>> 'cpp' was NOT a standard name for the C preprocessor. In fact, on
>> most systems 'cpp' is not the C preprocessor at all -- it's a
>> non-standard macro processing utility with default support for things
>> like line numbering. If you had used 'gcc' as an "abbreviation" for
>> "C compiler", someone probably would have told you off too.

>
>No, Mark did NOT point that out.


Yes, I did. You're deliberately misrepresenting me. Stop it.

--
Mark McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
CLC readme: <http://www.angelfire.com/ms3/bchambless0/welcome_to_clc.html>


----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
 
Reply With Quote
 
Default User
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-13-2003


Mark McIntyre wrote:

> because I dislike giving into bullies.



I've had enough of him.


*plonk*




Brian Rodenborn
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




Advertisments