«

There is a C tutorial at
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32
It is written to go with the compiler, available
at the same URL.

I have added quite a bit of material, and I would be
glad if people in this group give it a try and tell me if
I am saying nonsense somewhere.

Beware that I am not very orthodox, hence my tutorial
(and the associated compiler) is not just a tutorial about
ANSI C, but covers things like operator overloading and
other heresies

And since it is running in a specific OS, windows
programming makes for quite a lot of pages. If you
use another OS however, the first part is (almost)
straight C.

jacob

jacob navia wrote:

> There is a C tutorial at
> http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32
> It is written to go with the compiler, available
> at the same URL.
>
> I have added quite a bit of material, and I would be
> glad if people in this group give it a try and tell me if
> I am saying nonsense somewhere.
>
> Beware that I am not very orthodox, hence my tutorial
> (and the associated compiler) is not just a tutorial about
> ANSI C, but covers things like operator overloading and
> other heresies

This will attract some flak from this crowd. ANSI C and operator
overloading do not go together; this has little to do with zealotry or
heresy... It's more like saying: I'm writing something about soccer,
which includes a section on how to properly use a tennis racket.

If you're going to do a tutorial on C++, why not simply call it a C++
tutorial?

> And since it is running in a specific OS, windows
> programming makes for quite a lot of pages. If you
> use another OS however, the first part is (almost)
> straight C.

Unfortunately, the ftp server seems to be overloaded.

Best regards, Sidney

"Sidney Cadot" <> wrote in message
news:bvs62v$njo$...
> jacob navia wrote:
> This will attract some flak from this crowd. ANSI C and operator
> overloading do not go together; this has little to do with zealotry
or
> heresy... It's more like saying: I'm writing something about soccer,
> which includes a section on how to properly use a tennis racket.
>

The implementation is 100% compatible with the standard. As
you may know, the standard doesn't forbid extensions.

> If you're going to do a tutorial on C++, why not simply call it a
C++
> tutorial?

Because is C. No object oriented programming, no namespaces
no facets, no complexity. Just a few ideas from C++.

>
> > And since it is running in a specific OS, windows
> > programming makes for quite a lot of pages. If you
> > use another OS however, the first part is (almost)
> > straight C.
>
> Unfortunately, the ftp server seems to be overloaded.

Yes, there are many people using it, I hope it is useful.
Just try again later.

>
> Best regards, Sidney
>

Thanks
jacob

On Thu, 5 Feb 2004, Sidney Cadot wrote:
>
> jacob navia wrote:
> > There is a C tutorial at
> > http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32
> > It is written to go with the compiler, available
> > at the same URL.
<snip...>
> > Beware that I am not very orthodox, hence my tutorial
> > (and the associated compiler) is not just a tutorial about
> > ANSI C, but covers things like operator overloading and
> > other heresies
>
> This will attract some flak from this crowd. ANSI C and operator
> overloading do not go together; this has little to do with zealotry or
> heresy... It's more like saying: I'm writing something about soccer,
> which includes a section on how to properly use a tennis racket.

But as I understand it, Jacob *does* play soccer with a tennis
racket...

Re the actual content, I gave it a very cursory inspection. The
text still has a higher-than-average number of typos (capitalize
"Linux," for example, and the diagram on page 4, besides being
slightly mis-laid-out with respect to the surrounding text, has
a typo in the compiler message itself ("sucessfully"?)).
The technical content of the text is so lcc-win32 specific as to
make any review by comp.lang.c essentially pointless. From an ISO
Standard point of view, you've got errors up the wazoo -- but as
far as I can tell, at least the first few dozen pages are correct
from an lcc-win32 point of view.
I will also say that the typography needs some work. It's legible,
but you haven't paid much attention to the consistent use of Courier
for code snippets embedded in the text, the difference between ` and '
and whatever TeX does with ", `` and '', and lots of other little
typographical nits. Makes it somewhat more annoying to read than it
really has to be, IMHO.

my $.02,
-Arthur

On Thu, 05 Feb 2004 02:51:18 +0100, jacob navia wrote:

>
> "Sidney Cadot" <> wrote in message
> news:bvs62v$njo$...
>> jacob navia wrote:
>> This will attract some flak from this crowd. ANSI C and operator
>> overloading do not go together; this has little to do with zealotry
> or
>> heresy... It's more like saying: I'm writing something about soccer,
>> which includes a section on how to properly use a tennis racket.
>>
>
> The implementation is 100% compatible with the standard. As
> you may know, the standard doesn't forbid extensions.
>
>> If you're going to do a tutorial on C++, why not simply call it a
> C++
>> tutorial?
>
> Because is C. No object oriented programming, no namespaces
> no facets, no complexity. Just a few ideas from C++.

Then it isn't C. The code may be C++, which happens to have a lot in
common with C (though it is not truly a superset)
Operator overloading is without a doubt NOT ISO/ANSI C.

So you're telling me that just because a program does not use class,
namespace, or templates means its not C++. I think you have flawed
reasoning.

I dare you to go to comp.lang.c++ and proclaim the following is not a C++
program:

int main()
{
}

Sorry, but your tutorial uses C++. It may use a restricted subset of C++,
but it is still C++, not C.

Got it?

On Wed, 4 Feb 2004, Bubba wrote:
>
> On Thu, 05 Feb 2004 02:51:18 +0100, jacob navia wrote:
> > "Sidney Cadot" <> wrote...
> >
> >> If you're going to do a tutorial on C++, why not simply call it
> >> a C++ tutorial?
> >
> > Because is C. No object oriented programming, no namespaces
> > no facets, no complexity. Just a few ideas from C++.
>
> Then it isn't C. The code may be C++, which happens to have a lot in
> common with C (though it is not truly a superset)
> Operator overloading is without a doubt NOT ISO/ANSI C.
>
> So you're telling me that just because a program does not use class,
> namespace, or templates means its not C++. I think you have flawed
> reasoning.
<snip>
> Sorry, but your tutorial uses C++. It may use a restricted subset of C++,
> but it is still C++, not C.
>
> Got it?

You are mistaken. Jacob Navia's compiler is most definitely *NOT*
a C++ compiler, and doesn't try to be (AFAIK). It *is* a C compiler
with a whole bunch of non-standard extensions, including operator
overloading and suchlike. But it's *NOT* C++!

To use Sidney's analogy, just because Jacob likes to play soccer
using a tennis racket doesn't mean he's playing tennis. He may not
be playing tournament-rules soccer, but he's sure as heck not
playing tennis, if he's still kicking around that big black-and-white
ball!

[Jacob's an off-and-on regular in c.l.c, which is how I know what
his compiler is like, second-hand. I've never tried it myself: I
prefer to play soccer with my feet, and tennis with my tennis racket.
]

-Arthur

Arthur J. O'Dwyer wrote:

> Something that calls itself Bubba wrote:

[snip]

> You are mistaken.

[snip]

Arthur,

Please don't feed the trolls.

jacob navia wrote:

> There is a C tutorial at
> http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32
> It is written to go with the compiler, available
> at the same URL.

Thanks. I'd love to have a look at it. Do you have a version available in a
portable document format? The site says that "you need the Acrobat Reader
to view it". You see, given a choice between using Acrobat Reader or not
reading your tutorial, I will cheerfully give up the chance to read your
tutorial.

--
Richard Heathfield :
"Usenet is a strange place." - Dennis M Ritchie, 29 July 1999.
C FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
K&R answers, C books, etc: http://users.powernet.co.uk/eton

Richard Heathfield wrote:
> jacob navia wrote:
>
>
>>There is a C tutorial at
>>http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32
>>It is written to go with the compiler, available
>>at the same URL.
>
>
> Thanks. I'd love to have a look at it. Do you have a version available in a
> portable document format? The site says that "you need the Acrobat Reader
> to view it". You see, given a choice between using Acrobat Reader or not
> reading your tutorial, I will cheerfully give up the chance to read your
> tutorial.
>

What's wrong with Ghostview? Does his stuff _really_ need the Acrobat reader?


--
Martin Ambuhl

Martin Ambuhl wrote:

> Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> jacob navia wrote:
>>
>>
>>>There is a C tutorial at
>>>http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32
>>>It is written to go with the compiler, available
>>>at the same URL.
>>
>>
>> Thanks. I'd love to have a look at it. Do you have a version available in
>> a portable document format? The site says that "you need the Acrobat
>> Reader to view it". You see, given a choice between using Acrobat Reader
>> or not reading your tutorial, I will cheerfully give up the chance to
>> read your tutorial.
>>
>
> What's wrong with Ghostview?

Nothing at all, of course, although I don't particularly enjoy using it. I
use it for reading the Standard, because it's in my direct interest to be
able to read the Standard as a PDF. But when I have no particular reason to
read a document other than to review it in case I can help its author to
improve it, well, call me Mr Silly but I don't think it's the author's
place to insist that I use the software /he/ chooses.


> Does his stuff _really_ need the Acrobat reader?

He says it does, and he should know, shouldn't he?


--
Richard Heathfield :
"Usenet is a strange place." - Dennis M Ritchie, 29 July 1999.
C FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
K&R answers, C books, etc: http://users.powernet.co.uk/eton