Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > C Programming > printf() and scanf() questions

Reply
Thread Tools

printf() and scanf() questions

 
 
Mark McIntyre
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-06-2008
Martin Ambuhl wrote:
>
> Pay no attention to Mark McIntyre. He doesn't have a clue.


Yeah, I'm only quoting the Standard, after all.

Perhaps you should try reading it, instead of being a sarky git?

--
Mark McIntyre

CLC FAQ <http://c-faq.com/>
CLC readme: <http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt>
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Mark McIntyre
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-06-2008
Martin Ambuhl wrote:
>
> I have mercifully snipped the remainder of your nonsense.


You really are a tit, aren't you?

> I have. I know what I'm talking about.


Yeah? Then why do you get often stuff wrong ?

> You haven't a clue.


Sometimes. At least I'm not an obnoxious prat when I'm trying to help
people.

--
Mark McIntyre

CLC FAQ <http://c-faq.com/>
CLC readme: <http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt>
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Mark McIntyre
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-06-2008
Martin Ambuhl wrote:
> Mark McIntyre wrote:
>> 7.19.6.2(12)
>> "a,e,f,g Matches an optionally signed floating-point number,
>> whose format is
>> the same as expected for the subject sequence of the strtod function.
>> The corresponding argument shall be a pointer to floating."
>>
>> Note that strtod converts its argument to a double.
>>
>> Myself, I suspect this part of the Standard needs reworded.

>
> Yourself, you need to read. "a,e,f,g" in the above refers to the
> conversion operation and are not full specifiers. "%f" is a specifier,
> in which the optional size specification is empty. It is not the same
> thing at all.


So what you're saying is that in this part of the Standard, and nowhere
else, they chose a different language to express the same thing. So oy
original point about the language stands.

Either that, or you're talking twaddle to hide the fact that you didn't
actually know what the Standard said.

> I have mercifully snipped the remainder of your nonsense.


And I've mercifully snipped the remainder of your tripe.

You know, you would be regarded as more helpful if you weren't such an
arrogant and rude poster.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Antoninus Twink
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-06-2008
On 6 Mar 2008 at 21:45, Mark McIntyre wrote:
> Martin Ambuhl wrote:
>>
>> I have mercifully snipped the remainder of your nonsense.

>
> You really are a tit, aren't you?
>
>> I have. I know what I'm talking about.

>
> Yeah? Then why do you get often stuff wrong ?
>
>> You haven't a clue.


Tee hee! It's always amusing when the deep veins of anger latent in all
the CLC regulars boil over, and they turn their hate on each other
instead of random newbies.

> Sometimes. At least I'm not an obnoxious prat when I'm trying to help
> people.


Yeah right, you keep telling yourself that.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Antoninus Twink
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-06-2008
On 6 Mar 2008 at 21:48, Mark McIntyre wrote:
> Martin Ambuhl wrote:
>> I have mercifully snipped the remainder of your nonsense.

>
> And I've mercifully snipped the remainder of your tripe.
>
> You know, you would be regarded as more helpful if you weren't such an
> arrogant and rude poster.


Said without the slightest hint of irony.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Martin Ambuhl
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-06-2008
Mark McIntyre wrote:
> Martin Ambuhl wrote:
>>
>> Pay no attention to Mark McIntyre. He doesn't have a clue.

>
> Yeah, I'm only quoting the Standard, after all.


You were misreading the standard.
>
> Perhaps you should try reading it, instead of being a sarky git?


Maybe you should try understanding what you quote. The section you
quote has nothing to support your completely bogus labeling my correct
statements as wrong. You still haven't a clue.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Kenny McCormack
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-06-2008
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
Antoninus Twink <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>On 6 Mar 2008 at 21:48, Mark McIntyre wrote:
>> Martin Ambuhl wrote:
>>> I have mercifully snipped the remainder of your nonsense.

>>
>> And I've mercifully snipped the remainder of your tripe.
>>
>> You know, you would be regarded as more helpful if you weren't such an
>> arrogant and rude poster.

>
>Said without the slightest hint of irony.
>


I know. It is. To laugh.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Martin Ambuhl
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-06-2008
Mark McIntyre wrote:
> Martin Ambuhl wrote:
>>
>> I have mercifully snipped the remainder of your nonsense.

>
> You really are a tit, aren't you?
>
>> I have. I know what I'm talking about.

>
> Yeah? Then why do you get often stuff wrong ?


Let's see your evidence for that.
>
>> You haven't a clue.

>
> Sometimes. At least I'm not an obnoxious prat when I'm trying to help
> people.


Since you don't actually help anyone with your absurd misreading of the
standard, and you are obviously obnoxious when you incorectly "correct"
my correct posts, I'd say you will the obnoxious unelpful person award.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Kenny McCormack
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-06-2008
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
Antoninus Twink <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>On 6 Mar 2008 at 21:45, Mark McIntyre wrote:
>> Martin Ambuhl wrote:
>>>
>>> I have mercifully snipped the remainder of your nonsense.

>>
>> You really are a tit, aren't you?
>>
>>> I have. I know what I'm talking about.

>>
>> Yeah? Then why do you get often stuff wrong ?
>>
>>> You haven't a clue.

>
>Tee hee! It's always amusing when the deep veins of anger latent in all
>the CLC regulars boil over, and they turn their hate on each other


It *is* funny. You'd think they would be able to keep their act
together better.

>> Sometimes. At least I'm not an obnoxious prat when I'm trying to help
>> people.

>
>Yeah right, you keep telling yourself that.
>


Welcome to another episode of...

CLC regulars eating their own!

 
Reply With Quote
 
Kenny McCormack
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-06-2008
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
Martin Ambuhl <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>Mark McIntyre wrote:
>> Martin Ambuhl wrote:
>>>
>>> Pay no attention to Mark McIntyre. He doesn't have a clue.

>>
>> Yeah, I'm only quoting the Standard, after all.

>
>You were misreading the standard.
>>
>> Perhaps you should try reading it, instead of being a sarky git?

>
>Maybe you should try understanding what you quote. The section you
>quote has nothing to support your completely bogus labeling my correct
>statements as wrong. You still haven't a clue.


Gentlemen. Please...

 
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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Malloc and free questions - learner questions pkirk25 C Programming 50 10-04-2006 02:22 PM
Questions on Canon 300D and etc. questions regarding digital photography Progressiveabsolution Digital Photography 12 03-24-2005 05:18 PM
Newbie questions - Couple of VC++ questions regarding dlls and VB6 Ali Syed C Programming 3 10-13-2004 10:15 PM
Re: Questions....questions....questions Patrick Michael A+ Certification 0 06-16-2004 04:53 PM



Advertisments