Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > C Programming > How printf() works???????

Reply
Thread Tools

How printf() works???????

 
 
Antoninus Twink
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-07-2008
On 7 Mar 2008 at 17:15, Richard wrote:
> Antoninus Twink <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>
>> On 7 Mar 2008 at 13:44, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>> Richard said:
>>>> But of course, giving credence and credit to other posters is
>>>> becoming a rarer and rarer thing these days with posters like CBF
>>>> riding in on their chargers at a moments notice.
>>>
>>> Again, I am struggling to disagree with you here, and failing.

>>
>> Wow, CBF has really been cut loose. Clique status lost and no mistake.
>>
>> <typical Heathfield cant and hypocrisy snipped>

>
> I always felt he was treated more like the grumpy old
> farm dog. Ultimately useless, but nice to pet occasionally.


Either way, he's definitely off to the glue factory now.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
santosh
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-07-2008
Richard wrote:

<snip>

> Santosh, you're rapidly becoming a bore in your attempts to make your
> bones. Heathfield is big enough and ugly enough to take care of
> himself. As, I am sure, is Robbie.
>
> I'm not reading any more of your word games. Enough.


Thanks for sending a SIGSTOP to yourself. For a moment there I feared
that I would be stuck spinning in an endless loop, explaining the same
things to you over and over.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Richard
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-07-2008
Antoninus Twink <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

> On 7 Mar 2008 at 17:05, santosh wrote:
>> I will respond as long as you keep insisting that I "defended" RJH or
>> was "rubbing up against RHs leg" or point out what I should and should
>> not be writing.

>
> Give it up, Santosh - the craven submissiveness and fawning admiration
> that constitutes your relationship with RJH is obvious to everyone.


I hadn't bothered to read his whining. Incredible.

>
>> Well too bad, but as I said before, I am going to say what I want to
>> say, without considering whether it might upset you or Antoninus or
>> Kenny and your collective obsession with RJH.

>
> Gimme a break - you're the only one here with a dribbling, fetishistic
> obsession with Heathfield. He can do no wrong in your eyes.


Even his mistakes are "Genuine" or mere "reversals of the truth"
according to Santosh. I suspect RH's morning ablutions are "uncompressed
diamonds" or other such nonsense in Santosh's world.

Honestly, if, like me, you visit this group in "stop gap", its
astonishing to see how Santosh has changed from being a bright young
buck with all the rebelliousness of youth to a fawning lackey.


 
Reply With Quote
 
santosh
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-07-2008
Richard wrote:

> Antoninus Twink <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>
>> On 7 Mar 2008 at 17:05, santosh wrote:
>>> I will respond as long as you keep insisting that I "defended" RJH
>>> or was "rubbing up against RHs leg" or point out what I should and
>>> should not be writing.

>>
>> Give it up, Santosh - the craven submissiveness and fawning
>> admiration that constitutes your relationship with RJH is obvious to
>> everyone.

>
> I hadn't bothered to read his whining. Incredible.
>
>>
>>> Well too bad, but as I said before, I am going to say what I want to
>>> say, without considering whether it might upset you or Antoninus or
>>> Kenny and your collective obsession with RJH.

>>
>> Gimme a break - you're the only one here with a dribbling,
>> fetishistic obsession with Heathfield. He can do no wrong in your
>> eyes.

>
> Even his mistakes are "Genuine" or mere "reversals of the truth"


If you want to criticise what I say, then try, at least, to not make up
your own quotes. Nowhere did I say "reversals of the truth".

> according to Santosh. I suspect RH's morning ablutions are
> "uncompressed diamonds" or other such nonsense in Santosh's world.


Typical troll. Mind always in the gutter.

> Honestly, if, like me, you visit this group in "stop gap", its
> astonishing to see how Santosh has changed from being a bright young
> buck with all the rebelliousness of youth to a fawning lackey.


It's even more astonishing to have witnessed your change from a sensible
and polite poster to a sniping, obnoxious peon for the group's resident
trolls.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Kenny McCormack
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-07-2008
In article <fqrjj3$sc8$(E-Mail Removed)>,
Richard <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
....
>CBF, however, is just a waste of disk space IMO. He is wrong more often
>than he is right. And he is downright rude and objectionable at his
>best.


Not only a waste of disk space, but a waste of space, period.
And of air.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Kenny McCormack
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-07-2008
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
Antoninus Twink <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>On 7 Mar 2008 at 17:05, santosh wrote:
>> I will respond as long as you keep insisting that I "defended" RJH or
>> was "rubbing up against RHs leg" or point out what I should and should
>> not be writing.

>
>Give it up, Santosh - the craven submissiveness and fawning admiration
>that constitutes your relationship with RJH is obvious to everyone.
>
>> Well too bad, but as I said before, I am going to say what I want to
>> say, without considering whether it might upset you or Antoninus or
>> Kenny and your collective obsession with RJH.

>
>Gimme a break - you're the only one here with a dribbling, fetishistic
>obsession with Heathfield. He can do no wrong in your eyes.


When you're right, you're right...

 
Reply With Quote
 
Kenny McCormack
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-07-2008
In article <fqrqm2$1pe$(E-Mail Removed)>,
Richard <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>Antoninus Twink <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>
>> On 7 Mar 2008 at 14:25, Richard wrote:
>>> Your need to jump to RHs defence surprises me. There is no need.

>>
>> It doesn't surprise me. Santosh's only function in this group is to
>> groom the fleas of Heathfield the alpha male.

>
>That's as may be, but he seems to have got a bit wrapped in this one for
>some reason. And the bottom line of this thread is abundantly clear to
>anyone who read as far as RHs polite reply where he pretty much agreed
>with each and every point I had made.


It's like finding out that Jesus Christ was really just a man like you
and me. If you've spent your whole life assuming He can do no wrong,
then, when confronted with evidence to the contrary (however trivial
the "problem" is, in the eyes of anyone sane - i.e., anyone not wrapped
up in your mythology) you end up spinning out of control, in weird
gyrations, trying to keep your previous world-view intact.

That's why Santosh has come up with all these weird new expressions, to
help him come to grips with something so trivial that all the rest of us
have just looked at, giggled a bit and then moved on.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Kenny McCormack
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-07-2008
In article <fqrnq2$iut$(E-Mail Removed)>,
Richard <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
....
>What is it with you and apologising for other peoples mistakes?


Good point. I refer you to:

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/war.../sycophant.htm

 
Reply With Quote
 
CBFalconer
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-07-2008
santosh wrote:
> Richard wrote:
>

.... snip ...
>
>> Your need to jump to RHs defence surprises me. There is no need.

>
> *sigh* Once more:
>
> I did _not_ jump to RJH's defence. I jumped in to correct Robbie
> Hatley's mistake. Can you make out the difference, or are you far
> too biased against RJH that you see a correction to a post aimed
> at a post that was a correction to a post by RJH, as a defence of
> RJH?


You do realize that that Richard is a known troll? Why feed it?

--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
Try the download section.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

 
Reply With Quote
 
Richard
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-08-2008
CBFalconer <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

> santosh wrote:
>> Richard wrote:
>>

> ... snip ...
>>
>>> Your need to jump to RHs defence surprises me. There is no need.

>>
>> *sigh* Once more:
>>
>> I did _not_ jump to RJH's defence. I jumped in to correct Robbie
>> Hatley's mistake. Can you make out the difference, or are you far
>> too biased against RJH that you see a correction to a post aimed
>> at a post that was a correction to a post by RJH, as a defence of
>> RJH?

>
> You do realize that that Richard is a known troll? Why feed it?
>
> --
> [mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
> [page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
> Try the download section.


It is amusing how foolish you are. I would put my credentials against
yours any day. But that would be "real world". In clc, you are king pin
Chuck. Enjoy!

 
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
Re: How include a large array? Edward A. Falk C Programming 1 04-04-2013 08:07 PM



Advertisments