«

Dear pedantic user

What is a pedant?

According to dictionary.com you are:

1. a person who makes an excessive or inappropriate display of learning.
2. a person who overemphasizes rules or minor details.
3. a person who adheres rigidly to book knowledge without regard to
common sense.

I am very glad that this flag, done for people like you
works as expected.

My compiler system is not for pedants, so you can stop using it
and get a compiler that suits your pedantic needs. Many pedants
here (this group has a lot of them) will point you to their
favorite software.



--
jacob navia
jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
logiciels/informatique
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32

jacob navia wrote:
> Dear pedantic user
>
> What is a pedant?
>
> According to dictionary.com you are:
>
> 1. a person who makes an excessive or inappropriate display of learning.
> 2. a person who overemphasizes rules or minor details.
> 3. a person who adheres rigidly to book knowledge without regard to
> common sense.
>
> I am very glad that this flag, done for people like you
> works as expected.
>
> My compiler system is not for pedants, so you can stop using it
> and get a compiler that suits your pedantic needs. Many pedants
> here (this group has a lot of them) will point you to their
> favorite software.
>
>
>


This message should have been sent to the
"Is pedantic a bad flag"
thread...

But anyway, forget it, it is not worth the effort

--
jacob navia
jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
logiciels/informatique
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32

On Jun 21, 1:19 pm, jacob navia <ja...@nospam.com> wrote:
> jacob navia wrote:
> > Dear pedantic user
>
> > What is a pedant?
>
> > According to dictionary.com you are:
>
> > 1. a person who makes an excessive or inappropriate display of learning.
> > 2. a person who overemphasizes rules or minor details.
> > 3. a person who adheres rigidly to book knowledge without regard to
> > common sense.
>
> > I am very glad that this flag, done for people like you
> > works as expected.
>
> > My compiler system is not for pedants, so you can stop using it
> > and get a compiler that suits your pedantic needs. Many pedants
> > here (this group has a lot of them) will point you to their
> > favorite software.
>
> This message should have been sent to the
> "Is pedantic a bad flag"
> thread...
>
> But anyway, forget it, it is not worth the effort
I think the person who made the thread is on purpose making threads
about bugs with little importance in your compiler system.
But it would be wiser to ignore the bait and just fix the bugs.

CBFalconer wrote:
> jacob navia wrote:
>> Dear pedantic user
>>
>> What is a pedant?
>>
>> According to dictionary.com you are:
>>
>> 1. a person who makes an excessive or inappropriate display of
>> learning.
>> 2. a person who overemphasizes rules or minor details.
>> 3. a person who adheres rigidly to book knowledge without regard
>> to common sense.
>>
>> I am very glad that this flag, done for people like you
>> works as expected.
>>
>> My compiler system is not for pedants, so you can stop using it
>> and get a compiler that suits your pedantic needs. Many pedants
>> here (this group has a lot of them) will point you to their
>> favorite software.
>
> Excellent. Very amusing.
>
> However, we need to point out that the pedantic beast is not the
> probrammer, but the compiler. That poor compiler is stolidly
> insisting that the code it compiles be written to match the demands
> of the C standard. This has the side-effect of ensuring that the
> code actually performs as desired. In most cases this matches the
> conscious desires of the programmer.
>

Yes yes Mr PEDANT.

Obviously it suffices to conform to ISO C and your
program will "perform as desired". Of course.


3. a person who adheres rigidly to book knowledge without regard
to common sense.


--
jacob navia
jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
logiciels/informatique
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32

Richard Heathfield wrote:
> jacob navia said:
>
>> Dear pedantic user
>>
>> What is a pedant?
>>
>> According to dictionary.com you are:
>>
>> 1. a person who makes an excessive or inappropriate display of learning.
>> 2. a person who overemphasizes rules or minor details.
>> 3. a person who adheres rigidly to book knowledge without regard to
>> common sense.
>
> Note that dictionary.com is non-normative.
>
> In comp.lang.c, the word "pedant" tends to be used to describe someone who
> cares about getting it right, by someone who doesn't.
>
> In that sense, you are using it correctly.
>
> <snip>
>

1. a person who makes an excessive or inappropriate display of learning.
2. a person who overemphasizes rules or minor details.


--
jacob navia
jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
logiciels/informatique
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32

jacob navia <> writes:

> Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> jacob navia said:
>>
>>> Dear pedantic user
>>>
>>> What is a pedant?
>>>
>>> According to dictionary.com you are:
>>>
>>> 1. a person who makes an excessive or inappropriate display of learning.
>>> 2. a person who overemphasizes rules or minor details.
>>> 3. a person who adheres rigidly to book knowledge without regard to
>>> common sense.
>>
>> Note that dictionary.com is non-normative.
>>
>> In comp.lang.c, the word "pedant" tends to be used to describe
>> someone who cares about getting it right, by someone who doesn't.
>>
>> In that sense, you are using it correctly.
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>
> 1. a person who makes an excessive or inappropriate display of learning.
> 2. a person who overemphasizes rules or minor details.

Also note that Heathfield has not defined "right" here. For many "right"
is something that works well on their target platform. "Right" can even
include cross platform ISO goodness but may not be "perfect" either -
but a timely and economic solution to the problem in hand.

No.

"Pedants" in this group are the anal retentives who are more interested
in showing off their own standard knowledge than actually helping people
get up to speed in good, (sometimes) portable C. This group is
c.l.c. Not ISO C. Not C89. Just "c". And if others want to help others
with "general" C issues then good luck to them.

jacob navia <> writes:

> Dear pedantic user

Dear Jacob

> What is a pedant?

What is the -pedantic flag? As far as I can see you don't document
the use of it. As such, you can hardly have faced an easier bug to
fix -- just report "bad flag" and ignore it. Of course, if you
intended it to do something then you have a bigger problem.

Rather than getting hot under the collar about it, I think the users
of your compiler would be better served by a simple statement of
intent: accepting the flag is either a simple bug (which you can fix
in about a minute) or you do intend to offer some sort of more
rigorous checking mode and you plan to get it working soon. Would it
not have been simpler just to say which is the case?

--
Ben.

Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> jacob navia <> writes:
>
>> Dear pedantic user
>
> Dear Jacob
>
>> What is a pedant?
>
> What is the -pedantic flag? As far as I can see you don't document
> the use of it. As such, you can hardly have faced an easier bug to
> fix -- just report "bad flag" and ignore it. Of course, if you
> intended it to do something then you have a bigger problem.
>
> Rather than getting hot under the collar about it, I think the users
> of your compiler would be better served by a simple statement of
> intent: accepting the flag is either a simple bug (which you can fix
> in about a minute) or you do intend to offer some sort of more
> rigorous checking mode and you plan to get it working soon. Would it
> not have been simpler just to say which is the case?

Some simple rules when dealing with Jacob:

1. Don't attack Jacob, he takes it as personal offense
2. Don't criticize Jajob, he takes it as an attack, see 1.
3. Don't criticise any software Jacob developed, he takes it as personal
criticism, see 2.
4. Don't report bugs in software Jacob developed, he takes it as criticism,
see, 3.

In any case he'll feel personnally offended by any of the above mentioned
things. On top of that:

5. Better don't reply to anything Jacob writes, if there is the slightest
possibility that it might be interpreted in 2 ways, one of which may
possible offending, he'll for sure pick that interpretation and go balistic.
6. If you did reply to Jacob, don't fell offended, when he goes balistic and
calls you a liar for no good reason, this is his normal behavoir, just
ignore it, it's better for your health
7. Never ever expect Jacob ot appologize for any offense he did to you, so
far it never ever happened. Saves you from a disappointement, and is better
for your health.

This should really be added to the CLC FAQ.

Sad, but apparently true...

Bye, Jojo

Richard Heathfield wrote:
> Some simple rules when dealing with critics:
>
> 1. If they're criticising your C code, listen to them, make sure
> they're right, and - if they are - fix the code.
Guess you meant "make sure _whether_ they are right", otherwise you may need
to introduce bugs just to make them being right

> 2. Don't forget to thank them for educating them.
guess you meant: "educating _you_"

> 3. If you can't stand your code being criticised, don't write any.
guess you mean: "don't _publish_ any"

> Jacob Navia is not immune to criticism just because he doesn't know
> how to handle it properly. One day, he will learn that criticism is
> good and useful.
hope dies last, doesn't it?

Bye, Jojo

"Joachim Schmitz" <> writes:

> Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> Some simple rules when dealing with critics:
>>
>> 1. If they're criticising your C code, listen to them, make sure
>> they're right, and - if they are - fix the code.
> Guess you meant "make sure _whether_ they are right", otherwise you may need
> to introduce bugs just to make them being right
>
>> 2. Don't forget to thank them for educating them.
> guess you meant: "educating _you_"
>
>> 3. If you can't stand your code being criticised, don't write any.
> guess you mean: "don't _publish_ any"
>
>> Jacob Navia is not immune to criticism just because he doesn't know
>> how to handle it properly. One day, he will learn that criticism is
>> good and useful.
> hope dies last, doesn't it?
>
> Bye, Jojo

Smashing job there of being a pedant over Heathfield's pompous pedantry,
advice giving and general lording it.