Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > C Programming > I need your advices about C prg.

Reply
Thread Tools

I need your advices about C prg.

 
 
Keith Thompson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-13-2013
"paskali" <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
> Keith Thompson <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> I wouldn't recommend that tutorial. The examples use an obsolete
>> version of the language.

>
> I think it is a good starting point also to understand how many is old how
> many is wrong. A lot of code out there is wrote in this manner.


Yes, a lot of code is written using obsolete versions of the language.
Pointing that out in a tutorial is fine. Presenting obsolete code
without saying it's obsolete is not.

>> > Yes, you have to learn technical English, it is usefull to read.
>> > It is more easy that spoken language.
>> > Avoid, in a first moment, to learn spoken language especially in the form
>> > of the USA.

>>
>> How is that relevant?

>
> Yes, i think is relevant, may be that does not seem to you.


I asked *how* it's relevant, not *whether* you think it's relevant.

This newsgroup discusses the C programming language, and this
thread is about C tutorials. I fail to see how spoken US English
is relevant to either.

I encourage you to focus on the topic.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
James Kuyper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-14-2013
On 06/14/2013 06:08 AM, paskali wrote:
> Keith Thompson <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>
>> Yes, a lot of code is written using obsolete versions of the language.
>> Pointing that out in a tutorial is fine. Presenting obsolete code
>> without saying it's obsolete is not.
>>

>
> You have to read the entire tutorial and then judge that.


How do you know that he hadn't already done so? Having read the entire
tutorial just now, I found nothing to justify changing the judgments
that Keith expressed up above.

The code at that site is written using an obsolete version of the
language - it relies upon main() being given an implicit return type of
'int'. That was a feature of C90 which was dropped in C99, 14 years ago,
and was never good practice even when it was permitted (which is why it
was dropped). I found similarly dated material in the other chapters
that I browsed. The tutorial doesn't say that it was written for an
obsolete version of the language, and neither did you when presenting it
as a place to go for learning C.

Those web pages have not been updated since 1999-08-31. That partially
explains why the information is out of date, though that doesn't excuse
your decision to mention it as a good place to learn C. However, by that
time most of the features of the new standard had already been agreed to
by the committee and were subjects of public discussion in both
comp.std.c and this newsgroup. Preliminary drafts were easily obtainable
by those who were interested. If the author had been paying attention to
such things, he could have re-written his code to be compatible with
both the current standard and the planned changes to the standard. He
could also have discussed what those planned changes were. He did neither.
--
James Kuyper
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
James Kuyper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-14-2013
On 06/14/2013 08:14 AM, paskali wrote:
> James Kuyper <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> Now i understand because someone has tried to open a comp.lang.c
> alternative news group, to separate the normal people from the rest.


comp.lang.c was created for discussion of the C language. I suppose you
could describe that as separating people who have an interest in such
discussions from the people (I guess you could call them "normal") who
have no such interest. If your comment was meant to convey any meaning
other than that, you should explain in more detail, at least if you care
about whether or not anyone understands what you're trying to say.
--
James Kuyper
 
Reply With Quote
 
Keith Thompson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-14-2013
"paskali" <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
> Keith Thompson <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> Yes, a lot of code is written using obsolete versions of the language.
>> Pointing that out in a tutorial is fine. Presenting obsolete code
>> without saying it's obsolete is not.

>
> You have to read the entire tutorial and then judge that.


Not really. I found serious problems in the first few pages.
That was enough for me to decide that reading the whole thing was
not worth my time. I suppose it was conceivable that the rest of
it made up for those problems, but there are plenty of C tutorials
that *don't* use implicit int and gets(). (James Kuyper did read
the whole thing, and confirmed my tentative conclusions.)

What is your basis, as an acknowedged C non-expert, for maintaining
that that particular tutorial is a good one? If you think that
you're right and multiple C experts are wrong, well, that's a
possibility, but you'll have to convince us.

Consider the possibility that you might be wrong. (I make mistakes
all the time myself; I usually acknowledge them.)

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) (E-Mail Removed) <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
 
Reply With Quote
 
Les Cargill
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-14-2013
paskali wrote:
> James Kuyper <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> Now i understand because someone has tried to open a comp.lang.c
> alternative news group, to separate the normal people from the rest.
>
>



It may be pedantic nit-picking, but said pedantic nit-picking
is a good thing to be familiar with.

--
Les Cargill
 
Reply With Quote
 
徐冬冬
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-15-2013
As I know ,English is not so decisive,Aii the way you have some knowledge of English, it is enogh.Just read one or two basic books in your language.perfer to read some famous book , like Modern C programming. then to read programming pearls.I ihink it is Ok.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Nick Keighley
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-16-2013
On Apr 26, 11:39*am, David Brown <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:
> On 26/04/13 01:01, glen herrmannsfeldt wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Jorgen Grahn <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2013-04-25, James Kuyper wrote:

>
> >>> In this newsgroup I've talked with a number of people who thought that
> >>> most, if not all, current C programming is being done for embedded
> >>> platforms. When challenged, none have been able to provide hard numbers
> >>> in support of their claim. To be fair, I know of no good source of
> >>> numbers to disprove the claim, either. But the simple fact that anybody
> >>> believes it is, in itself, evidence for the existence of a fairly large
> >>> amount of embedded C programming going on.

>
> >> There's also a lot of confusion about what "embedded programming" is.
> >> My employers call what I do embedded programming, but it's really
> >> for the most part ordinary Unix server programming.

>
> > Yes, more and more embedded systems run Linux, or something similar.

>
> > I suppose I call it embedded if it boots completely from ROM, EPROM,
> > EEPROM, or FLASH. The latter does not include FLASH interfaced through
> > one of the usual disk interfaces such as SATA.

>
> > The usual NAT router/wireless access point devices run Linux, for
> > example.


I think of myself as a semi-embedded programmer. The systems I work on
aren't on desktops or in server rooms. But my CV seems to go to the
bottom of the heap when I apply for jobs that call themselves
"embeded" (I don't have any problems getting employment otherwise).
The systems I work on do have proper OSs (Windows or Linux)

> I try to make the distinction of "small embedded systems" - basically,
> microcontroller programming where the program runs entirely from flash,
> mostly using flash and ram that are integrated into the microcontroller.
> *Typical cpus are 8-bit or 16-bit devices (like the AVR or msp430), or
> small 32-bit devices (Cortex M family are the most common these days).
> These are usually bare metal, or run embedded OS's like FreeRTOS.


I guess those are the jobs I don't get replies to!

> "Mid level" embedded systems run things like VxWorks or Linux, have
> processors with external ram and flash, but don't have disks, and have
> mostly fixed hardware (you might be able to plug in a USB memory stick,
> but you are not going to change the screen or memory). *Wireless routers
> are in this category.
>
> "High-end" embedded systems are often more like PC's, except that you
> mostly restrict the software and hardware that runs on it, and obviously
> the hardware and software are often specialised. *"Media centres" would
> be an example.


those are the systems I work on. Production lines at the moment. Weird
hardware and cut down versions of the OSs. Mine are diskless at the
moment.

> Of course, these are only vague categories, with plenty of overlap and
> plenty of missing categories.


 
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
silly question about Running a script from the command line A.Rock Python 0 04-10-2013 11:21 AM
newbie question about confusing exception handling in urllib cabbar@gmail.com Python 6 04-09-2013 07:11 PM
Need your advices =?utf-8?B?5rW36aOO?= Java 10 04-17-2006 10:26 PM
Need advices for exam 70-306 LoveGarfield MCSD 3 09-21-2003 11:06 AM
need advices : intranet archecture design Gildas Garcia ASP .Net 0 07-04-2003 07:08 PM



Advertisments