Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes...
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2024 19:13:07 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <vc9ov4$2uqam$3@dont-email.me>
References: <vab101$3er$1@reader1.panix.com> <vapitn$3u1ub$1@dont-email.me>
 <87o75bwlp8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <vaps06$3vg8l$1@dont-email.me>
 <871q27weeh.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <20240829083200.195@kylheku.com>
 <87v7zjuyd8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <20240829084851.962@kylheku.com>
 <87mskvuxe9.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <vaq9tu$1te8$1@dont-email.me>
 <vbci8r$1c9e8$1@paganini.bofh.team> <vbcs65$eabn$1@dont-email.me>
 <vbekut$1kd24$1@paganini.bofh.team> <vbepcb$q6p2$1@dont-email.me>
 <vbgb5q$1ruv8$1@paganini.bofh.team> <vbhbbb$1blt4$1@dont-email.me>
 <87tteqktr8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <vbkjqk$201ms$1@dont-email.me>
 <87ttenk2nq.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <vbps3c$31s4d$1@dont-email.me>
 <875xr3jaz0.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <867cbccn78.fsf@linuxsc.com>
 <vc8vgr$2one0$1@dont-email.me> <20240916042822.629@kylheku.com>
 <vc9cjc$2s6vu$1@dont-email.me> <vc9lq5$2u802$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2024 19:13:09 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="0f501a25988d16ea2f32567a651b5888";
	logging-data="3107158"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19mr6/FV/RfP0v0TzYO7RlrshZB8sYLNvA="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ozlCxs46qXsfC8gUs6z1r2e1mXE=
In-Reply-To: <vc9lq5$2u802$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-GB
Bytes: 4099

On 16/09/2024 18:19, James Kuyper wrote:
> On 2024-09-16, Bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
>> On 16/09/2024 12:30, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> ...
>>> Yes; "I hsve my own personal version of the Bible in which many of its
>>> arbitrary stories are otherwise" is probably not a good way to approach
>>> a Bible study group.
>>
>> So this is a Bible study group now?
> 
> No, but there are some key similarities. Both bible study groups and
> this newsgroup have an authoritative text to reference. However, the
> nature of that authority is quite different in the two cases. Bible
> study groups believe that the Bible is divinely inspired. Those who are
> sufficiently familiar with the C standard know that it was created by a
> committee of experts, fully capable of making mistakes. Many (most?)
> Believers consider the Bible to be incapable of being wrong.
> 
> The C standard is also incapable of being wrong, but in a very different
> sense - the C standard defines C, there is no alternative to compare it
> with, in order to say that the C standard is wrong. The C standard might
> be inconsistent, unimplementable, badly designed, or incomprehensible,
> among many other defects if might have - but as the official definition
> of C, it cannot be wrong.
> Any such defects can be corrected by filing a defect report and
> convincing the committee that the report is correct. If they agree, the
> next version of the standard is likely to contain revised wording to
> address the issue. Try doing that with the Bible.

At the risk of offending people, I'd say this /has/ been done with the 
Bible countless times.  There are dozens of major versions of the Bible 
with different selections of books and sections of the books.  There are 
hundreds of translations for each version, even counting just 
translations into English, based on different source texts and very 
different styles of translation.  And that's before you get to major 
re-writes, like Mormonism (though perhaps that's more akin to moving 
from C to Rust).

Unlike C, it is not a nice linear progression with each new version 
superseding the previous versions.  But we still do see some "C90 
fanatics" that are as convinced in their viewpoint as some King James fans!