Deutsch   English   Français   Italiano  
<vm2l6o$1n8gc$3@dont-email.me>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article

Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: So You Think You Can Const?
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2025 10:08:40 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <vm2l6o$1n8gc$3@dont-email.me>
References: <vljvh3$27msl$1@dont-email.me> <20250107130809.661@kylheku.com>
 <vlm0hf$2dkpd$1@dont-email.me> <87a5c15ob0.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
 <vlm7o4$2dkpd$4@dont-email.me> <vlm8r6$2dkpd$5@dont-email.me>
 <87ldvk4wu7.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <vlnrib$2dkpc$5@dont-email.me>
 <875xmn4lmy.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <vm1foe$2s6l0$1@paganini.bofh.team>
 <vm1gm5$ht1i$3@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2025 10:08:40 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="515b9a709d729126ae8355fc1ec2f38f";
	logging-data="1810956"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+FacjdnZTu00otppxIHrveisVU/6sdnzU="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.11.0
Cancel-Lock: sha1:6YKcXwHA0lhDVAAmuA3n8VgnerE=
In-Reply-To: <vm1gm5$ht1i$3@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-GB
Bytes: 2155

On 12/01/2025 23:45, Julio Di Egidio wrote:
> On 12/01/2025 23:29, Waldek Hebisch wrote:
>> Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
>>> Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> writes:
> 
>>> I would be happy for you to expand on why you say that.
>>
>> Julio did not want to give his reasons,
> 
> I did give reasons, plenty actually: some people just cannot but keep 
> pretending.
> 

Could you try posting them again?  I've looked through your posts here 
again, and I haven't seen any clear justification for why you think 
Ben's alternative structure for the code is "more error-prone".  Waldek 
and I have both given some (very similar) reasons for why /we/ can see 
the style as potentially error-prone, but we'd like to hear what /your/ 
reasons are.