Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.python
Subject: Re: Python recompile
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2025 09:57:16 +0000
Organization: Fix this later
Lines: 59
Message-ID: <vq6ips$1pmnk$2@dont-email.me>
References: <vq1qas$j22$1@gallifrey.nk.ca> <vq1uvb$qbuq$1@dont-email.me>
 <vq22nc$rvb8$1@dont-email.me> <vq24kd$rg6i$1@dont-email.me>
 <vq3oag$18iv6$1@dont-email.me> <vq4hf2$1brf7$1@dont-email.me>
 <vq4l3d$1ck9e$1@dont-email.me> <vq4m0u$1ctpn$1@dont-email.me>
 <vq4n05$1d5dv$1@dont-email.me> <vq4om7$1dbo2$2@dont-email.me>
 <vq6dqh$1pskk$1@dont-email.me> <vq6f8p$1pmnk$1@dont-email.me>
 <vq6gqc$1qcp8$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2025 10:57:16 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f7081586a897c6da4d79231b7ed9c810";
	logging-data="1891060"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19QrPLIX4fFiA0s9azy58FLE2Kt3RNMJvqpy7jzO4NgsA=="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:m1B4h7CXac7/OEqTDapk5rO0UsA=
In-Reply-To: <vq6gqc$1qcp8$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-GB
Bytes: 3342

On 04/03/2025 09:23, Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Mar 2025 08:56:57 +0000
> Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> wibbled:
>> On 04/03/2025 08:32, Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org wrote:
>>> Oh well, in that case I bow down in front of his magnificence, he must not
>>> be contradicted!
>>
>> James would be the first to say that he should be contradicted
>> when he is mistaken.
>>
>> Here, he is not mistaken. You are.
> 
> No, I'm not,

Yes, you are.

> because plenty of compilation issues are caused by code issues.

Undoubtedly true, and equally undoubtedly irrelevant in this 
case. Were it relevant, the OP would by now have shown us the 
problem code.

> Or are you claiming those don't count as part of development?

Not at all. Your keyboard's shift key is part of development too, 
but that isn't enough to make it topical in comp.lang.c.

Show us the code.

>>> Compilation is a fundamental part of the process of programming in C whether
>>> you and Kuyper like it or not.
>>
>> Quoth K&R in "The C Programming Language":
> 
> *yawn*
> 
>> Just how to run this program depends on the system you are using.
>> As a specific example, on the UNIX operating system you must
> 
> Blah blah.
> 
> K&R would also claim that the function parameter type definitions have to
> follow the prototype. Luckily that hasn't been the case since 1989.

Is it, then, your claim that K&R are mistaken or outdated and 
that compilation no longer depends on the system you are using 
and has now become a language attribute? Can you hear the 
chuckles yet?

If you think you can defend your claim by showing where the 
language standard supports your extraordinarily wobbly position, 
by all means have a crack at it. Show us why you're right.

-- 
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within