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 10:25:01 +0000
Organization: Fix this later
Lines: 66
Message-ID: <vq6kdt$1pmnk$4@dont-email.me>
References: <vq1qas$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> <vq6ips$1pmnk$2@dont-email.me>
 <vq6j5h$1qosf$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 11:25:01 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f7081586a897c6da4d79231b7ed9c810";
	logging-data="1891060"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+jO0r73DIN9CsQ/Tmt5nzOJFtZ5Jg4HLqS2Exno8YDAg=="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:+C1H747G+zA4xtKWw2vVNno21zE=
In-Reply-To: <vq6j5h$1qosf$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-GB
Bytes: 3721

On 04/03/2025 10:03, Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Mar 2025 09:57:16 +0000
> Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> wibbled:
>> On 04/03/2025 09:23, Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org wrote:
>>> 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.
> 
> So what you're saying is you can't troubleshoot linking problems.

No, that's not what I'm saying. Do learn to read. What I'm saying 
is that the OP would be better served by posting the problem 
statement in a group more closely related to the actual problem.

We may, I trust, presume that the Python source he is building is 
production code that has successfully been built before by other 
people? If so, then it's not a language issue, and that is enough 
to put it beyond comp.lang.c's brief.

> Do you
> get someone else to compile your code for you?

I tell the compiler to do it. Don't you?

> 
>>> 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.
> 
> Oh dear, if stuck go in circles, posted comparisons conveniently ignored.

Your inability to comprehend analogies does not stop them from 
being valid illustrations of the gaping holes in your "argument" 
(such as it is).

> 
>>> 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
> 
> Is K&R outdated? Hmm, let me think about that for a nanosecond...

So it *is* your claim that...

>> that compilation no longer depends on the system you are using
>> and has now become a language attribute? Can you hear the
>> chuckles yet?

Laughing my socks off. Time to plonk, perhaps?

> Wtf has the language standard got to do with anything?

Yep; time to plonk.

Bye-bye.

-- 
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