Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: bart <bc@freeuk.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2025 11:04:12 +0000
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <vru2jb$35frt$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vrd77d$3nvtf$2@dont-email.me> <vreve4$19klp$2@dont-email.me>
 <20250319201903.00005452@yahoo.com> <86r02roqdq.fsf@linuxsc.com>
 <vrh1br$35029$2@dont-email.me> <LRUCP.2$541.0@fx47.iad>
 <vrh71t$3be42$1@dont-email.me> <874izntt5t.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
 <vrhviu$h5c$1@dont-email.me> <87ecyrs332.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
 <vri9t1$a29t$1@dont-email.me> <20250320171505.221@kylheku.com>
 <vrif1v$c9ev$3@dont-email.me> <8734f7rw7z.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
 <vrjjvb$1esjh$1@dont-email.me> <87tt7mqk7w.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
 <vrkvt5$2k04q$2@dont-email.me> <87cye9afl0.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
 <vrmckn$114k$1@dont-email.me> <871puoag2q.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
 <vrnoft$15f6n$1@dont-email.me> <vrrh0c$qila$1@dont-email.me>
 <vrrouo$11up7$1@dont-email.me> <vrrqe0$12u8q$1@dont-email.me>
 <vrrs20$14vob$1@dont-email.me> <vrrvnh$176lu$1@dont-email.me>
 <vrs0j5$191gt$1@dont-email.me> <vrsi31$1ldng$2@dont-email.me>
 <vrtq87$2upvg$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2025 12:04:12 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="9b3a21da3fd3fa07be1d97bdef3f85eb";
	logging-data="3325821"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+qiS2B6Ji0n7N9zGXPgFTv"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:lotW8DtWyg2Lo/IokTwLOQNc9vQ=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <vrtq87$2upvg$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 2776

On 25/03/2025 08:41, Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 21:16:17 +0000
> bart <bc@freeuk.com> wibbled:
>> .... EXCEPT when it comes to edit-run cycles. There you're in favour of
>> bunching lots of changes together, and doing one big build followed by
>> testing a dozen different things on that new version. (As though this
>> was the 1960s and you only got one batch compilation per night.)
> 
> I'm sure that made some sense to you when you wrote it. I have no idea wtf
> you're talking about however.

Then I have no idea WTF you're on about when you say that programmers 
should spend 100 times as long thinking as they do compiling. (Try 
suggesting that for any other kind of application!)

Or WTF it is that you're 'on', assuming you're not just here to wind 
people up.