Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.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, 9 Sep 2024 13:06:13 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <vbmkr5$2cmfo$2@dont-email.me>
References: <vab101$3er$1@reader1.panix.com> <87mskwy9t1.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
 <vanq4h$3iieb$1@dont-email.me> <875xrkxlgo.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
 <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> <875xrivrg0.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
 <20240829191404.887@kylheku.com> <86cylqw2f8.fsf@linuxsc.com>
 <871q2568vl.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <vavmbk$13k4n$1@dont-email.me>
 <87cylo494u.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <vb09gd$16mr5$1@dont-email.me>
 <20240831195350.785@kylheku.com> <86mskrrvco.fsf@linuxsc.com>
 <vbj9qb$1qi2h$1@dont-email.me> <vbkbc1$1u33o$1@dont-email.me>
 <vbkcqi$1v2vr$1@dont-email.me> <vbmckb$2bn0s$1@dont-email.me>
 <vbmkl4$2cqcu$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2024 13:06:13 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="245842e44c78e95d3bc5cb773286c128";
	logging-data="2513400"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/jCIYwEteM2rv/KjsslH3akv0fuKuVRQM="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.11.0
Cancel-Lock: sha1:K54ThH/rF5M/sn+3WuGcrfjPfMY=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <vbmkl4$2cqcu$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 3518

On 09/09/2024 13:03, James Kuyper wrote:
> On 9/9/24 04:46, David Brown wrote:
>> On 08/09/2024 16:37, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
>>> On 08.09.2024 16:12, James Kuyper wrote:
> ...
>>>> Most important for my purposes, it makes it clear
>>>> what's required and allowed by the standard.
>>
>> No, that is not really true - the C standard is /not/ clear on all
>> points.  There are aspects of the language that you cannot fully
>> understand without cross-referencing between many different sections
>> (and there are a few aspects that are not clear even then).  That is
>> because it is a standard, not a tutorial, and not a language reference.
>> A standard is written in more "legalise" language, and makes a point of
>> trying to avoid repeating itself - while a good reference will repeat
>> the same information multiple times in different places, whenever it
>> helps for clarity.
> 
> I will concede your point, but it's still the case that the standard is
> clearer about such things than any other source I'm familiar with.

I have lost track of which particular "such things" we are talking about 
here, so you could well be right!

The standard /is/ clear on some aspects of C - but not on others.  I 
don't dispute that it is a useful document and one that serious C 
programmers should aspire to read, but I don't think it is really aimed 
at "normal" C programmers or useful to them.  Perhaps the original 
writers did not envisage so many non-experts getting involved in C coding.