Re: C IDE Recommendations
- From: Keith Thompson <kst-u@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2006 00:16:13 GMT
jacob navia <jacob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
[...]
The Original Poster of the thread started asking about an IDE.
Besides, I do think that IDEs *are* topical here and that this
group is hijacked by people that want it to discuss a narrow
part of the language (C89) and not all the environment where
the language lives.
For the record, we routinely discuss C89/C90 *and* C99, and
occasionally pre-standard versions of the language, and such
discussions are (almost?) universally accepted as topical. The fact
that some of us will point out that depending on C99-specific features
can cause portability problems does not change the fact that C99 is
considered topical here.
(My comment in this followup applies only to that one narrow point,
and not to any debate about who may or may not have hijacked what.)
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@xxxxxxx <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: C IDE Recommendations
- From: Jonathan Pritchard
- Re: C IDE Recommendations
- From: Richard Heathfield
- Re: C IDE Recommendations
- References:
- Re: C IDE Recommendations
- From: Jonathan Pritchard
- Re: C IDE Recommendations
- From: Keith Thompson
- Re: C IDE Recommendations
- From: jacob navia
- Re: C IDE Recommendations
- From: Andrew Poelstra
- Re: C IDE Recommendations
- From: jacob navia
- Re: C IDE Recommendations
- Prev by Date: Re: General method for dynamically allocating memory for a string
- Next by Date: Re: C IDE Recommendations
- Previous by thread: Re: C IDE Recommendations
- Next by thread: Re: C IDE Recommendations
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|