Re: Has ANSI Approved ISO/IEC 9899:1999?
- From: gazelle@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Kenny McCormack)
- Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2007 14:32:14 +0000 (UTC)
In article <lnprz1coxu.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Keith Thompson <kst-u@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Mark McIntyre <markmcintyre@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 18:44:03 +0200, in comp.lang.c , "Joachim Schmitz"
<nospam.jojo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
To me wikipedia is the greates thing since sliced bread...
Please see a doctor.
Smiley deliberately omitted...
If you had been *either* off-topic *or* gratuitously insulting, I
wouldn't bother to post. As it is, please post to alt.flame.wikipedia
(the fact that it doesn't exist is your own problem).
It is so refreshing to see honest dissension amongst the regulars.
When I started posting to clc (in the current incarnation), there was
absolutely no (public) disagreement among the regulars; they presented a
unified front. Very nice to see that things have loosened up.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Has ANSI Approved ISO/IEC 9899:1999?
- From: Richard
- Re: Has ANSI Approved ISO/IEC 9899:1999?
- References:
- Has ANSI Approved ISO/IEC 9899:1999?
- From: jaysome
- Re: Has ANSI Approved ISO/IEC 9899:1999?
- From: Joachim Schmitz
- Re: Has ANSI Approved ISO/IEC 9899:1999?
- From: Mark McIntyre
- Re: Has ANSI Approved ISO/IEC 9899:1999?
- From: Keith Thompson
- Has ANSI Approved ISO/IEC 9899:1999?
- Prev by Date: Re: Writing single bits to a file
- Next by Date: Re: pll: who uses _Bool
- Previous by thread: Re: Has ANSI Approved ISO/IEC 9899:1999?
- Next by thread: Re: Has ANSI Approved ISO/IEC 9899:1999?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|