Re: How printf() works???????

Richard wrote:
santosh <santosh.k83@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
Robbie Hatley wrote:
"Richard" <devr_@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Richard Heathfield <rjh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

<snip>

x < 30 is a relational expression, and all expressions have
values. Relational expressions have the value 0 if they're false,
and 1 if they're true. So x < 30 will evaluate to 0 if x is less
than 30, and 1 otherwise.

It won't actually.

How do you figure? It does in standard C. If it doesn't for you,
then your compiler is broken and you should get a better one.

The expression x < 30 will evaluate to 1 if x is less than 30 and
zero otherwise. Richard said the reverse, by mistake I'm sure.

Getting something totally backwards is,of course, a mistake. There is
no evil intent in my correction. Why you feel the need to confirm his
"mistake" is very strange.

Because he did not spot RJH's error and therefore, could not understand
your correction.

Possibly you should inform Robbie to be
less quick to tell people their compilers are broken and that they
should get a new one?

He misread RJH's erroneous sentence. Why blame him for it?

Which leads to the question "Why didn't you explain why Heathfield was
wrong". And the answer is simple : I don't believe in treating people
like idiots. Let them look and think the problem over themselves. They
can always come back and say "you have me stumped", what is the
issue?".

Well in this case it has led to another bunch of substanceless posts
over a trivial error. Maybe we can stop now...

A good C programmer and "team player" thinks for themselves. RH had
said enough about the comparison expression for anyone with half a
clue to see why he had made a mistake in his final analysis.

Yes. But Robbie Hatley misread that whole statement.

But of course, giving credence and credit to other posters is becoming
a rarer and rarer thing these days with posters like CBF riding in on
their chargers at a moments notice.

People in clc are far too eager to see other people wrong so that they
can score some clique points by being rude and obnoxious at the first
possible point. See the races to post OT rejoinders for a good example
- when they KNOW that Default User or CBF have already beaten them to
it.

I don't see much of this lately.

It's why I come here to be honest. It's fun to watch and relieves the
boredom of a typical C programming day. And one learns something here
- not always standard C related either. Fortunately there are more
posters willing to "break topicality" and, err, talk about real C.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: How printf() works???????
    ... unplonked "Just Richard" on a whim, ... Getting something totally backwards is,of course, a mistake. ... It was an honest correction to an honest ... whole to relax its topicality restrictions somewhat. ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: How printf() works???????
    ... Richard said the reverse, by mistake I'm ... Getting something totally backwards is,of course, a mistake. ... What he said to you about your compiler is beside the ... Robbie came flying in telling me my ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: Code Review - is this code shit
    ... Richard "Buckwheat" Heathfield are falling all over yourselves to ... mistake, and you are falling all over yourself trying to avoid your ... made an incorrect "correction". ... The important issue is that of incorrectly "correcting" someone, ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: How printf() works???????
    ... Richard Heathfield writes: ... Getting something totally backwards is,of course, a mistake. ... It was an honest correction to an honest ... I think is unlikely to spot on re-reading the reason that their ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: Chez Watt: Re: Manufacture vs. Artifact?
    ... Not true - I have voted for evolutionists who made amusingly ridiculous ... problem is that there are precious few nominations to choose from that are ... Again you claim this was a mistake by Richard. ...
    (talk.origins)