Re: "Portable" C compilers?

On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 11:34:05 -0700 (PDT), jameskuyper
<jameskuyper@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

luser-ex-troll wrote:
On Mar 20, 9:26 am, gaze...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Kenny McCormack)
wrote:
...
I would like a clarification from one of the regs or semi-regs (in which
category I place you, Jim K.) as to whether or not Chuck is still a reg.
...
It's becoming apparent that in the contraxion of "regular" to "reg" it
becomes overloaded with a sense of "regulator" which in the context of
usenet becomes associated with the sense of "moderator" issuing in
overtones of power and the inherent corruptibility of its seekers.

If a regular is only required to provide a sense of regularity, then,
um, they're not so bad.

The people who use the term "reg" on this newsgroup do not consider it
to apply to themselves. This also applies to most of the people who
use the term "regular", and to every person who uses "regular" to mean
anything other than "someone who posts to this newsgroup regularly".
The existence and membership of that group is therefore determined
entirely by people who consider themselves non-members. Therefore,
you'll have to ask those non-members what those terms means to them,
and in particular you'll have to ask them whether CBFalconer has lost
his membership. However, I don't believe that the term "regulator" has
any direct role to play in the etymology or connotations of the term
"reg".

There have been bizarrely paranoid claims that the "regulars" have
some weird moderator-like power to prevent people from posting
whatever they want to this newsgroup, the people who believe in the
existence of that power seem to resent bitterly the abuse of that
power. I've seen no evidence that anyone has ever been prevented from
posting anything here; quite the contrary, so I find the resentment
very difficult to understand. If there were in fact a clique with the
motives and powers that some of the users of the term ascribe to
"regulars", the people who use that term would be completely unable to
post any messages here.

Along the way, i once tried IRC chat rooms. They have an immediacy of
response similar to being there in person. I (and presumably they)
also have had experiences with cliques that weild such power. They
then expect their bad experiences in IRC to carry over to Usenet,
because they do not that there is a difference. I have seen people
that (i imagine) are used to IRC, post several times in succession, or
answer their own post with a repost. Thus is my proposed an
explaination.
.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Concluding End Result - Re: SubWoofer Low Level Input - Interface Standards?
    ... +/- 12V dual polarity power supply regulator. ... The amplifier uses legacy, leaded components ... I had never worked on an amplified subwoofer before and had no ...
    (rec.audio.tech)
  • Re: [UPDATED v3][PATCH 1/7] regulator: consumer interface
    ... 'id' is really the regulator name and will be renamed in the next patch. ... In this example the power domain constraint (not consumer constraint) ... The actual regulator output will be determined by consumer voltage ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: ethernet and AC in conduit
    ... Also taken into account are voltage variations in the AC to DC power ...   If provided were numbers (such as from the AP internal electrolytic ... regulator), then and only then would I agree to a 50% overvoltage ... Refering to voltage variation tolerance - Linksys appears to use a ...
    (alt.internet.wireless)
  • Re: power supply design
    ... > I'm going to build a power supply for my projects and I was wondering a few ... the point where the regulator can no longer regulate. ... charged up to the peak voltage - 2x the diode drop twice a cycle. ... is simply a zener diode good enough for the overvoltage ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: Voltage shedding question
    ... in order mostly to learn how to design simple power supplies. ... caps and the regulator. ... For the regulator and transformer I'm using, ... Here's the circuit: ...
    (sci.electronics.basics)