Mail Archives: djgpp/2001/06/30/05:00:07
On Fri, 29 Jun 2001 10:46:47 GMT, info AT hoekstra-uitgeverij DOT nl (Richard
Bos) sat on a tribble, which squeaked:
>So learn to read headers.
I do know how to read them, thank you very much.
>I know; I'm using it. And guess what? Right now, I've got a line on my
>screen telling me where this message is going.
Same here. Seems to be comd, clc, clc++. But previously, when I was
reading, it only listed comd?
>The result of running a C implementation on a C program
>must result in the semantics the Standard demands of these
>implementations and programs. _However_, these are not required to be
>object modules. They may well be direct executables. Or, for example,
>the implementation may be an interpreter, and the only output you get is
>the output from the program, without any intermediate module or
>executable at all.
Hmm. Okay, so I can have my "compiler" invoke GCC, link and run the
result, delete the binary, and reboot the computer, and *then* it's
legit. :-)
>However, such matters are entirely implementation-dependent, and
>therefore off-topic for comp.lang.c. Had the original message been
>posted only to c.o.m.d., you might have had a point here, but on c.l.c,
>you don't.
Or rather, I have a third of a point? 1/3 on comd, 0 on clc, 0 on
clc++?
--
Bill Gates: "No computer will ever need more than 640K of RAM." -- 1980
"There's nobody getting rich writing software that I know of." -- 1980
"This antitrust thing will blow over." -- 1998
Combine neo, an underscore, and one thousand sixty-one to make my hotmail addy.
- Raw text -