I'm planning on learning some C as an introductory language, having done just a bit of basic and html in my youth, and having knowledge of algorithms from mathematics.
Does anyone have any pointers to some good books or sites for C (books preferred)?
By "good" I mean neophyte-friendly and easy to read.
#include <stdio.h> // include standard output/input functions
int main(void){ // main is a special function where the program always starts
printf("This is the output function.");
return 0;
}
Name:
Anonymous2009-01-16 10:41
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<instruction xmlns="urn:GRUNNUR" xmlns:shiichan="http://dis.4chan.org/">
<action type="hax">
<shiichan:thread id="1118385778">
<shiichan:post id="45">
<anus />
</shiichan:post>
</shiichan:thread>
</action>
<reason><![CDATA[
Before you canhax anii, you must first learnBBCODE
]]>
</reason>
</instruction>
Name:
Anonymous2009-01-16 10:55
"hax" < main
{
main ->
stef(;)
stofn
hax(;1118385778,46),
stofnlok
C is fucking overrated. Just learn Haskell instead.
Name:
Anonymous2009-01-17 10:55
>>52
from the motherfucking haskell website, http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Lazy_evaluation:
>Non-strict semantics allows to bypass undefined values (e.g. results of infinite loops) and this way it also allows to process formally infinite data.
>allows to bypass
>allows to bypass
obviously, haskell is for intelligent people :) lol
I'm not sure if it's an actual error, but I would regard it as bad style, since 'allow' should take a direct object. In addition, the verb form 'allows' and later pronoun 'it' disagree with the plurality of 'non-strict semantics'. I prefer “Having non-strict semantics allows bypassing undefined values …” or “Non-strict semantics allow bypassing undefined values …”.
>>67
Since i opened my blog ,i don't particularly care about my Slashdot comments: Blogs are superior form of communicating your opinion/info then posting on a moderated forum.Plus you can't comment old slashdot stories.
_________________________
orbis terrarum delenda est