/prog/ - C program

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 18:06

Make me a C program that reads given two integers (no limits) and outputs the largest.

Do this in a proper GNU hello.c way.

Name: VIPPER 2010-07-13 18:24

#!/usr/bin/perl

print my $a = <> < my $b = <> ? $a : $b;
print "JEWS " for(;;) or die "JEWS";

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 18:48

>>2
That truly was VIP quality.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 18:56

#include <stdio.h>



int main(void)

{ for(;;) putchar('9');

  return 0; }

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 19:10

#include <homework.h>//All possible assignements/problems
HOMEWORK_2301;

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 19:12

#include <stdio.h>
void main(){
puts("The numbers are fully equal. Stop being racist!");
}

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 19:24

>>5
[m]/hw/2010/2301.c:14: `};' warning: `
statement is empty or has no side effects

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 19:24

/hw/2010/2301.c:14: `};' warning: ` statement is empty or has no side effects

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 19:37

[code]int main()
    {
      printf("enter two numbers");
      int a = scanf("%d");
      int b = scanf("%d");
      if (a > b)
      printf(a);
      if (a < b)
      printf(b);
      return;
    }

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 19:53

[/code]

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 20:22

r = x - ((x - y) & ((x - y) >> (sizeof(int) * CHAR_BIT - 1)));

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 20:27

>>1
two integers (no limits)
What does that mean? That we need to use unbounded integers?

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 20:42



#include <stdio.h>

#include <string.h>



int main(int argc, char **argv) {

        char __=0,*_o=1[argv],*o_=2[argv];

        strlen(_o)>strlen(o_)?--__:strlen(o_)>strlen(_o)?++__:__;

        if (!__)

                for (; *_o&&*_o==*o_ || (*_o?--__,*_o>*o_?__:--__:__)&&0;++_o,o_++);

        return (printf)("%d\n",!__?~~0:++__?2:1) *0;

}

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 20:49

>>13



usage: magic <uint_1> <uint_2>



output:

    0 : uint_1 == uint_2

    1 : uint_1 > uint_2

    2 : uint_1 < uint_2

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 22:57

1[argv]
This is valid? What does it do? What ends up being the value of *_o?

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 0:09

>>15
Yes. It confuses people who don't know C. You can figure the last part out for yourself.

Also: don't you have a C compiler?

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 1:37

>>15
You are a faggot, faggot. Haven't you read your K&R today?

Name: FrozenVoid 2010-07-14 2:00

>>15
Arrays/Pointers in C can accessed by
array+index and index+array, which is just pointer_offset+pointer_base.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 2:36

>>18
That's just sick.
string("abc")+string("def") != string("def")+string("abc") even in c++. Probably we should fix this bug in C++-1x

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 2:47

>>13
I'm an expect C programmer.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 2:48

string("abc")+string("def") != string("def")+string("abc")
what does string do there that it breaks the transitivity of addition?

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 2:57

>>21
it doesn't break transitivity of addition.
this is about concatenation, which isn't transitive, ever.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 3:31

>>22
+ doesn't do concatenation. concatenation in c looks like "abc" "def" and "def" "abc".

Name: FrozenVoid 2010-07-14 8:09

>+ doesn't do concatenation
Concatenation with + isn't normal, but in Sepples it is.

__________________
Orbis terrarum delenda est

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 8:51

>>23
How did this become topical?

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 8:56

>>25
The question is: what drugs K&R did, so pointer+integer became commutative? I want to know.
>>21,22
I don't think you know what transitive means, guys. But, well. Expect nothing less from /prog/

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 9:34

>>23
Only with string constants.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 10:11

strcat

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 10:16

>>24
Pretty sure it's operator<<

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 10:26

>>5

OP here... if this was an homework thread it would be done in Java.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 10:33

>>30
fuck java
also, how you like my solution? >>13 that is

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 13:05

@31: I wanted to tear my eyes out as soon as I saw char __=0,

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 13:29

>>32
it's a perfectly cromulent variable name

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 13:35

>>32, 33
yepp. identifiers in C are [_A-Za-z0-9]

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 14:05

>>26
what drugs K&R did, so pointer+integer became commutative?
That's a fair question. What I want to know is how the discussion of strings became topical. They have nothing to do with this phenomenon.

To answer your question, the object is to support pointer arithmetic without requiring casts everywhere (try casting that... blech! It's just as bad the other way around.) C is fairly hacky in a lot of places, but this isn't one of them. It just seems odd because it happens to work owing to the types involved.

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 14:43

Addition is commutative. What were Russel and Whitehead smoking?!

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 15:06

>>36
Blah, think about Niels Abel!

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-15 3:23

#include <stdio.h>



int ab(char *a, char *b) {

    while(*a!='\0'&&*a==*b&&*a++&&*b++); return *a-*b;

}



int main(int ac, char **a) { 

    int c = ac<3?0:ab(a[1], a[2]);

    printf("%s\n",ac<3?"the fuck?!":c>0?a[1]:a[2]);

    //printf("%s\n",ac<3?"fuck off":c>0?"1st greater":c<0?"2nd greater":"equal");

    return 0;

}

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-15 3:35

>38
>while(*a!='\0'&&*a==*b&&*a++&&*b++); return *a-*b;
while(*a!='\0'&&*b!='\0'&&*a==*b&&*a++&&*b++); return *a!='\0'&&*b!='\0'?*a-*b:*a=='\0'&&*b=='\0'?0:*a=='\0'?-1:1;

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-15 4:07



int main(argc, argv) int argc; char** argv; { puts(argv[1]); return 0; }

It has a bug that I didn't fix: it works only in 50% of cases. But I think it's not that bad. Probably it's compiler failure.

C program

1 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 18:06

2 Name: VIPPER 2010-07-13 18:24

3 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 18:48

4 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 18:56

5 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 19:10

6 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 19:12

7 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 19:24

8 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 19:24

9 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 19:37

10 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 19:53

11 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 20:22

12 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 20:27

13 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 20:42

14 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 20:49

15 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 22:57

16 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 0:09

17 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 1:37

18 Name: FrozenVoid 2010-07-14 2:00

19 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 2:36

20 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 2:47

21 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 2:48

22 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 2:57

23 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 3:31

24 Name: FrozenVoid 2010-07-14 8:09

25 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 8:51

26 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 8:56

27 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 9:34

28 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 10:11

29 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 10:16

30 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 10:26

31 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 10:33

32 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 13:05

33 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 13:29

34 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 13:35

35 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 14:05

36 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 14:43

37 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 15:06

38 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-15 3:23

39 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-15 3:35

40 Name: Anonymous 2010-07-15 4:07

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 18:06

Name: VIPPER 2010-07-13 18:24

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 18:48

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 18:56

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 19:10

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 19:12

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 19:24

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 19:24

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 19:37

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 19:53

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 20:22

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 20:27

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 20:42

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 20:49

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-13 22:57

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 0:09

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 1:37

Name: FrozenVoid 2010-07-14 2:00

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 2:36

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 2:47

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 2:48

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 2:57

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 3:31

Name: FrozenVoid 2010-07-14 8:09

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 8:51

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 8:56

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 9:34

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 10:11

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 10:16

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 10:26

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 10:33

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 13:05

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 13:29

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 13:35

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 14:05

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 14:43

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-14 15:06

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-15 3:23

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-15 3:35

Name: Anonymous 2010-07-15 4:07