Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

Cats

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-26 2:54

Tell me about your cat(s), /prog/.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-26 12:31

>>40
Obviously I would only spawn a new thread if there were several files on different hard drives and then only one per hard drive.

You probably don't know how this stuff works anyway.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-26 12:34

Tell me about your toxoplasmosis, /prog/.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-26 13:05

>>40
>of course it would you moron

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-26 13:50

>>37
You don't need that shit, it either works or doesn't. Those error messages broken down:
<stdin>:19:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'getopt'
Your system is not POSIX. getopt is in unistd.h.
(http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/000095399/functions/getopt.html)
<stdin>:27:5: error: 'optind' undeclared (first use in this function)
Same thing.
<stdin>:48:3: error: suggest parentheses around assignment used as truth value
Not an error.
<stdin>:49:32: error: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions
Doesn't matter, it's only checking for equality between however many bytes read and written.

I should've stopped at the first error; compiling a POSIX utility on a non-POSIX system is already doing it wrong.

>>37
It's an inherently serial process. The only speedup possible is by reading/writing bigger chunks.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-26 14:09

>>44
It's an inherently serial process. The only speedup possible is by reading/writing bigger chunks.
Nope.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-26 14:17

>>8
0-65536
is it weird that it bothers me that this isn't 65535

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-26 14:19

>>44

You should learn to cast so you don't get such shitty errors.
If when you compile your code it spews out a bunch of warnings and errors you're a terrible person and you should feel bad.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-26 14:22

>>47
Your an even more terrible person. Casting in such cases is only a way of asking the compiler to shut up; it doesn't magically makes the code correct.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-26 14:29

>>48

Well played, Anon.

Name: FrozenVoid 2011-09-26 14:33

>>48
All pointers are equal size physically.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-26 14:37

>>50
False. data pointers are one byte, cdata and xdata pointers are two bytes, a generic pointer is three bytes long.

Name: FrozenVoid 2011-09-26 14:45

>>51
1 byte size pointer? do you have only 255bytes of RAM

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-26 15:02

>>52
Perhaps he does, what are you, some kind of anti-low memory person?

Name: FrozenVoid 2011-09-26 15:06

>>53
No, just a normal 32-bit system user. I don't see char,int,long long or double having different pointer sizes(they are all 32-bit int pointers)

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-26 15:12

>>54
That's system specific.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-26 15:12

Imagine if all you had was 1 byte of pointers. The amount of memory saved. Lower CPU usage. Safety. Green computing
Switch to TROLLGOL today to experience the benefits of 1-byte addressing. Enterprises can't go wrong with 60-year proven solution.

--TROLLGOL design commitee

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-26 15:40

>>56
No, we should divide memory space into segments. Each segment will have a 1 byte address, and then sub-segments will have their own addresses, and so on for sub-sub-segments. Then all addresses to bytes will be stores in a linked list of pointers. It's the future.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-26 16:21

>>56
http://www.atmel.com/dyn/products/product_card.asp?part_id=3674
256 bytes of RAM.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-26 16:23

Hi! shut up!

Sorry, just testing.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-26 16:31

EXPERT PROGRAMMER!testanotheryet another

OKAY!

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-26 17:12

I loved you so much, /prog/.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-27 4:05

>>44
You're a fucking idiot. I'm on a POSIX system, but my CFLAGS restrict to the use of standard features only.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-27 5:10

>>62
getopt is a standard feature, can't you read?
http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/000095399/functions/getopt.html

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-27 5:52

>>63
I'm not sure if it's -ansi or -pedantic, but one of them restricts GCC to only define standard C features, which basically undefines the macros GNU_SOURCE, POSIX_SOURCE, XOPEN_SOURCE, etc. etc. and therefore removes the availability of non-standard functions.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-27 5:57

THIS IS NOT YOSPOS

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-27 6:03

>>64
It's -ansi, -pedantic only adds warnings.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-27 6:55

>>62
implying POSIX is not standard
>>64,66
Then don't use that option, idiot.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-27 7:28

>>67
Back to the imageboards.

Name: Anonymous 2011-09-27 14:03

>>68
hurr durr fuck you faggot

Name: sOoOoOoO random 2011-09-29 1:11

cat /dev/urandom xD
Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List
All trademarks and copyrights on this site are owned by their respective parties. All comments and posts are the responsibility of their own posters.
- Tinychan + 2ch Mode -