Hi Laslo,
Thanks for the clarification. I have to say it's definitely a different
experience getting used to suckless code.
Dan
On Thu, Aug 24, 2017, at 06:13 AM, Laslo Hunhold wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Aug 2017 20:28:12 -0500
> Daniel Xu wrote:
>
> Hey Daniel,
>
> > I'm currently familiarizing mys
On Wed, 23 Aug 2017 20:28:12 -0500
Daniel Xu wrote:
Hey Daniel,
> I'm currently familiarizing myself with various pieces of suckless
> code. One thing keeps bothering me, though:
>
> What is EARGF() and ARGF() shorthand for? I can more or less tell what
> they do but the best I can come up with
I'm currently familiarizing myself with various pieces of suckless code.
One thing keeps bothering me, though:
What is EARGF() and ARGF() shorthand for? I can more or less tell what
they do but the best I can come up with is "Error arg flag" and "Arg
flag",
respectively.
Hopefully someone can scr
On 12/11/2013, Martti Kühne wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 3:54 PM, Strake wrote:
> ...
>> for an actual fault, for example a bottom post, is no flame.
>>
>
> Logical fallacies that are obvious are an edge case, I guess... It's
> top posting we don't like.
Sorry, yes, I meant top post.
On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 3:54 PM, Strake wrote:
...
> for an actual fault, for example a bottom post, is no flame.
>
Logical fallacies that are obvious are an edge case, I guess... It's
top posting we don't like.
cheers!
mar77i
"Asshole vs. reality" would be an appropriate subtitle for "suckless:
the movie".
Alas, the list smells ever of phosphorus and kerosene, as some would
rather flame than argue rationally. But slamming someone for an actual
fault, for example a bottom post, is no flame.
On Thu, 7 Nov 2013 10:32:46 +0100
koneu wrote:
> Maybe suckless.org should host a netiquette mailing list to get all this
> off topic out of [dev] ...
>
ML-fragmentation has been discussed before (especially in regard to
stali) and dismissed.
For the sake of specificity though, I wouldn't have
Mihail Zenkov wrote:
> 2013/11/6, koneu :
> > I agree with you on implicit "hi" and "bye" in mailing lists but please
> > don't fucking bot quote. And if gmail's fucking online shit doesn't
> > allow anything else then don't fucking use gmail's fucking online shit.
> > Thanks.
>
> +1 But can we wr
2013/11/6, koneu :
> I agree with you on implicit "hi" and "bye" in mailing lists but please
> don't fucking bot quote. And if gmail's fucking online shit doesn't
> allow anything else then don't fucking use gmail's fucking online shit.
> Thanks.
+1 But can we write in less aggressive style withou
> Asshole vs. reality [was: Re: [dev] Question about arg.h]
I should have never asked...
Christoph Lohmann <2...@r-36.net> wrote:
>> What does it make you feel that I do not append a salutation and closing
>> to this e-mail? Does it bother you in any way? If so, why? If not, why
>> should I do so?
>
>This is not twitter.
He has a point, and this discussion is related to usage of this
hiro wrote:
> You're so deep.
I agree with you on implicit "hi" and "bye" in mailing lists but please
don't fucking bot quote. And if gmail's fucking online shit doesn't
allow anything else then don't fucking use gmail's fucking online shit.
Thanks.
You're so deep.
On 11/6/13, Christoph Lohmann <2...@r-36.net> wrote:
> Greetings.
>
> On Wed, 06 Nov 2013 17:48:22 +0100 Chris Down wrote:
>> On 2013-11-06 06:38:23 +0100, Christoph Lohmann wrote:
>> > You have nothing to say, I guess.
>>
>> What does it make you feel that I do not append a salut
Greetings.
On Wed, 06 Nov 2013 17:48:22 +0100 Chris Down wrote:
> On 2013-11-06 06:38:23 +0100, Christoph Lohmann wrote:
> > You have nothing to say, I guess.
>
> What does it make you feel that I do not append a salutation and closing
> to this e-mail? Does it bother you in any way? If so, why?
Chris Down wrote:
>On 2013-11-06 06:38:23 +0100, Christoph Lohmann wrote:
>> You have nothing to say, I guess.
>
>What does it make you feel that I do not append a salutation and
>closing
>to this e-mail? Does it bother you in any way? If so, why? If not, why
>should I do so?
I'm puzzled too. For
I really enjoy this mailing list, because discussions about random
topics result in a debate about something completely irrelevant.
On 2013-11-06 06:38:23 +0100, Christoph Lohmann wrote:
> You have nothing to say, I guess.
What does it make you feel that I do not append a salutation and closing
to this e-mail? Does it bother you in any way? If so, why? If not, why
should I do so?
pgpFwshGOPNWT.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Greetings.
On Wed, 06 Nov 2013 06:38:23 +0100 Chris Down wrote:
> Good gribbly greetings my good chum,
>
> On 2013-11-05 21:38:35 +0100, Alexander Huemer wrote:
> > P.S. I passionately hate people who top-post, don't give enough details
> > and cannot say hi or bye in an email.
>
> Having to p
Good gribbly greetings my good chum,
On 2013-11-05 21:38:35 +0100, Alexander Huemer wrote:
> P.S. I passionately hate people who top-post, don't give enough details
> and cannot say hi or bye in an email.
Having to prepend a salutation to every message, and then a goodbye
message and your name i
Alexander Huemer wrote:
>P.S. I passionately hate people who top-post, don't give enough details
>
>and cannot say hi or bye in an email.
I wonder about the last bit: aren't "hi" and "bye" implied?
--
Dmitrij D. Czarkoff
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 09:24:38PM +0100, Krol, Willem van de wrote:
> It's in sbase arg.h
The usage of the macro in these places does not make sense to me.
Kind regards,
-Alex
P.S. I passionately hate people who top-post, don't give enough details
and cannot say hi or bye in an email.
It's in sbase arg.h
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 9:09 PM, Alexander Huemer wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 08:26:01PM +0100, Krol, Willem van de wrote:
>> The arguments (argc, argv) _are used, in the for loop from ARGBEGIN.
>
> Are you talking about st or some other suckless.org project?
> I do not se
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 08:26:01PM +0100, Krol, Willem van de wrote:
> The arguments (argc, argv) _are used, in the for loop from ARGBEGIN.
Are you talking about st or some other suckless.org project?
I do not see the USED macro being used anywhere in st.
Kind regards,
-Alex
The arguments (argc, argv) _are used, in the for loop from ARGBEGIN.
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 7:57 PM, Alexander Huemer wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 07:23:30PM +0100, Krol, Willem van de wrote:
>> Indeed, casting to void doesn't have any effect. The variable doesn't
>> become unusable or someth
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 07:23:30PM +0100, Krol, Willem van de wrote:
> Indeed, casting to void doesn't have any effect. The variable doesn't
> become unusable or something like that (no compiler warning or error).
Casting to void has an effect. In case an argument to a function is not
used anywhe
Indeed, casting to void doesn't have any effect. The variable doesn't
become unusable or something like that (no compiler warning or error).
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 7:18 PM, koneu wrote:
> Krol, Willem van de wrote:
>> Hello, I was reading arg.h, because I want to use it in my program, but I
>> co
Krol, Willem van de wrote:
> Hello, I was reading arg.h, because I want to use it in my program, but I
> couln't figure out why the USED macro was used. Could someone clear
> that up?
>
> Willem
It's so you don't have to type out (void) whenever you want to cast
something to void without any rea
Hello, I was reading arg.h, because I want to use it in my program, but I
couln't figure out why the USED macro was used. Could someone clear
that up?
Willem
28 matches
Mail list logo
