On Fri, 28 Apr 2006 19:08:33 -0500, in comp.arch.embedded Dave
<dave@comteck.com> wrote:


From now I will just post C source code for 8051 with no comments




martin

martin griffith wrote:

it much more readable.

--

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

Posting from Google? See http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/

On Fri, 28 Apr 2006 16:26:11 -0700, in comp.arch.embedded Tim Wescott
<tim@seemywebsite.com> wrote:

Boki stuff maybe?


martin

Over the last week or two, this NG seems to have drifted away from the
embedded group that it is. Postings have been made expressing political,
religous, and personal opinions far from the charter of this NG. Personal
attacks have been made on individuals for expressing their opinions.

Please take these postings to personal e-mail or some more appropriate NG.


Thank You,

~Dave~

martin griffith wrote:

I suggest writing a little program that will recursively search your
source directory and assemble random functions.

It should take the declaration line from a randomly selected fcn in a
randomly selected sourcefile, put in curly braces, and in between put a
random number of randomly selected source lines (including non-null
comments and occasional whitespace). If the function returns a value,
your program should take a return statement from a randomly selected
function in your source directory and put it before the closing curly
brace, typecasting the returned value to the return type of the
prototype for this random function.

You may be on to a real AI implementation... :-)

Dimiter

------------------------------------------------------
Dimiter Popoff Transgalactic Instruments

http://www.tgi-sci.com
------------------------------------------------------

larwe wrote:

On 28 Apr 2006 23:12:44 -0700, in comp.arch.embedded "Didi"
<dp@tgi-sci.com> wrote:

Do you think CBF will comment about your top posting?


martin

Don't take any notice of a man who even irons his underpants.


On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 09:14:13 +0200, martin griffith
<mart_in_medina@yahoo.esXXX> wrote:

"Dave" <dave@comteck.com> wrote in message
newsan.2006.04.29.00.08.32.651350@comteck.com...
Yes, it's true. There's been a right old "setting the world to rights around
the water cooler" chinwag.

And very good-humoured it's been too. (I saw one personal attack, which was
challenged, and the poster apologised immediately.) Despite a multiplicity
of viewpoints, it's been cogent, mature, frank, but fair. (Which for Usenet
is almost unheard of .) I'd like to say thanks and huge respect to the
posters for keeping it that way.

But yes, you're right, it was OT. It made for an interesting distraction
from real work, though .

Steve
http://www.fivetrees.com

I agree with you, Steve. Nothing wrong with getting to know each other
a bit better. Some off-topic exchanges, so what. I am sure the net
result will be less unnecessary communication over time (and thus
more useful exchanges).

Dimiter

------------------------------------------------------
Dimiter Popoff Transgalactic Instruments

http://www.tgi-sci.com
------------------------------------------------------

P.S. Yet another top-posting from me (I find top-posting more
appropriate when there is no excerpt I want to indicate I reply
to and the entire message is > 4-5 lines; otherwise I merge both.
So far no complaints :-).


Steve at fivetrees wrote:

martin griffith wrote:
Postponed until the greater evil of google is conquered. :-)

--
"If you want to post a followup via groups.google.com, don't use
the broken "Reply" link at the bottom of the article. Click on
"show options" at the top of the article, then click on the
"Reply" at the bottom of the article headers." - Keith Thompson
More details at: <http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/>
Also see <http://www.safalra.com/special/googlegroupsreply/>

Steve at fivetrees wrote:
In large part it has been kept under control by the absence of
extensive cross-posting. That is always deadly, as it attracts
kooks of all flavors.

--
"If you want to post a followup via groups.google.com, don't use
the broken "Reply" link at the bottom of the article. Click on
"show options" at the top of the article, then click on the
"Reply" at the bottom of the article headers." - Keith Thompson
More details at: <http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/>
Also see <http://www.safalra.com/special/googlegroupsreply/>

Didi wrote:
Unfortunately I think some of the people I work with write actual code
this way.

Hello Tim,

Not so thoughtful ones can be funny at times. When the occasional
redneck rant pops up maybe we should just think of newsgroups
differently, like neighborhood bars. Usually a nice place to hang out
but there may be a fight now and then.

Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com