But dc
is a reverse polish calculator Unix program. It’s even in the Bell Labs’ Unix 1st edition manual.
But dc
is a reverse polish calculator Unix program. It’s even in the Bell Labs’ Unix 1st edition manual.
:!kill -9 -1
It’s designed to be an extended vi clone above anything else.
It’s blueshifted to looking green because you’re excessively speeding.
C was built mostly to abstract from assembly
That’s actually not true; rather, many modern architectures are designed to allow languages like C to be compiled more easily. Old architectures don’t even have a built-in stack.
Ed Is The Standard Text Editor
ed
, ex
, and vi
are all standard, required text editors in the Single Unix Specification.
You can’t have total internal reflection within a hollow core, but that’s not how they function.
But then the filename wouldn’t be /^[[:alnum:]._-]*~*$/
.
.C
came first. I don’t usually use it though; I usually use .cc
or .cxx
, but if I’m making some tiny test source, I often use .C
. I’m strongly opposed to the .cpp
extension because calling C++ “CPP” leads to confusion with the preexisting (before C++) use of the initialism to refer to the C preprocessor. There’s a reason why CPPFLAGS refers to preprocessor flags and CXXFLAGS refers to C++ flags.
You also talk to the rapist.
I look forward to finding out how it’s actually much worse than meets the eye. [emphasis added]
It this schadenfreude because you hate Canonical and their Snap system?
It would be better if the workers were actually paid enough.
[[ is not a POSIX shell feature.
deleted by creator
Also, I constantly name files in the same directory the same thing except for case. In my ~/tmp directory I have unrelated foo.c (C source) and foo.C (C++ source).
much like “therefor”, which does not mean the same thing as “therefore”
Wye due pupil cairn what wards ah yews wren the pronoun serration is clothes and off two yonder sandwich wards amen two yews wrens pea king allowed.
Why does philosophy constantly twist things into an over complicated mythical mess, and then act like it’s some novel insight?
I cannot stand that either, but this sort of pseudo-profundity is more common in some specific schools of thought, rather than philosophy in general.
Does a tree falling in the woods with nothing to hear it make a sound?
It’s probably № 1 on my list of stupidest questions. The answer is yes.
deleted by creator