X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f From: Eric Sosman User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: strange error References: <2m6rscFjl139U3 AT uni-berlin DOT de> <20040721091933 DOT 06719 DOT 00001806 AT mb-m13 DOT aol DOT com> In-Reply-To: <20040721091933.06719.00001806@mb-m13.aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 56 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 02:23:51 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.76.167.224 X-Complaints-To: abuse AT worldnet DOT att DOT net X-Trace: bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net 1090463031 12.76.167.224 (Thu, 22 Jul 2004 02:23:51 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 02:23:51 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Sterten wrote: > > I tried R[99]={770} and then found that only the first value was 770, > so I concluded that the other values are undefined and only accidently > zero in most cases. Many years ago I worked on software to drive some automated electronic test equipment. One member of the team was a sure-fire electronics engineer, who could explain to us just why it was important to adjust the potential to 5 volts *before* applying the 1200 Hz sine wave, and that sort of thing. He was accustomed to analyzing his circuits before applying power to them, and he was much amused and bemused by us software types, perfectly willing to throw together any old bunch of gibberish and run it through the compiler. He characterized our methodology as "Random punches in random card columns," (I said it was many years ago), "then debug." Guenter Sterten, you are validating his observation. You have, it seems, no knowledge of the programming language you are attempting to use. You throw together some half- understood bits of C-ish text, stir them until the compiler stops complaining, and then try to draw inferences from whatever you can observe of the outcome. Your efforts do not seem guided by purpose, but by chance. Now, when confronted by the mysteries of the primate genome or the interstellar microwave background radiation, your method is indeed the best available. But given the existence of instruction manuals -- to wit, dozens of fine books explaining how to use the C language -- the choice to ignore them is either folly or arrogance. Your experiences in trying to get this simple program to run must surely have cured you of the latter; what will cure you of the former? Learn C, Guenter Sterten. Get a book: There's no shortage of good ones, and even a bad one would put you ahead of where you stand today. Your problems stem from a complete lack of knowledge of the tool you are trying to use; take some time to learn about the tool before you chop your leg off in your ignorance. Seriously. There's nothing wrong with being ignorant; it's where we all started. But there *is* something wrong with plowing ahead in a wilful state of continuing ignorance, when the means to cure it are all about you. Use them; you'll feel better for it. -- Eric Sosman esosman AT acm DOT org