- comp.lang.c++.moderated status - 21 Updates
- Piss - 1 Update
- [oft] from blocking to nonblocking server - 2 Updates
- Sequencing of "<<" - 1 Update
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>: Dec 07 02:39PM +0100 On 07/12/17 13:37, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: >> We do understand... > You are not the only readers / regulars in clc++. The message is > given for those who will hear, not those who won't. /Nobody/ here - or in any of the other technical newsgroups - wants to hear your "message". Some readers are atheists or agnostics - they are not interested in your cult. Some are Christians - they will stay Christians, and not join your cult. Others have different religions - they will not join your cult. In all the years I have seen you post this drivel, I have only seen two or three people reply positively to your religious "messages". Invariably these are people that don't know you, have not seen your behaviour, and have misunderstood you. Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that there really is someone out there who might be interested in your "everyone but Rick is possessed by the Devil" cult, and is willing to worship you and praise you for your humbleness. Do you really think they have failed to get the idea after your first 100 messages - but will suddenly "see the light" on message 101 ? Now, I welcome your C++ related posts as much as I welcome any other on-topic post. But if ever there is a moderated group made here, you can be confident that you will be the first person banned - unless you change your posting habits. |
Real Troll <real.troll@trolls.com>: Dec 07 08:48AM -0400 On 06/12/2017 23:20, Richard wrote: > [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup] No we don't have the time to email you anything because it is not worth it!!!!!!!! > so we can all get away from the spam and the > trolls. I would think you could "get away from the spam and the trolls" if you bothered to learn how to kill-file known trolls like yours faithfully!!!! The major spammers here are the ones like you who keep replying to any crap posted here. For example, there is absolutely no need to reply to Rick idiot or Ramine bomber or Linux junkies or Mai-Wai-Chang. Just kill-file them and the problem is solved but people like you are so lazy to learn how to do this. |
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Dec 07 06:15AM -0800 On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 8:34:24 AM UTC-5, Öö Tiib wrote: > > You are not the only readers / regulars in clc++. The message is > > given for those who will hear, not those who won't. > Who they actually are? Any who would come. > over all these years get any followers? You said then that > none, never. Have you at least got much positive feedback > from other Christians? I trust that it is also close to none. To my knowledge, nobody has ever been saved through my outreach, teaching, evangelism, or witness. I do receive periodic and regular emails and messages from people citing their appreciation of my posts, positive attitude, non-confrontational replies in the midst of attacks, and so on. > Somehow you are unable to take under consideration that it > is your own repulsive behavior that scares everybody away. I recognize that's how people view it, but it's not that. They are repulsed by Jesus, by His condemnation of their sin. It is transferred onto me as the messenger of that message. Nobody walks away from Christianity because of my posts. They were already on the road walking away, and in hearing His messages re- posted through me, it just makes them walk faster. > lose and hard to gather when "messenger" is behaving so > rudely and unpleasantly. > I hope that if He really exist then He can forgive that to you. The born again nature gives us fellowship with Him. We are literally guided from within on many things. The best natural way I've ever found to describe it is from this episode of Star Trek Voyager, where Seven received a message from one of her cranial communication implants. She receives a message nobody else heard, and she conveys it verbally: Begins at 1:50s: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CE_eprf2G4E&t=1m50s We just have "ideas" or "thoughts" which occur to us regarding how to proceed, what to say, what to do, what not to do. It is God's Holy Spirit guiding our spirit to move here in this world. The whole nature of man described in the Bible is true, Öö Tiib. It is profound and beyond imagination because it's spirit. I urge you and everyone else to seriously investigate it. Press in and seek the truth. -- Rick C. Hodgin |
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Dec 07 06:17AM -0800 On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 8:51:33 AM UTC-5, Real Troll wrote: > ...For example, there is absolutely no need to reply to Rick idiot or... I literally weep for you, Real Troll. You have no idea what's coming. Your rebellious arrogance will overwhelm you and you will be utterly destroyed. If anyone cares about the person posting as "Real Troll," please re- post this message so he/she will read it. There is still hope to hear the message before we leave this world. But after we leave this world, if we have rejected the offer of forgiveness of sin by Jesus Christ, then that is it for us. Our lives are ended, and our entire eternal future is in the lake of fire because of our love of sin, and our rejection of truth. -- Rick C. Hodgin |
Chris Vine <chris@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk>: Dec 07 02:26PM On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 04:37:08 -0800 (PST) "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> wrote: [snip] > You are very rude, Chris, using profanity toward me. Is that really > the way you want to be? To not only deny Christ, but also amp up in > anti- Christ activities? HOW DARE YOU say I "deny Christ". Disagreeing with your off topic posting is not "denying Christ", nor is it "anti-Christ activities". You are making gross assumptions based on your own self-absorption and your conviction that only you and your narrow and obsessive version of Christianity counts as "true". I am rude to you, in the hope that that might break through your shell of self-absorption. I hope not to respond to you often, but when I do I fully intend to be rude again. |
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Dec 07 06:30AM -0800 On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 9:26:33 AM UTC-5, Chris Vine wrote: > I am rude to you, in the hope that that might break through your shell > of self-absorption. I hope not to respond to you often, but when I do I > fully intend to be rude again. A tree is known by its fruit. The outer behavior of the man reveals his inner heart condition, and explicitly his regard to Jesus Christ, and sin. As such, it is not I who say you deny Christ ... it is you in your public proclamation. -- Rick C. Hodgin |
Chris Vine <chris@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk>: Dec 07 02:30PM On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 06:15:16 -0800 (PST) > On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 8:34:24 AM UTC-5, Öö Tiib wrote: [snip] > I recognize that's how people view it, but it's not that. They are > repulsed by Jesus, by His condemnation of their sin. It is > transferred onto me as the messenger of that message. No, people are repulsed by you and your behaviour. Most religious people are already well aware of their shortcomings. Sadly, you are not. |
Cholo Lennon <chololennon@hotmail.com>: Dec 07 12:37PM -0300 On 06/12/17 20:20, Richard wrote: > FYI, I am working with Daveed Vandevoorde to revive moderation of > comp.lang.c++.moderated so we can all get away from the spam and the > trolls. Hopefully we can get moderation back online by January, 2018. Kudos to you! It would be nice just to discuss C++ and programming related topics. Best regards -- Cholo Lennon Bs.As. ARG |
scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal): Dec 07 04:17PM >A tree is known by its fruit. The outer behavior of the man reveals >his inner heart condition, and explicitly his regard to Jesus Christ, >and sin. Judge not, lest ye be judged. Asshole. |
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Dec 07 09:50AM -0800 On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 11:17:48 AM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote: > Judge not, lest ye be judged. Have you ever seen this? https://brotylercampbell.files.wordpress.com/2015/07/judge-not-scribble.jpg Is it like that in your Bible? If not, you should read some more passages. The teaching is comprehensive. Ir even includes this: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+2%3A15&version=KJV 15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. The gospel message is simple to understand. The correct application of Biblical teaching requires devotion, and study. -- Rick C. Hodgin |
"K. Frank" <kfrank29.c@gmail.com>: Dec 07 10:06AM -0800 Hello Richard (and Group)! Hear, hear! On Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 6:20:43 PM UTC-5, Richard wrote: > FYI, I am working with Daveed Vandevoorde to revive moderation of > comp.lang.c++.moderated so we can all get away from the spam and the > trolls. Hopefully we can get moderation back online by January, 2018. Thank you Richard and Daveed. I hope your efforts to resurrect comp.lang.c++.moderated come to fruition. If I may make a suggestion: Perhaps the moderated group could be a bit more lightly moderated than in the past. This might reduce the burden on the moderators and speed up the moderation process. I would be willing to help with moderation, at least to the extent of rejecting (or eliding) obviously off-topic noise. Best regards. K. Frank |
"James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net>: Dec 07 01:28PM -0500 On 12/07/2017 02:08 AM, Marcel Mueller wrote: >> trolls. Hopefully we can get moderation back online by January, 2018. > From my experience the latency of moderated groups is more bothersome > than the junk posts that can be mostly filtered by blacklists. ... The people whose messages I normally want to monitor will frequently respond to messages that I don't want to see. The filters I'm familiar with don't make it easy to filter out those responses. A moderator who would prevent the messages I don't want to see from ever showing up in the first place would also incidentally eliminate the responses. I agree that latency is the key issue. I think that getting the latency down to no more than perhaps 3 hours is necessary to making a moderated newsgroup an acceptable alternative to an unmoderated one - but I gather that this would require a team of moderators working in coordinated shifts. |
Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com>: Dec 08 07:33AM +1300 On 12/07/2017 12:20 PM, Richard wrote: > FYI, I am working with Daveed Vandevoorde to revive moderation of > comp.lang.c++.moderated so we can all get away from the spam and the > trolls. Hopefully we can get moderation back online by January, 2018. If you need someone to cover the GMT+12 timezone, just ask. -- Ian |
legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard): Dec 07 06:38PM [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup] Marcel Mueller <news.5.maazl@spamgourmet.org> spake the secret code > From my experience the latency of moderated groups is more bothersome >than the junk posts that can be mostly filtered by blacklists. The problem with blacklists is that the trolls and spammers keep using new identities and for some people not *everything* they say is worthless. I don't see how a moderation delay impacts your experience as a reader. You see stuff show up after moderation, so how is that different from seeing it after someone posts it? You can't predict when someone will post. -- "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book <http://tinyurl.com/d3d-pipeline> The Terminals Wiki <http://terminals-wiki.org> The Computer Graphics Museum <http://computergraphicsmuseum.org> Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com> |
legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard): Dec 07 06:39PM [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup] "K. Frank" <kfrank29.c@gmail.com> spake the secret code >If I may make a suggestion: Perhaps the moderated group could be >a bit more lightly moderated than in the past. This might reduce >the burden on the moderators and speed up the moderation process. Given the reduced traffic, moderation shouldn't be a heavy burden. The point is just to keep the trolls and spam out. -- "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book <http://tinyurl.com/d3d-pipeline> The Terminals Wiki <http://terminals-wiki.org> The Computer Graphics Museum <http://computergraphicsmuseum.org> Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com> |
"James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net>: Dec 07 02:07PM -0500 On 12/07/2017 01:38 PM, Richard wrote: ... > as a reader. You see stuff show up after moderation, so how is that > different from seeing it after someone posts it? You can't predict > when someone will post. It's hard to maintain the proper flow of conversation when the response is delayed 3 days from the time it was sent (which I've seen happen in some moderated newsgroups). Another issue is multiple responses: one person sends a message, and 20 people want to respond. In an unmoderated newsgroup, three of those people respond quickly, and the other 17 would have posted later, but they see that the point they wanted to make has already been made, so they don't bother posting a response. In a moderated group, all 20 of those people will send a response, many of them covering the same points as other people, because none of them see anyone else's response. I've seen this pattern many times in the moderated newsgroups I've monitored. It's particularly common if someone makes a mistake so simple that most of the people monitoring the newsgroup know the correct answer. A couple of dozen responses that all say "No, it doesn't work that way because size_t is unsigned" can get pretty boring. |
Marcel Mueller <news.5.maazl@spamgourmet.org>: Dec 07 08:25PM +0100 On 07.12.17 19.28, James R. Kuyper wrote: > The people whose messages I normally want to monitor will frequently > respond to messages that I don't want to see. The filters I'm familiar > with don't make it easy to filter out those responses. In my news reader (quite old Thunderbird) the relevant filter action is called "Ignore subthread". This excludes any troll feeder as well. > down to no more than perhaps 3 hours is necessary to making a moderated > newsgroup an acceptable alternative to an unmoderated one - but I gather > that this would require a team of moderators working in coordinated shifts. Ack. You just argued why I unsubscribed from all moderated groups. Marcel |
Chris Vine <chris@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk>: Dec 07 07:29PM On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 18:39:52 +0000 (UTC) > >the burden on the moderators and speed up the moderation process. > Given the reduced traffic, moderation shouldn't be a heavy burden. > The point is just to keep the trolls and spam out. But it does need to happen without too much delay. 3 hours is good to aim at. In the latter days of comp.lang.c++.moderated it could take a day to get a post moderated. I am happy to help if there is a shortage. As a side note I don't think that moderators need to know a great deal about C++. They just need to have reasonable judgement. |
legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard): Dec 07 08:36PM [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup] "James R. Kuyper" <jameskuyper@verizon.net> spake the secret code >It's hard to maintain the proper flow of conversation when the response >is delayed 3 days from the time it was sent (which I've seen happen in >some moderated newsgroups). That's a fair point. All I can say is that we will attempt to minimize delays in approving appropriate posts. The infrastructure is setup to handle multiple moderators allowing for sufficient concurrency across time zones that I don't expect there to be any significant delays due to moderation. After all, when you subtract out the spam and the trolling, there are only a handfull of messages a day in this unmoderated forum. -- "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book <http://tinyurl.com/d3d-pipeline> The Terminals Wiki <http://terminals-wiki.org> The Computer Graphics Museum <http://computergraphicsmuseum.org> Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com> |
legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard): Dec 07 08:37PM [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup] Chris Vine <chris@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk> spake the secret code >As a side note I don't think that moderators need to know a great deal >about C++. They just need to have reasonable judgement. Agreed. Again, we're just talking about keeping out the spam and the off-topic trolling. -- "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book <http://tinyurl.com/d3d-pipeline> The Terminals Wiki <http://terminals-wiki.org> The Computer Graphics Museum <http://computergraphicsmuseum.org> Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com> |
legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard): Dec 07 08:38PM [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup] Marcel Mueller <news.5.maazl@spamgourmet.org> spake the secret code >> newsgroup an acceptable alternative to an unmoderated one - but I gather >> that this would require a team of moderators working in coordinated shifts. >Ack. You just argued why I unsubscribed from all moderated groups. Of course reading the moderated group is totally up to the individual. Me, I'm going to have it worse, because now I will have to see all those junk posts as a moderator :) "Time to take one for the team." -- "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book <http://tinyurl.com/d3d-pipeline> The Terminals Wiki <http://terminals-wiki.org> The Computer Graphics Museum <http://computergraphicsmuseum.org> Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com> |
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Dec 07 07:09PM Hi, my name is Rick C. Hodgin and in-between my several daily sessions of jerking off to an image of a naked Jesus Christ I drink my own piss. -- Thank you, Rick C. Hodgin |
fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com>: Dec 07 06:49AM -0800 W dniu czwartek, 7 grudnia 2017 14:23:26 UTC+1 użytkownik fir napisał: > > Chris > i want a piece of code, becouse i usually do more things than one at the same time and a long reading session will stop that all > getting just code sniped and im done with this .. weird i cant find it (not googled very long but some notable amount and didint found it yet) i found something that would be int WaitForServerConnectionUnblocked() { u_long no_block=1; ioctlsocket(clientSock,FIONBIO,&no_block); //connect to the server // iResult = connect(client, (sockaddr*)&server, sizeof(server)); int retVal = connect(clientSock,(LPSOCKADDR)&serverInfo, sizeof(serverInfo)); if( retVal == SOCKET_ERROR) { int iError = WSAGetLastError(); //check if error was WSAEWOULDBLOCK, where we'll wait if(iError == WSAEWOULDBLOCK) { /// cout << "Attempting to connect.\n"; fd_set Write, Err; TIMEVAL Timeout; FD_ZERO(&Write); FD_ZERO(&Err); FD_SET(clientSock, &Write); FD_SET(clientSock, &Err); Timeout.tv_sec = 0; Timeout.tv_usec = 30*1000; int iResult = select(0, NULL, &Write, &Err, &Timeout); if(iResult == 0) { // cout << "Connect Timeout (" << TimeoutSec << " Sec).\n"; return 0; } else { if(FD_ISSET(clientSock, &Write)) { // cout << "Connected!\n"; return 1; } if(FD_ISSET(clientSock, &Err)) { // cout << "Select error.\n"; return 0; } } } else { // cout << "Failed to connect to server.\n"; // cout << "Error: " << WSAGetLastError() << endl; // WSACleanup(); return 0; } } else { //connected without waiting (will never execute) //cout << "Connected!\n"; return 1; } } ///////////////// i would yet need a bit to digest it it looks like blocking but here you could just set the timeout to small value so the client will not half-hang as with blocked where it was also like nonblocking but with a timeout like 1.5 seconds, here i set 30 ms and it seem to work (i assume here that when i returned 1 it is connected , when returned 0 it is not connected and i should repeat the attempts by calling it again) sometiomes thoug rarely it seems not to connect when i set up both client and server and it probably would need to be inspected yet, maybe there is yet some bug somewhere |
legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard): Dec 07 06:46PM [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup] "Fred.Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@KVI.nl> spake the secret code >difficult to read, because it is not sequential. C++ makes it easy to create >a separate thread to make the connection, so that other threads can continue >to do their work. It is no problem if a separate thread blocks. There are libraries now that make asynchronous code read like sequential regular code. Facebook's Folly future is one example, but there are others. -- "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book <http://tinyurl.com/d3d-pipeline> The Terminals Wiki <http://terminals-wiki.org> The Computer Graphics Museum <http://computergraphicsmuseum.org> Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com> |
Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu>: Dec 07 06:43AM -0800 > associated computations must also be so sequenced. > So I think this means that in C++17, 'cout << ++i << i++;' does actually > work. Right. |
You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to comp.lang.c+++unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. |
No comments:
Post a Comment