Tuesday, September 18, 2018

Digest for comp.lang.c++@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 5 topics

"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Sep 18 11:18AM -0400

I have this code (simplified for this example):
 
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdint.h>
 
unsigned char a = 2;
unsigned char b = 2;
unsigned char c = 2;
uint32_t d = 5;
 
int main(int argc, char* argv[])
{
if (a + b + c > d)
printf("...\n");
 
return(0);
}
 
If I use godbolt.org and compare the MSVC x86 2015 and 2017
versions with "/W4 /TC" (all warnings, compile as C code),
then I get these messages. The same comes up without "/TC":
 
https://godbolt.org
 
MSVC:
warning C4018: '>': signed/unsigned mismatch
 
If I try it with GCC 8.2 with "-Wall -x c" I get no errors
(compile in C mode). But if I take off the "-x c" I get
this error:
 
GCC 8.2:
warning: comparison of integer expressions of different
signedness: 'int' and 'uint32_t' {aka 'unsigned int'}
[-Wsign-compare]
 
Why are an "unsigned char" and a uint32_t being seen as a
different signedness? If I trace uint32_t to its definition,
it's "unsigned int" in MSVC.
 
Is it a compiler bug in MSVC?
 
--
Rick C. Hodgin
jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu: Sep 18 08:58AM -0700

On Tuesday, September 18, 2018 at 11:18:49 AM UTC-4, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
 
> Why are an "unsigned char" and a uint32_t being seen as a
> different signedness? If I trace uint32_t to its definition,
> it's "unsigned int" in MSVC.
 
If UCHAR_MAX < INT_MAX (which is likely, but not guaranteed), then expressions of type unsigned char get promoted to 'int' (4.5p1). It's "int" and "unsigned int" which have different signedness. This can result in undefined behavior if expressions of that type overflow, something that would not happen if those types had not been promoted.
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Sep 18 12:05PM -0400

>> different signedness? If I trace uint32_t to its definition,
>> it's "unsigned int" in MSVC.
 
> If UCHAR_MAX < INT_MAX (which is likely, but not guaranteed), then expressions of type unsigned char get promoted to 'int' (4.5p1). It's "int" and "unsigned int" which have different signedness. This can result in undefined behavior if expressions of that type overflow, something that would not happen if those types had not been promoted.
 
Why would the promotion from unsigned type x not be to unsigned type
y of a greater bit size rather than signed type y of a greater bit
size?
 
That seems contrary to what one looking in on this would expect.
 
--
Rick C. Hodgin
Mr Flibble <flibbleREMOVETHISBIT@i42.co.uk>: Sep 18 05:45PM +0100

On 18/09/2018 16:18, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> different signedness?  If I trace uint32_t to its definition,
> it's "unsigned int" in MSVC.
 
> Is it a compiler bug in MSVC?
 
Satan invented fossils yes?
 
I don't help egregious misogynistic homophobic bigoted cunts who think
religion excuses them for being egregious misogynistic homophobic bigoted
cunts and I wish others wouldn't either so fuck off and die you egregious
misogynistic homophobic bigoted cunt.
 
/Flibble
 
--
"Suppose it's all true, and you walk up to the pearly gates, and are
confronted by God," Bryne asked on his show The Meaning of Life. "What
will Stephen Fry say to him, her, or it?"
"I'd say, bone cancer in children? What's that about?" Fry replied.
"How dare you? How dare you create a world to which there is such misery
that is not our fault. It's not right, it's utterly, utterly evil."
"Why should I respect a capricious, mean-minded, stupid God who creates a
world that is so full of injustice and pain. That's what I would say."
jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu: Sep 18 10:03AM -0700

On Tuesday, September 18, 2018 at 12:05:12 PM UTC-4, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> y of a greater bit size rather than signed type y of a greater bit
> size?
 
> That seems contrary to what one looking in on this would expect.
 
That depends entirely upon what expectations you bring with you;
early implementors choose two different approaches, but the C
committee selected only one of them for inclusion in C89. All
later versions of the C and C++ standards have simply ratified
that decision and made minor improvements in the wording. Since
the decision was made 30 years ago, and huge amounts of code have
been written that expect this rule to be followed, the chance that
someone might convince either committee to change it's mind are
quite negligible, and in fact you would have to convince both
committees. Here's what the C Rationale has to say about this issue:
 
Between the publication of K&R and the development of C89, a
serious divergence had occurred among implementations in the
evolution of integer promotion rules. Implementations fell into
two major camps which may be characterized as unsigned preserving
and value preserving. The difference between these approaches
centered on the treatment of unsigned char and unsigned short
when widened by the integer promotions, but the decision had an
impact on the typing of constants as well (see §6.4.4.1).
The unsigned preserving approach calls for promoting the two
smaller unsigned types to unsigned int. This is a simple rule,
and yields a type which is independent of execution environment.
The value preserving approach calls for promoting those types to
signed int if that type can properly represent all the values of
the original type, and otherwise for promoting those types to
unsigned int. Thus, if the execution environment represents short
as something smaller than int, unsigned short becomes int;
otherwise it becomes unsigned int.
Both schemes give the same answer in the vast majority of cases,
and both give the same effective result in even more cases in
implementations with two's-complement arithmetic and quiet
wraparound on signed overflow—that is, in most current
implementations. In such implementations, differences between the
two only appear when these two conditions are both true:
 
1. An expression involving an unsigned char or unsigned short
produces an int-wide result in which the sign bit is set, that
is, either a unary operation on such a type, or a binary
operation in which the other operand is an int or "narrower"
type.
2. The result of the preceding expression is used in a context in
which its signedness is significant:
• sizeof(int) < sizeof(long) and it is in a context where it must
be widened to a long type, or
• it is the left operand of the right-shift operator in an
implementation where this shift is defined as arithmetic, or
• it is either operand of /, %, <, <=, >, or >=.
 
In such circumstances a genuine ambiguity of interpretation
arises. The result must be dubbed questionably signed, since a
case can be made for either the signed or unsigned
interpretation.
Exactly the same ambiguity arises whenever an unsigned int
confronts a signed int across an operator, and the signed int has
a negative value. Neither scheme does any better, or any worse,
in resolving the ambiguity of this confrontation. Suddenly, the
negative signed int becomes a very large unsigned int, which may
be surprising, or it may be exactly what is desired by a
knowledgeable programmer. Of course, all of these ambiguities can
be avoided by a judicious use of casts.
One of the important outcomes of exploring this problem is the
understanding that high-quality compilers might do well to look
for such questionable code and offer (optional) diagnostics, and
that conscientious instructors might do well to warn programmers
of the problems of implicit type conversions.
The unsigned preserving rules greatly increase the number of
situations where unsigned int confronts signed int to yield a
questionably signed result, whereas the value preserving rules
minimize such confrontations. Thus, the value preserving rules
were considered to be safer for the novice, or unwary,
programmer. After much discussion, the C89 Committee decided in
favor of value preserving rules, despite the fact that the UNIX
C compilers had evolved in the direction of unsigned preserving.
 
QUIET CHANGE IN C89
A program that depends upon unsigned preserving arithmetic
conversions will behave differently, probably without complaint.
This was considered the most serious semantic change made by the
C89 Committee to a widespread current practice.
 
The Standard clarifies that the integer promotion rules also
apply to bit-fields.
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Sep 18 01:28PM -0400

> C89 Committee to a widespread current practice.
 
> The Standard clarifies that the integer promotion rules also
> apply to bit-fields.
 
Interesting. FWIW, I think the C committee got it wrong. The
source type should drive the promotion, and if there is another
consideration (such as unsigned to sign across an operator),
then a second promotion should be given in that case, to the
next largest signed on both sides of the operator.
 
This is what CAlive does, by the way. To me, it's the only way
that makes sense when you view data as data, and view it being
processed from the point of view of what a human being would ex-
pect the answer to be.
 
--
Rick C. Hodgin
jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu: Sep 18 11:36AM -0700

On Tuesday, September 18, 2018 at 1:29:04 PM UTC-4, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
...
> Interesting. FWIW, I think the C committee got it wrong.
 
What a surprise.
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Sep 18 02:48PM -0400

> ...
>> Interesting. FWIW, I think the C committee got it wrong.
 
> What a surprise.
 
Wow. Really? Seriously, James ... don't you think
they got it wrong too?
 
It seems the UNIX folk thought it was a mistake, as
they already had invested code and developer time in
the other direction.
 
Of all the places they cater to for the sake of "novice
developers?" What kind of place is serious C code for
a novice developer? You have to work your way up pretty
steadily in ability to be a serious C developer. And I
think the promotion of an unsigned type to a larger un-
signed type is only natural. I think promoting an un-
signed type to a signed type is crazy. It was surely
originally set to be unsigned for a reason.
 
I don't even see a good argument for C's logic, other
than that's the way some people were doing it. But I
think the far better solution would've been to tell
them, "Sorry, Charlie."
 
--
Rick C. Hodgin
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Sep 18 03:09PM -0400

On 9/18/2018 11:18 AM, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
>     unsigned char b = 2;
>     unsigned char c = 2;
>     uint32_t      d = 5;
 
Given that unsigned char translates to an 8-bit unsigned
integer, and uint32_t translates to a 32-bit unsigned int-
eger, what makes sense to me is this operation:
 
>         if (a + b + c > d)
 
Natural order of operation:
 
01: t1 = a + b
02: t2 = t1 + c
03: t3 = t2 > d
 
Order of operations with promotions injected (u8, u16,
u32 = 8-bit, 16-bit, 32-bit unsigned int):
 
// a, b, c all begin as u8
 
01: t1 = promote a to u16
02: t2 = promote b to u16
03: t3 = t1 + t2 as u16, tagged as a promoted result
04: t4 = promote c to u16
05: t5 = t3 + t4 as u16, tagged as a promoted result
06: t6 = promote t5 to u32
07: t7 = t6 > d as u32
 
Note: Many of these promotions are done in assembly at
the register level, but the operations still remain
there as logical step-by-step ops. Optimization
logic will factor in here and revise the ops for
its needs, such as promoting to u32 rather than u16
as that would be a natural machine word size, etc.
 
Is that not logical? What am I missing? Where would it
make more sense to promote a u8 to an s16 or s32 (signed
16-bit or signed 32-bit)?
 
--
Rick C. Hodgin
Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.com>: Sep 18 10:41PM +0300

Rick C. Hodgin:
 
 
> https://godbolt.org
 
> MSVC:
> warning C4018: '>': signed/unsigned mismatch
 
Let me impersonate a C guru and quote the standard:
 
If an int can represent all values of the original type,
the value is converted to an int; otherwise, it is
converted to an unsigned int.
 
--
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ http://preview.tinyurl.com/qcy6mjc [archived]
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Sep 18 03:45PM -0400

On 9/18/2018 3:41 PM, Anton Shepelev wrote:
 
> If an int can represent all values of the original type,
> the value is converted to an int; otherwise, it is
> converted to an unsigned int.
 
What is the logic behind that? You've moved from unsigned to
signed for no reason other than it will fit in the positive
portion of the signed's range.
 
It was originally unsigned for a reason. Why migrate it to
signed without a cast?
 
I honestly consider this a fundamental flaw in C (and C++).
 
--
Rick C. Hodgin
Bo Persson <bop@gmb.dk>: Sep 18 04:04PM +0200

On 2018-09-18 15:13, Ralf Goertz wrote:
> "bigger cousins"? If you need character types you can always use
> (unsigned) char. There is no point in using [u]int8_t for that. But why
> do I need to bend over backwards to deal with the special case of 8 bit?
 
It's not really the types, but the streams that have special overloads
for char types.
 
If you output an int* you will get the address stored in the pointer,
but if you output a char* it will display the string pointed to. The
designers thought that would be the most common use case.
 
Similarly the 8-bit types are displayed as the corresponding character
and not the ASCII-value stored in the variable.
 
If you want a value x displayed as an integer, you can always do
 
cout << (int)x;
 
 
Bo Persson
Ralf Goertz <me@myprovider.invalid>: Sep 18 04:34PM +0200

Am Tue, 18 Sep 2018 15:47:29 +0200
> exists. In theory, uint8_t and int8_t could be "extended integer
> types"
> - in practice you won't find that.
 
Okay, that's interesting. The draft of the standard (2015) and the
second column in <https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/types/integer>
always state "typedef". So they must be equal to an existing type like
char, must they not? But how can they then be extended?
 
> This is an oddity that C++ inherited from C, and unfortunately you are
> stuck with it.
 
But the C-types could also have been made extended, right?
 
> int16_t and uint16_t do not behave like their larger cousins either,
> assuming 32-bit int. They are closer than int8_t and uint8_t, but not
> identical.
 
In what way (other than range of course)?
 
 
> You could happily make some classes that really are new types, and
> really act like pure integers of different sizes - but you'd have to
> make them.
 
Yes. But I was under the impression that the C++11 standard had done
that for me. And now I wonder why it hadn't. Much ado about (almost)
nothing imho.
Sam <sam@email-scan.com>: Sep 18 10:57AM -0400

Ralf Goertz writes:
 
> have typenames that explicitly tell you their size. But why stop there?
> Why can't those types be arithmetic types which behave like their
> "bigger cousins"?
 
But they are. They, themselves, behave identically to their bigger cousins.
`<<` and `>>` were not arithmetic operations in that particular case. They
were overloaded operators defined explicitly for some particular class.
 
If you were to use the `<<` and `>>` operators directly on chars, they would
act exactly the same as they do for ints and longs (subject to their actual
bit size, of course).
 
They are integer types.
 
> If you need character types you can always use
> (unsigned) char.
 
There's no such thing as a "character type" in C++, as the term is used
here. There happens to be a type called "char", but it's an integer type. It
supports all the same operations as other integer types.
 
Furthermore, C++, like C, decided to support the concept of "characters" by
using a small (8-bit) integer type to represent a character value, and to
underscore the point, that integer type was named "char".
 
But it's still an integer type.
 
> There is no point in using [u]int8_t for that. But why
> do I need to bend over backwards to deal with the special case of 8 bit?
 
There are very few things that C++ hands over on a silver platter. Very
often things require quite a bit of work. I still remember how things used
to be before std::string came along.
 
And you have to do it because that's how C++ works.
 
Furthermore, both POSIX (int8_t), and the C++ standard (std::int8_t) require
it to be a typedef to an integer type. As such, no C++ compiler has a choice
in this matter. int8_t has to be a typedef to a natural integer type, and
C/C++ also defines the concept of characters as being represented by (8-bit)
integer types. It is what it is. That's how the world spins around, and
nothing can be done to change that, so I can only think of two possible
options here. The first one is, of course, to continue complaining about it
(if I was inclined to complain about it, for some reason, but I'm not). My
second option would be to spend a few minutes to code a wrapper type that
overloads arithmetic operations, including the appropriate overloads for
stream objects, and a modern C++ compiler will simply optimize away down to
nothing, producing the same code as it would with a native integer type.
 
I'm wondering which option will be more productive, in general.
jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu: Sep 18 08:51AM -0700

On Tuesday, September 18, 2018 at 10:34:57 AM UTC-4, Ralf Goertz wrote:
> second column in <https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/types/integer>
> always state "typedef". So they must be equal to an existing type like
> char, must they not? But how can they then be extended?
 
The standard explicitly allows for extended integer types (3.9.1p2), and
in any case where the standard refers to any category of that includes
integer types, without specifying "standard", that category includes
extended integer types as well as standard integer types. 18.4.1
describes <cstdint>, and frequently refers to "integer types", but never restricts it's statements to "standard integer types".
In practice, this doesn't come up for the smallest exact-sized types.
18.4.1 requires that they match section 7.18, which presumably should
be section 7.20 of the current C standard.
"The typedef name intN_t designates a signed integer type with width N,
no padding bits, and a two's complement representation." (7.20.1.1p1). Therefore, if uint8_t and int8_t are supported, CHAR_BIT must be 8.
Therefore, unsigned char, char, and signed char must all be 8 bit types,
too.
 
"The rank of any standard integer type shall be greater than the rank of
any extended integer type with the same width." (4.14p1) The C standard
says something important, and I can't find a corresponding statement in
the C++ standard, nor any cross-reference to this requirement:
"For any two integer types with the same signedness and different
integer conversion rank (see 6.3.1.1), the range of values of the type
with smaller integer conversion rank is a subrange of the values of the
other type." (C 6.2.5p8).
 
I believe that this is either a failure on my part to find the relevant
C++ text, or an oversight by the authors of the C++ standard - I'm sure
that the intent was to impose this same requirement in C++.
There isn't any room for int8_t to have a range that's a sub-range of
the range of signed char; int8_t already represents the maximum number
of different values that can be stored in an 8-bit byte, so if int8_t
exists and C 6.2.5p8 applies, it must represent the same range of values
as signed char. In principle, they could use different representations
for the same range of values, but that's not much reason for an
implementation to do that. Similarly, uint8_t, if supported must
represent the same range of values as unsigned char.
 
> > This is an oddity that C++ inherited from C, and unfortunately you are
> > stuck with it.
 
> But the C-types could also have been made extended, right?
 
Yes, they can.
 
> > assuming 32-bit int. They are closer than int8_t and uint8_t, but not
> > identical.
 
> In what way (other than range of course)?
 
If UINT16_MAX is less than INT_MAX, the integral promotions convert
uint16_t to int, while unsigned int remains an unsigned type(4.5p1).
This can affect the type, and in some cases, the value, of other
expressions containing expressions with that type.
"Öö Tiib" <ootiib@hot.ee>: Sep 18 11:37AM -0700

On Tuesday, 18 September 2018 13:56:37 UTC+3, Ralf Goertz wrote:
> However, I
> had the impression that those [u]intX_t types were there so that I can
> do math with them, not to deal with characters.
 
That was incorrect impression. Mathematical operations are not defined
for "short int" and shorter integral types in C++.
 
Note that operator>> with istream is not mathematical but text
input operation. Conforming implementation has to have it
defined like that:
 
template< class Traits >
basic_istream<char,Traits>& operator>>( basic_istream<char,Traits>& st
, unsigned char& ch );
 
It is required to behave like you described.
 
> So what is the canonical way to input/output integral types of varying
> size (in my actual program I use templates)?
 
Canonical way is to narrow down the choices. For example use only
int_fast32_t, int_fast64_t, double and custom classes for
text input-output and calculations with numerical values.
 
Canonical way is to avoid using the likes to int16_t, int8_t or
bit-fields for math or text input-output. These are slower and
the possible overflows are harder to control. Use these as
optimizations of storage size and for binary input-output.
MARIA GRAZIA CRUPI- EX AMANTE DI MARINA BERLUSCONI <fuckyounazistassassindonaldtrump@protonmail.com>: Sep 18 10:29AM -0700

IN GALERA LUIGI BERLUSCONI, NON SU WIKIPEDIA! RICICLA SOLDI MAFIOSI A PALATE, VIA MALAVITOSA H14, COME FACEVANO I SUOI BASTARDAMENTE CRIMINALI NONNO E PADRE. E POI, DICIAMOCELA TUTTA, PLEASE: E' SEMPRE SBORRATO TUTTO DENTRO AL CULO: LUIGI BERLUSCONI! CON FIDANZATA UN ^MASSONE MAFIOSO^ CON LA BARBA
https://www.tuttouomini.it/images/2017/7/luigi-berlusconi-bacio-gay-estate-amico.jpg
E NON, COME FIDANZATA, LA NOTA PUTTANONA MEGA COCAINOMANE FEDERICA FUMAGALLI. DA ANNI SCOPATA DA TANTISSIMI COCOAINOMANI COME LEI, IN MILLE CLUB PRIVE' DELLA INTERA FOGNA NAZISTA E MAFIOSA DI BERLUSCONIA, COME COSI', DI MONTECARLO E SVIZZERA!
E CON CITATO PADRE, IL PEGGIORE CRIMINALE INCRAVATTATO DI TUTTO IL MONDO E DI TUTTI I TEMPI, LO SPAPPOLA MAGISTRATI, ASSASSINO, PEDOFILO SILVIO BERLUSCONI!
DICEVO.. ANYWAY... E' SEMPRE SBORRATO TUTTO DENTRO AL CULO: LUIGI BERLUSCONI! CON FIDANZATA UN ^MASSONE MAFIOSO^ CON LA BARBA
https://www.tuttouomini.it/images/2017/7/luigi-berlusconi-bacio-gay-estate-amico.jpg
^MASSONE MAFIOSO^ DELLA MEGA ASSASSINA GRAN LOGGIA DEL DRAGO DEL DITTATORE FASCIOMAFIOSO, STRAGISTA SPAPPOLA MAGISTRATI, MANDANTE DI MIGLIAIA DI OMICIDI MASCHERATI DA FINTI SUICIDI, MALORI, INCIDENTI, NOTO PEDOFILO SILVIO BERLUSCONI!!!
CIAO A TUTTI. SONO LA VICENTISSIMA PORNOSTAR ED INSEGNANTE A MILANO: MARIA GRAZIA CRUPI. NATA IL 30.10.1969 ( https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXbvx-W5fJ-jYI9GgBUOi6Q/discussion?disable_polymer=1 )
ED ORA FATEMI URLARE CON TUTTE LE MIE FORZE, PLEASE....
L'IMMENSO PRENDI CAZZI IN CULO LUIGI BERLUSCONI (FIDANZATA-WIKIPEDIA-PADRE SPAPPOLA MAGISTRATI E SBAUSCIA TROIE POCO PIU' CHE BAMBINE, "SILVIO BERLUSCON PER SEMPRE FUORI DAI COGLIONI") DI CRIMINALISSIMA FININVEST ALIAS (MA)FI(A)NINVEST, CRIMINALISSIMA MOLMED SPA, CRIMINALISSIMA HOLDING ITALIANA QUATTORDICESIMA SPA ALIAS CRIMINALISSIMA H14 (GIA' CASSAFORTE DI COSA NOSTRA: DI STEFANO BONTATE, PRIMA E TOTO RIINA, POI), CRIMINALISSIMA BANCA MEDIOLANUM MAFIOLANUM CAMORRANUM NDRANGOLANUM LAVALAVAPERCOCALEROSCOLOMBIANUM NAZISTANUM (OVE RICICLA SOLDI ASSASSINI A RAFFICA PROPRIO COME ACCADEVA NELLA SCHIFOSA, MALAVITOSA, DAVVERO BASTARDA BANCA RASINI DEL TOPO DI FOGNA LUIGI BERLUSCONI "NONNO"
http://susannaambivero.blogspot.com/2009/08/rasini-la-banca-di-berlusconi-e-della.html
COME, D' ALTRONDE, NELLA MALAVITOSISSIMA FININVEST DEL SUO PEZZO DI MERDA PADRE, NOTO PEDOFILO SPAPPOLA MAGISTRATI SILVIO BERLUSCONI, COME DA QUESTO GRANDISSIMO, FANATASTICO, INARRIVABILE DOUMENTARIO
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFxooBwjIIc
ED ARTICOLO
http://www.antimafiaduemila.com/home/primo-piano/68166-berlusconi-soldi-e-boss-mafiosi-negli-appunti-di-falcone.html ), CRIMINALISSIMA SOLDO LTD ROMA, CRIMINALISSIMA SOLDO FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD, CRIMINALISSIMA ELIGOTECH AMSTERDAM, CRIMINALISSIMA CGNAL DI TOPO DI FOGNA BERLUSCORROTTISSIMO MARCO CARRAI, CRIMINALISSIMA ALGEBRIS DI MEGA RICICLA SOLDI MAFIOSI DAVIDE SERRA ED ALTRA MERDA NAZIMAFIOSA BERLUSCONICCHIA VARIA STA CREANDO NUOVE OVRA E GHESTAPO DEL WEB!! COL PRIMA CITATO MERDONE BERLUSCONICCHIO MARCO CARRAI DI CGNAL, COL NAZI-ST-ALKER, ACCERTATO PEDERASTA INCULA BAMBINI, FREQUENTISSIMO MANDANTE DI OMICIDI, GIA' TRE VOLTE FINITO IN CARCERE: PAOLO BARRAI NATO A MILANO IL 28.6.1965 ( O FREQUENTISSIMO MANDANTE DI OMICIDI, GIA' TRE VOLTE FINITO IN CARCERE: PAOLO PIETRO BARRAI NATO A MILANO IL 28.6.1965 CHE SIA)!!! E SIA CHIARO, PLEASE: IO SONO MARIA GRAZIA CRUPI DI MILANO. SONO L'EX AMANTE LESBICA DI MARINA BERLUSCONI. GLI HO LECCATO LA FIGA E GLI HO MESSI AGGEGGI SESSUALI NEL DI DIETRO PER BEN 13 ANNI. SE VI E' UNA AMICA INTIMA DI LGBT QUELLA SONO PROPRIO IO. MA DEBBO URLARE UNA COSA, ADESSO: LUIGI BERLUSCONI PRENDE CAZZI DI 30 CM IN SU FINO ALLA PROSTATA, FA BOCCHINI SU BOCCHINI E BEVE LITRI SU LITRI DI SBORRA. E' UN OMOSESSUALE PERSO, PRESTO, MOLTO PROBABILMENTE, SI FARA' ANCHE LA OPERAZIONE E DIVERRA' TRANS!
http://www.gay.it/gossip/news/bacio-gay-luigi-berlusconi
IO, VINCENTISSIMA MASSONA, PORNOSTAR ( SEMPRE, ASSOLUTAMENTE, PERO', CON MASCHERINA: PER NON RISCHIARE DI PERDERE IL PUR SEMPRE COMODO E FACILE STIPENDIO DI DELLA PUBBLICA ISTRUZIONE) E ( COME ACCENNATO) INSEGNANTE MARIA GRAZIA CRUPI
https://yt3.ggpht.com/a-/AJLlDp0JZgJt3slrUkUEWnWHjDcrVnCJYCft00OO8A=s900-mo-c-c0xffffffff-rj-k-no
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiO_106YnacsbUAPgGPSctsb1opWT4GfYfEEMuMuhl17hf-4TVBmh3Pab-EbYErPEYamQWceQVq8lBTeF6JCUVg49PRkYE6dTom16I0jpt9-H7PW59hkUhvf4HOEx2ssoA5fh2t9Uqdqa5U/s113/AAEAAQAAAAAAAAL4AAAAJGIzZjk4YzFjLWQ1ZjctNGI0ZC1hYmU4LWFiODIzNzQ4ODY5Yw%255B1%255D.jpg
( COME DICEVO, SON ANCHE INSEGNANTE IN MILANO: ISTITUTI ROSA LUXEMBURG, ETTORE CONTI, ECT ECT.. TROVATE TUTTO QUI http://www.istruzione.lombardia.gov.it/milano/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Elenco-trasferimenti-definitiviIIgr.pdf )
CHIAMATA LA " REGINA CALABRESEDDA DEGLI AMATORIAL PORN FILMS EX AMANTE LESBICISSIMA DI MARINA BERLUSCONI". AMATORIAL PORN FILMS CHE HO FATTO A CENTINAIA, CENTINAIA E CENTINAIA IN VITA MIA. DI CUI ALMENO 70 PROPRIO NELLA VILLA SATANISTA E NAZISTA, VILLA SATA-N-AZISTA DI ARCORE-HARDCORE
https://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/premium/articoli/le-notti-di-arcore-una-setta-del-male-con-tuniche-e-riti/
AMATORIAL PORN FILMS, SIA STRAIGHT, CHE LESBO, CHE ANCHE CON ALCUNI CAVALLI, CHE HO GIRATO AD INIZIARE DA QUANDO AVEVO SEDICI ANNI E MEZZO, ALLORCHE' IN MIA CALABRIA. ECCO UNA MANCIATA DI FOTO, SU MIGLIAIA E MIGLIAIA CHE HO
https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-qkTlyigYRQM/WQsbwxkPZzI/AAAAAAAAALo/MGN1QnRh4GcwjoiFO96u3-1bFXqWqegDQCK4B/s113/1443711887.76214.jpg
http://b2.woxcdn.com/pics-final-2/fc3/909/fc39090be6f548a25aeec380b2ea36e2.jpg
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTOWSvw8gFuU_9mESWWPFXldj2fp9uf71O-7d6iwFZh2B7IKO2RuQ
http://scopateitaliane.it/fotovideo/4161.jpg
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRQbZWcnN5tKpb_ra-np8v8mAfAGLrNU-7CkH7hUy8HCoWuhR6KFA
RI ECCOMI ANCORA QUI, QUESTA VOLTA WITH ANOTHER PARRUCCA, MENTRE LECCO DA DIETRO UNA MASSONA DI ORIGINI CALABRESI, DI NOTA FAMIGLIA BERLUSCONIANISSIMA E LEGHISTISSIMA DI NDRANGHETA. COME ME, TRAPIANTATA ANCHE LEI A MILANO
http://b1.woxcdn.com/pics-final-2/ced/ba8/cedba85d41629e8e0faa7f179b8f447a.jpg
ORMAI SONO SULLA SOGLIA DI FARE IL MIO MILLESIMO AMATORIAL PORN FILM, MA, ATTENZIONE ASSOLUTA, POR FAVOR, SEMPRE CON MASCHERINA. PER NON PERDERE IL MIO PUR SEMPRE COMODO SALARIO DEL MINISTERO DELL'ISTRUZIONE. FILM PORNO, DICEVO, CHE HO FATTO A CENTINAIA E CENTINAIA, ORMAI E' TEMPO DI DIRE A MIGLIAIA, FRA UN'ORGIA E L'ALTRA CON LA LESBICA NAZISTA, LAVA SOLDI MAFIOSI, ASSASSINA, MEGA COCAINOMANE, CRIMINALISSIMA MARINA BERLUSCONI. OLTRE CHE CON LA LESBICA CAMORRISTA FRANCESCA PASCALE, LA LESBICA SATANISTA SIMONA PREMOLI, LA LESBICA PURE SATANISTA DEBORAH PERAZZOLI, LA LESBICA PIU' SATANISTA DI TUTTE, LA MANDANTE DI OMCIDI ANNA LOSAPIO DI LAVA SOLDI MAFIOSI, CRIMINALISSIMO RELAIS DEI MANDORLI DI VIA LUIGI CALVETTI 9 A BERGAMO
http://www.relaisdeimandorli.it/
DI LAVA SOLDI MAFIOSI, CRIMINALISSIMA METAMEDICINA http://it.metamedecine.com/k_member/anna-losapio/
E DI LAVA SOLDI MAFIOSI, CRIMINALISSIMA SERENDIPITA' http://www.serendipita.it/consulente-anna-losapio
ED ANCORA, LA LESBICISSIMA "CHICLEFREAK" MARIA DE FILIPPI, LA LESBICONA SATANAZISTA GIULIA BONGIORNO, OSSIA L' AVVOCATO PIU' AMATO DA COSA NOSTRA, CAMORRA E NDRANGHETA..OLTRE CHE CON LA "SCIUTA PAZZA" SARA TOMMASI, CON LA ZURIGHESE LAETITA BISSET ORA LAETITIA WAGNER ZAPPA, LA LESBICA CHE SI FINGE DI SINISTRA ALBA PARTIETTI... E TANTE ALTRE LESBICHE O BISESSUALI , SPESSO PURE DEPRAVATISSIME, DI ARCORE-HARDCORE... ED IL TUTTO FRA CHILI E CHILI DI COCAINA E MONTAGNE DI CASH MAFIOSO )
LA ( APPENA CITATA FRA PARENTESI) ALTRETTANTO MASSONA, PORNOSTAR ED "ESPERTA IN LINGUE" SIMONA PREMOLI
https://plus.google.com/113646548587006228899
https://plus.google.com/115986687335585757334
https://plus.google.com/112260635418591459571
https://twitter.com/premolisimona
https://it.linkedin.com/pub/dir/Simona/Premoli
E TANTE ALTRE LESBICHE O BISESSUALI ABBIAMO LECCATO LA FIGA DI MARINA BERLUSCONI X DECENNI, DECENNI E DECENNI! IO E SIMONA PREMOLI ABBIAMO FATTE ORGE LESBICHE SU ORGE LESBICHE, CORREDATE DA CHILI DI COCAINA E PACCONI DI CASH MAFIOSO, CON, COME PRIMA CITATO FRA PARENTESI, MARINA BERLUSCONI, MARIA DE FILIPPI, DEBORAH PERAZZOLI, ANNA LOSAPIO DI CRIMINALISSIMI RELAIS I MANDORLI, METAMEDICINA E SERENDIPITA' MARA CARFAGNA (" SEMPRE DALLA CALDA FREGNA" COME OGNI GIORNO LA NICKEVAMO), MICHELLE BONEV, MICHELLE HUNZICKER E LA SUA AMANTE ^OCCULTISSIMAMENTE^ MASSONA, NAZIFASCISTA E FILO MAFIOSA GIULIA BONGIORNO ( L' AVVOCATO PIU' AMATO DA COSA NOSTRA, CAMORRA E NDRANGHETA)... ENSEMBLE ALLA CAMORRISTA FRANCESCA PASCALE ( LA VERA AMANTE DELLA HITLERIANA CRIMINALE MARINA BERLUSCONI, ALTRO CHE AMANTE DEL PEDOFILO SPAPPOLA MAGISTRATI SILVIO BERLUSCONI... CHE, NON PER NIENTE, GIUSTAMENTE, IN PUBBLICO, TRATTA COSI' http://www.huffingtonpost.it/2014/09/21/pascale-braccetto-berlusconi_n_5856594.html ), SARA TOMMASI ( CHE NE ACCENNA QUI https://infosannio.wordpress.com/2011/02/09/sara-tommasi-basta-con-le-marchette-nel-giro-di-marina-berlusconi/ ) E LA FANTASTICA PORNOSTAR LAETITIA BISSET ORA LAETITIA WAGNER ZAPPA, CHE NE SCRIVE ALTRETTANTO CHIARAMENTE QUI
https://disqus.com/by/laetitiabissetmarinaberlusc/ )
QUELLO CHE MI FA INCAZZARE TANTO E' CHE NONOSTANTE QUESTI SIANO TUTTI INDISCUTIBILI FATTI, FATTI, FATTI, UNA BASTARDA DITTATURA NEO FRANCHISTA, NEO SALAZARIANA, NEO PINOCHETTIANA, NEO HITLERIANA, NEO MUSSOLINIANA, BASTARDISSIMAMENTE NEO PIDUISTA: IMPONE SILENZIO TOTALE SU TUTTO QUESTO! BASTA BERLUSCONAZISTA E BERLUSCOMAFIOSA OMERTA'! BASTA, BASTA, BASTA, BASTA, BASTA. FACCIAMO LA RIVOLUZIONE, VIVA IL MOVIMENTO 5 STELLE, RIVOLUZIONE, RIVOLUZIONE, RIVOLUZIONE, RIVOLUZIONEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!
TUTTO IL MONDO SI UNISCA A NOI IN QUESTO CORO DA MEGA STADIO " PEDOFILO BERLUSCONI PER SEMPRE FUORI DAI COGLIONI"! " MILLE RIVOLUZIONI CONTRO I STRAGISTI BERLUSCONI"!!!
RITORNELLO DI DOVUTISSIMA CANZONE CHE STIAMO PREPARANDO IO E LA MIA AMANTE LESBICISSIMA SIMONA PREMOLI, ORA, PLEASE:
"ITALIA DEGRADATA A BERLUSCONIA DEI NAZISTI, LAVA SOLDI MAFIOSI DAVIDE SERRA, LUIGI BERLUSCONI, MARCO CARRAI E PAOLO BARRAI, SE NON LI SBATTI IN GALERA, VEDRAI CHE MORIRAI ( E SE MORISSE QUESTA MERDA DI ITALIA DEGRADATISSIMA A BERLUSCONIA, FACENDO COSI' RINASCERE UNA ITALIA VERA, INDIPENDENTE, ETICA, DEMOCRATICA, PER BENE, VINCENTE, COME QUELLA DI SANDRO PERTINI ED OSCAR LUIGI SCALFARO, SAREBBE SOLO UNA MERAVIGLIOSA COSA)
AL PUNTO DI CUI ACCENNAVO ALL'INIZIO, ORA, PLEASE ...
IL CIUCCIA E PRENDI MEGA CAZZI A GO GO LUIGI BERLUSCONI (BACIO RICCHIONESCHISSIMO QUI
https://www.tuttouomini.it/images/2017/7/luigi-berlusconi-bacio-gay-estate-amico.jpg ) NATO IN FIGHETTINA ARLESHEIM (CH) IL 27.9.1988.... L'OMOSESSUALE ^OCCULTO^ LUIGI BERLUSCONI
https://it.blastingnews.com/tv-gossip/2017/07/gossip-luigi-berlusconi-e-omosessuale-ecco-come-ha-reagito-il-padre-001847471.html
DI BASTARDAMENTE CRIMINALE ELIGOTECH AMSTERAM, BASTARDAMENTE CRIMINALE SOLDO LTD LONDON E BASTARDAMENTE CRIMINALE BANCA MEDIOLANUM (CHE RICICLANO MONTAGNE DI € MAFIOSI, ESATTAMENTE COME FACEVA LA CRIMINALISSIMA BANCA RASINI DI SUO NONNO, TOPO DI FOGNA LUIGI BERLUSCONI ....O COME FACEVA E FA ORA PIU' CHE MAI, LA FININVEST DEL PEDOFILO DILANIANTE FALCONE E BORSELLINO: SILVIO BERLUSCONI
http://www.vnews24.it/2014/05/29/borsellino-sentenza-choc-stragi-commissionate-berlusconi/
E DELLA CRIMINALISSIMA, HITLERIANA, ^OCCULTA" LESBICA MARINA BERLUSCONI )
INSIEME AL BERLUS-CO-RROTTO VERME MARCO CARRAI DI CGNAL, CREA NAZITECNOLOGICHE NUOVE OVRA E GHESTAPO! COL NOTO ANTI SEMITA, GIA' 3 VOLTE FINITO IN CARCERE, PAOLO BARRAI, NATO A MILANO IL 28.6.1965 ( FINITO IN CARCERE PURE IN BRASILE, ED ANCHE PER PEDOFILIA OMOSESSUALE: INCULAVA LI I BAMBINI, NE SCRIVEREMO PRESTO
http://www.rotadosertao.com/images/fotos/fotos_noticias/testao.jpg
http://www.rotadosertao.com/noticia/10516-porto-seguro-policia-investiga-blogueiro-italiano-suspeito-de-estelionato
http://noticiasdeportoseguro.blogspot.com/2011/03/quem-e-pietro-paolo-barrai.html
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjTiy_twjOPYIaKWznyd9HxfmJs8PmzhN3NL3zMDaQkn7GY2hkLpIt6RKb8T1JrsKlFYPlynZxgWy48xtZRmWsxBrjnB9i9yCPIFO5EzNDYaXqtLYgQZgjZrQrS-ICNslSnJx2Rne3CAV8/s1600/barrai+ind-pag01.jpg
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.soft-sys.matlab/j3oyd-SmJ88 )! UNITI AL MEGA RICICLA SOLDI ALTRETTANTO CRIMINALI: CAROGNA SCHIFOSA, MEGA FIGLIO E MARITO DI PUTTANONE, DAVIDE SERRA DI ALGEBRIS INVESTMENTS ( NON PER NIENTE, SOCIO DEI VERMI MEGA RICICLA SOLDI MAFIOSI: ENNIO DORIS, MASSIMO DORIS, GIOVANNI PIROVANO ED OSCAR DI MONTIGNY DI BANCA MEDIOLANUM, COSANOSTRANUM, CAMORRANUM, NDRANGOLANUM, HITLERANUM)! E COL TUTTO CONNESSO ALL'ECONOMISTA NOTORIAMENTE PEDERASTA E NAZISTA PAOLO CARDENÀ, NATO A MACERATA IL 2.19.1971 E RESIDENTE A PENNA SAN GIOVANNI (MACERATA), VIA UMBERTO I, NUMERO 41. DI CRIMINALISSIMA CARDENA' CONSULTING, BASATA A FALERONE, VIA MARIA MONTESSORI 6 63837 FALERONE - criminalissimo numero di telefono Tel: 0734.710786 - altro criminalissimo numero di telefono 3335915666, criminalissima e mail info@cardenaconsulting.it criminalissima email formazione@cardenaconsulting.it - P.IVA: 01840990442) E CRIMINALISSIMO BLOG VINCITORI E VINTI. IL BASTARDO MALAVITOSO PAOLO CARDENÀ, SEMPRE IN CRAVATTA STILE "COLLETTI LERCI", RICICLA SOLDI ASSASSINI DEI MEGA OMICIDA DI COSA NOSTRA, CRISAFULLI DI MILANO https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisafulli_(clan) )!!!
E A PROPOSITO DEL PRIMA CITATO, VERME CRIMINALISSIMO, PEDOFILO, ASSASSINO PAOLO BARRAI NATO A MILANO IL 28.6.1965.....
E' DA ARRESTARE SUBITO ( PRIMA CHE FACCIA AMMAZZARE ANCORA), IL TERRORISTA NAZISTA, RAZZISTA, LADRO, TRUFFATORE, SEMPRE FALSO, MEGA COCAINOMANE, MANDANTE DI TANTISSIMI OMICIDI, QUINDI, ASSASSINO PAOLO BARRAI! NOTO PEDOFIL-O-MOSESSUALE GIA' FACENTE FILM PORNO CON BAMBINI, RAGAZZINI E... TENETEVI DURISSIMO, PLEASE, ANCHE CON CAVALLI, AD INIZIO ANNI 2000... COME PRESTO PROVEREMO
http://webmail.dev411.com/p/gg/google-appengine/155cgjbg0b/c-c-c-ciuccia-cazzi-di-cavallo-paolo-barrai-di-wmo-e-bsi-italia-srl-una-volta-cacciato-e-fatto-condannare-a-galera-da-citibank-prima-di-spennare-polli-via-web-fece-film-pedopornomosessuali-e-con-cavalli-ciucciando-e-prendendo-cazzi-equini-e
https://complaintwire.org/complaint/6K334yHuHw8/mercato-libero-paolo-barrai
https://it-it.facebook.com/public/Truffati-Da-Paolo-Barrai
http://code.activestate.com/lists/python-list/706609/
https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/blogger/GTmd4a1TkxM
http://www.caffe.ch/stories/Economia/37256_spregiudicati_affaristi_di_frontiera/
NATO A MILANO IL 28.6.1965. NONCHE' MEGA RICICLA SOLDI MAFIOSI E POLITICO-CRIMINALI, OSSIA FRUTTO DI MEGA RUBERIE E MEGA MAZZETTE, RICEVUTE DA LEGA LADRONA ( 48 MILIONI RUBATI CHE POI SARANNO COME MINIMO 200 E NON "SOLO" 48
https://www.nextquotidiano.it/49-milioni-la-lega-ladrona-deve-allitalia/
http://www.ilsole24ore.com/art/notizie/2017-09-14/renzi-salvini-fa-morale-ma-lega-ha-rubato-soldi-194056.shtml?uuid=AEWLnMTC
http://espresso.repubblica.it/inchieste/2017/09/28/news/esclusivo-salvini-ha-usato-i-soldi-della-truffa-di-bossi-1.311009
E DI MANDANTE DI CENTINAIA DI OMICIDI "MASCHERATI" DA FINTI MALORI, INCIDENTI, SUICIDI, COME, TANTO QUANTO, STRAGISTA SPAPPOLA MAGISTRATI, E NAZIFASCISTA DITTATORE E PEDOFILO: SILVIO BERLUSCONI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFxooBwjIIc
http://www.antimafiaduemila.com/home/primo-piano/68166-berlusconi-soldi-e-boss-mafiosi-negli-appunti-di-falcone.html
https://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/2017/12/08/mafia-lappunto-dimenticato-scritto-da-giovanni-falcone-berlusconi-paga-i-boss-di-cosa-nostra/4027104/
http://www.repubblica.it/politica/2017/10/31/news/mafia_e_stragi_del_93_berlusconi_indagato-179825283/
https://ifarabutti.wordpress.com/tag/i-soldi-sporchi-di-berlusconi/
http://ricerca.repubblica.it/repubblica/archivio/repubblica/1984/10/04/ecco-come-riciclavano-soldi-sporchi.html
https://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/2011/05/19/silvio-riciclava-i-soldi-della-mafia/112167/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXsjFhA587I
https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banca_Rasini
boltar@cylonHQ.com: Sep 18 03:26PM

On Tue, 18 Sep 2018 15:29:59 +0200
>> wisdom and tell us.
 
>You don't need a lot of wisdom here - a "mouth breather" is someone who
>breaths through their mouths a lot, rather than through their nose.
 
Noooo! Say it ain't so!! I bow down before your god like intellect in this
matter!
 
>There can be many reasons for this, such as simply having a physically
>narrow air passage in the upper nose (this is an inheritable trait).
 
Or because a lot of dumb people have a tendency to have their mouth open when
thinking. Or just when chewing gum.
 
>Having narrow nasal air passages, leading to mouth breathing, is a
 
Yeah, I'm sure its that.
 
>A little googling showed me that some American's think "mouth breathing"
>is an insult suggesting someone is stupid. It's a bit like calling
 
Well I'm not american so its somewhat more widespread.
 
>I think Ian is wrong to compare you to Bart. Bart might be stubbornly
>and wilfully ignorant, but he is not the unpleasant little turd of a
>human being that you give yourself out to be.
 
If being an unpleasant turd means I won't roll over and mea culpa for your
self righteous virtue signalling bullshit then guilty as charged.
boltar@cylonHQ.com: Sep 18 03:28PM

On Tue, 18 Sep 2018 16:31:32 +0300
>> needed it.
 
>Let me guess, this means you have never written a conversion operator
>for a class and do not understand why somebody would need one.
 
I have, never needed that though.
 
>> Had to look up enable_if, never heard of it.
 
>No wonder you are thinking C++ is "an OO and generic version of C" (a
>quote from your previous post).
 
How would you describe it then?
 
>language. On the other hand, why do you feel you are entitled to express
>strong opinions about in which direction the language should evolve in
>spite of your ignorance about the current state?
 
Because anyone who uses any language eventually has to learn most of it
simply because code you end up maintaining will have it in and it will get
asked in job interviews. The larger the language gets the harder this becomes
and when you have to be current in more than 1 language it becomes onorous.
boltar@cylonHQ.com: Sep 18 03:29PM

On Tue, 18 Sep 2018 15:31:59 +0200
>> }
 
>Polymorphism - function overloading - works on structural typing.
>Concepts work on features. There is a /vast/ difference.
 
For your example its same end result. You'll need a better one to convince me.
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Sep 18 10:00AM -0400

On 9/18/2018 9:53 AM, David Brown wrote:
> [snip]
 
Someday you'll understand David, either here on this Earth, or
when facing that toss into the lake of fire.
 
I am serious.
 
The spirit nature really does change you, and it enables the
ability for God to show you how far away from Him you've been
your entire life, even when you thought you were okay. It
reduces you to tears for the rest of your life when you think
about His Holiness, His Grace, and your sin.
 
That's been the experience of everyone who is truly born again.
 
--
Rick C. Hodgin
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>: Sep 18 04:08PM +0200

On 18/09/18 16:00, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
>> [snip]
 
> Someday you'll understand David, either here on this Earth, or
> when facing that toss into the lake of fire.
 
No, I won't - not in the way you like to think.
 
 
> I am serious.
 
Oh, I know you are serious. That does not stop you being wrong.
 
> reduces you to tears for the rest of your life when you think
> about His Holiness, His Grace, and your sin.
 
> That's been the experience of everyone who is truly born again.
 
There you go with the "True Scotsman" argument again.
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Sep 18 10:14AM -0400

On 9/18/2018 10:08 AM, David Brown wrote:
> On 18/09/18 16:00, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
>> That's been the experience of everyone who is truly born again.
 
> There you go with the "True Scotsman" argument again.
 
The enemy of God introduces generic blanket statements like "the
True Scotsman argument" to present things which truly exist in a
way you can more easily discount, and therefore ignore.
 
It does not change the true nature of the true thing.
 
If you ever seek the truth, you'll find it, David. I pray you do.
You are valuable and a remarkable creation of God and I want to
see you continuing on after you leave this world, shining like the
stars in Heaven forever. Jesus gives you that ability. It's why
I teach you about Him.
 
--
Rick C. Hodgin
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>: Sep 18 04:33PM +0200

On 18/09/18 16:14, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
 
> The enemy of God introduces generic blanket statements like "the
> True Scotsman argument" to present things which truly exist in a
> way you can more easily discount, and therefore ignore.
 
Your arguments, such as they are, are nothing /but/ blanket statements -
"if you read the Bible /properly/...", "we are /all/ sinners condemned
to death..."
 
> see you continuing on after you leave this world, shining like the
> stars in Heaven forever. Jesus gives you that ability. It's why
> I teach you about Him.
 
Death is vital to what makes us human. Without it, life is pointless.
An eternity sitting on a cloud with a guy who disowns all responsibility
for his people ("one of them sinned - I'll let them all suffer") and
sits as judge, jury and executioner for a crime he invented in the first
place? No, thank you, it does /not/ appeal.
 
And as for being judged on what I do and say - I'd rather be considered
someone who tries (but does not always succeed) to be a good and helpful
person because that is the right thing to do, than to be considered a
holier-than-thou irritant that feels he has to "teach" people for fear
of his imaginary friend.
scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal): Sep 18 02:44PM

>> [snip]
 
>Someday you'll understand David, either here on this Earth, or
>when facing that toss into the lake of fire.
 
ooooo, threats now!
 
When you die, you're dead. Period. Enjoy life in the here and now
while you got it.
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.
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)