>>10WAT, U WANT ME 2 RESPOND 2 HIS POINTS? /g/'S FILLED WITH SMALL PIMPLE-FACED YOUNG ADULTS WHO ARGUE 4 DA SAKE OF ARGUING, DESPITE A COMPLETE LAK OF INSIGHT INTO WAT DEY'RE ARGUING ABOUT.
ALRIGHT. LET'S CALL DA GUY WHOSE POST WAS ENTIRELY QUOTES "CONFORMIST-BOI" AND DA GUY WHO RESPONDED TO IT "JOI-BOI".
JOI-BOI'S POINT ABOUT "\r\n" BEING "mandatory" IS GIBBERISH. DER'S NO PROTOCOL DEFINED HERE, NO TARGET IMPLEMENTATION, AND NO INSIGHT INTO HOW DIS OUTPUT IS GONNA BE USED. DO I NEED 2 SAY MORE? JOI-BOI'S WRONG SO HE LOSES A POINT, N I WUD SAY DAT CONFORMIST-BOI'S POINTING IT OUT WAS SLIGHTLY JUSTIFIED, BUT IT AINT A SIGNIFICANT PROBLEM SO HE GETS A 0.
JOI-BOI: -1, CONFORMIST-BOI: 0
JOI-BOI'S NEXT POINT IS CORREKT, BUT HE DONT UNDERSTAND DA DIFFERENCE. A FUNCTION REQUIRES A NEW BLOK, DA BODY OF DA FOR-STATEMENT DOESNT NEED TO BE A BLOK. EITHER WAY, IT'S A MATTER OF PREFERENCE. HARDLY SIGNIFICANT. JOI-BOI'S SCORE STAYS DA SAME, BUT CONFORMIST-BOI LOSES A POINT FOR NITPICKIN ON A MATTER OF PERSONAL PREFERENCE.
JOI-BOI: -1, CONFORMIST-BOI: -1
NOW, Y DA FUK WOULD IT MATTER IF U USE size_t OR int FOR DIS PROGRAM? UR STORING DA VALUES 0 TO 6. int CAN STORE DAT. size_t CAN STORE DAT. AGAIN, ANOTHER FUKIN MEANINGLESS NITPICK BY CONFORMIST-BOI.
JOI-BOI: -1, CONFORMIST-BOI: -2
JOI-BOI LOSES A POINT. YA DONT PRINT size_t WITH %d OR %ld. U PRINT size_t WITH "%zu" BUT DAT'S >=C99. MOST PORTABLE WAY IS 2 CONVERT TO unsigned long N USE %lu.
HE LOSES ANOTHER POINT FOR SAYING DAT size_t AINT IN C89. IT IZ.
JOI-BOI: -3, CONFORMIST-BOI: -2
ANOTHER NITPICK BY CONFORMIST-BOI, BUT IT AINT 2 BAD. IT ALLOWS DA C IMPLEMENTATION 2 OPTIMISE A BIT, SO I'LL LET IT PASS (BUT WITHOUT POINTS). JOI-BOI'S LOSIN ANOTHER POINT HERE THO -- STRING LITERALS SIMPLY ARENT MUTABLE, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER DA POINTERS 2 THEM ARE const-QUALIFIED OR NOT.
JOI-BOI: -4, CONFORMIST-BOI: -2
CONFORMIST-BOI LOSES ANOTHER POINT FOR ANOTHER MEANINGLESS NITPICK. ENTIRELY A MATTER OF PREFERENCE. JOI-BOI EARNS A POINT FOR EXPLAINING DAT DA POTENTIAL LACK OF TAIL RECURSION OPTIMISATION MAY MAKE DA PROGRAM LESS EFFICIENT (IN TERMS OF SPACE USED), BUT HE LOSES A POINT FOR ASSUMING DAT DER'S A FUCKIN STACK. WAT A FUCKIN STAK BOI.
JOI-BOI: -4, CONFORMIST-BOI: -3
CONFORMIST-BOI BALANCED ON DA I/O POINT. IT'S AN OKAY POINT BUT IT AIN'T SIGNIFICANT. LET'S FACE IT, IF printf FAILS HERE, U NEED TO SORT YOUR IMPLEMENTATION OUT, NOT UR FUCKIN PROGRAM. WITH DAT SAID, IF UR WRITING A SERIOUS PROGRAM, IT'S NOT A BAD IDEA. NOT A BAD IDEA AT ALL. SINCE I DIDNT GIVE HIM DA POINT FOR DA const THING, I'LL AWARD HIM A POINT HERE.
JOI-BOI: -4, CONFORMIST-BOI: -2
EXIT_SUCCESS IS ANOTHER MEANINGLESS NITPICK. IF DIS RETOID HAD RED DA STANDARD HE'D KNO DAT "return 0;" AND "return EXIT_SUCCESS;" FROM main HAVE DA EQUIVALENT EFFECT. HE LOSES A POINT.
JOI-BOI: -4, CONFORMIST-BOI: -3
CONFORMIST-BOI'S OTHER POINTS ARE ABSOLUTE BULLSHIT AND SO ARE JOI-BOI'S. HARD TO DECIDE, BUT MY RULING IS DAT JOI-BOI LOSES 1 POINT AND CONFORMIST-BOI LOSES 2 POINTS.
JOI-BOI: -5, CONFORMIST-BOI: -5
AND JOI-BOI, YOU ARE ON DA SAME LEVEL AS CONFORMIST-BOI, YA FUKIN STAK BOI RETOID.
AND GET DA FUK OFF DA TECHNOLOGY BOARD REED UR FUKIN /fa/ BULLSHIT, YA CONFORMIST-BOI RETOID.
Y DONT U MONKEYS TRY IT AGAIN AFTER U'VE RED DA FUKIN STANDARD?