LET'S HAVE A LAUGH AT NIKITA SADKOV

https://github.com/saniv/text/blob/master/criticism/c.txt

while 32-bit integers are inefficient on 16-bit platform, changing int to 16 bit would break portability

DAT'S Y U USE long WHEN U NEED DA RANGE OF A 32-BIT INTEGER, YA FUCKIN RETOID. USE short TO CONSERVE MEMORY. USE int AS A 'COMFORTABLE' TYPE WITH DA RANGE OF A 16 BIT INTEGER.

C implicitly converts between floats and integers, despite they being completely different and incompatible objects,

IT CONVERTS DEM IF U ASK DA LANGUAGE TO CONVERT DEM. WAT'S DA FUCKIN PROBLEM? WUD U PREFER IT IF IT WEREN'T POSSIBLE TO CONVERT BETWEEN FLOATS AND INTEGERS?

Moreover, C allows passing integer, where pointer is expected, leading to segmentation faults.

DAT'S A CONSTRAINT VIOLATION UNLESS U USE A FUCKIN CAST. WAT DA FUCK ARE U TALKIN ABOUT YA DELUSIONAL NUT? YAINT RED DA FUCKIN STANDARD.

While malloc always stores the size of allocated array

A GOOD malloc IMPLEMENTATION USUALLY WILL. SAYIN DAT IT "ALWAYS" STORES DA SIZE IS BULLSHIT. IT CUD "ALWAYS" RETURN A NULL POINTER FOR ALL DA STANDARD CARES. DER'S A VALID CRITICISM OF DA STANDARD FOR U.

Despite being called "portable assembler"

ONLY RETOIDS FROM MOSCOW CALL IT DAT. IT'S A HIGH LEVEL LANGUAGE.

C preprocessor #include system relies on a myriad of unobvious hacks, like "#ifndef COMMON_H", "#pragma once"

DATS ONLY COS U RETOIDS KEEP INCLUDING HEADER FILES INSIDE OF HEADER FILES. U EAT WHERE U SHIT. DA LANGUAGE SURE AIN'T EASY TO USE, BUT UR COMMENTING ON POOR PROGRAMMING PRACTICE, JUNIOR. IF U STICK ONE OF DESE HEADER-GUARDING RETOIDS IN FRONT OF ANY PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE, DEY'RE GONNA WRITE GARBAGE. NO FUCKIN QUESTION ABOUT IT.

SOMEONE EXPLAIN C TO DIS RETOID BEFORE HE SPOUTS MORE CRAP ABOUT DA "ABI" N OTHER BULLSHIT. IF YA CAN'T FIND A STATIC STANDARD LIBRARY DAT AIN'T DA FAULT OF DA FUCKIN LANGUAGE, AND YAINT LOOKIN HARD ENOUGH.

DIS IS EVEN FUNNIER THO. IF U THOUGHT IT WAS FUNNY HOW HE WAS RAMBLING ABOUT SHIT HIS COMPILER DOES WEN HE WAS SUPPOSED TO BE TALKIN ABOUT C, U'LL LOVE DIS EVEN MORE. HE PRETENDS HE'S TALKIN ABOUT UNIX BUT HE TALKS ABOUT CRAP LIKE NAUTILUS AND GNOME (HAVE U RETOIDS EVEN USED DOSE FUCKIN PROGRAMS? I AINT):
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/saniv/text/master/criticism/unix.txt

HERE'S DA FUNNIEST PART THO, HE USES A SOFTWARE LICENSE FOR ALL HIS BABBLING: https://github.com/saniv/text/blob/master/LICENSE

GOOD JOB, PROFESSOR! IM SURE UR SOFTWARE WILL RECEIVE MANY USERS! HAHA

N HERE'S HIS LATEST DIARY ENTRY:
https://github.com/saniv/text/blob/master/notes/how-to-win-any-argument.txt

U CAN KEEP TELLING URSELF REALITY'S SUBJECTIVE, BUT DAT'S ONLY COS U'VE BEEN AROUND SYMBOLS TOO LONG AND U'VE FORGOTTEN WAT REAL LIFE IS LIKE. SYMBOLS AND THOUGHT CHANGE EASY, BUT UR SKINNY ASS DOESNT. U CAN CHANGE DA MEANING OF 'NIKITA', '100KG', '=', 'UNDER', AND 'PANCAKE' ALL U WANT, BUT U KNO DAM WELL DAT: NIKITA UNDER 100KG = PANCAKE. DAT'S OBJECTIVITY FOR U.

>>1

https://github.com/saniv

dorky ugly slav

>>1

DAT'S Y U USE long WHEN U NEED DA RANGE OF A 32-BIT INTEGER, YA FUCKIN RETOID. USE short TO CONSERVE MEMORY. USE int AS A 'COMFORTABLE' TYPE WITH DA RANGE OF A 16 BIT INTEGER.

long isn't guaranteed to be 32-bit. I.e. long too includes undefined behavior.

IT CONVERTS DEM IF U ASK DA LANGUAGE TO CONVERT DEM.

Nope. It converts them implicitly, like in "double i; for (i = 0; i < N; i += 1) ...". That is not the right thing.

DAT'S A CONSTRAINT VIOLATION UNLESS U USE A FUCKIN CAST. WAT DA FUCK ARE U TALKIN ABOUT YA DELUSIONAL NUT? YAINT RED DA FUCKIN STANDARD.

Nope. You can pass 0 as a pointer without a cast.

Sorry, I'm too lazy to refute your future points and you remind me of these soviet cumrades, who keep insisting that communism has fallen because of evil capitalist spies, instead of it being bankrupt economically and deceptive ideologically. Lisp folks call that Worse is Better. And "C" appears to stand for [C]ommunism - that is why C attracts such a massive support of populists and computing mediocrity, who want to keep IT at the level of 60ies.

nikita holds a special place in my heart
lambda, i love you too but i'll marry nikita

DAT'S A CONSTRAINT VIOLATION UNLESS U USE A FUCKIN CAST. WAT DA FUCK ARE U TALKIN ABOUT YA DELUSIONAL NUT? YAINT RED DA FUCKIN STANDARD.

What are you talking about? DA STANDARD says that integers may be converted to pointers, and vice-versa, despite giving no guarantees of the conversion being bijective. Also, what's a constraint violation in this context?

>>1

DAT'S Y U USE long WHEN U NEED DA RANGE OF A 32-BIT INTEGER

Or you check limits.h and select the right type by typedef-ing or definining it or by using stdint.h

DATS ONLY COS U RETOIDS KEEP INCLUDING HEADER FILES INSIDE OF HEADER FILES

This is offtopic but headers like stdlib.h need to define size_t but the user should be able to include other headers that define size_t too (like stddef.h or string.h). Usualy I implement (as a implemetation developer) these headers by #including stddef.h into them.

>>3
Slavs are niggers mongols

long isn't guaranteed to be 32-bit. I.e. long too includes undefined behavior.

§5.2.4.2.1 - Sizes of integer types <limits.h>

Their implementation-defined values shall be equal or greater ...
LONG_MIN -2147483647 // −(2³¹ − 1) — minimum value for an object of type long int
LONG_MAX +2147483647 // 2³¹ − 1 — maximum value for an object of type long int
ULONG_MAX 4294967295 // 2³² − 1 — maximum value for an object of type unsigned long int

>>4
I will marry Lambda!

>>3
If you mean that long can be more than 32 bit then ignore my point but there is no undefined behavior here

>>6

shall be equal or greater

so cat is alive or dead?

>>8
Both, AT THE SAME TIME!

>>1
EAT DICK

>>3

long isn't guaranteed to be 32-bit

NEVER SAID IT WAS. I SAID U SHUD USE long IF U NEED DA RANGE OF A 32-BIT INTEGER (COS IT GUARANTEES DAT AS A MINIMUM RANGE).

Nope. You can pass 0 as a pointer without a cast.

DA CONVERSION IS DAT OF A NULL POINTER CONSTANT TO A POINTER TYPE, NOT AN INTEGER TYPE TO A POINTER TYPE.

void *p = 0;
STORES A NULL POINTER IN p

void *p = (int) 0;
CONSTRAINT VIOLATION

void *p = (void *) (int) 0;
STORES AN IMPLEMENTATION-DEFINED VALUE IN p

REED DA FUKIN STANDARD.

>>5
http://port70.net/~nsz/c/c11/n1570.html#6.5.4

Conversions that involve pointers, other than where permitted by the constraints of 6.5.16.1, shall be specified by means of an explicit cast.

>>11
ON SECOND THOUGHT, DOSE LAST TWO EXAMPLES WUD ALL PRODUCE NULL POINTERS CONSIDERING DAT (int) 0 FITS DA DESCRIPTION FOR A NULL POINTER CONSTANT. 2 BE EXACT:

int x = 0;
void *p = x; /* CONSTRAINT VIOLATION */
void *q = (void *) x; /* STORES AN IMPLEMENTATION-DEFINED VALUE IN p */

>>12
STORES AN IMPLEMENTATION-DEFINED VALUE IN q*

ANYWAY, IF U WANT TO MAKE DA ARGUMENT DAT C'S SHIT COS IT USES 0 FOR A NULL POINTER, U SHUD SAY DAT, INSTED OF SAYING SOME AMBIGUOUS SHIT ABOUT INTEGER CONVERSIONS. DAT'S BULLSHIT. U'LL GET A DIAGNOSTIC FOR AN INTEGER TO POINTER CONVERSION. U'LL STORE A NULL POINTER WIT A NULL POINTER CONSTANT TO POINTER CONVERSION. DOSE CONVERSIONS R TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.

HERE'S ADDIN 2 DA LAUGHS
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Xj-E3himi4
GUESS WHO'S RESPONSIBLE 4 HIS MISSING BOTTOM TOOTH? DA JEWS!

>>11-14
BACK TO /G/, CUNT!

>>14
That's Nikita? I guess I've never actually seen his pictures. I was trying to convince myself that /prog/ just attracted people pretending to be insane. The level of legitimate mental dysfunction on this board is shockingly high.

>>4,6
How are we supposed to play fuck/marry/kill without a third proglodyte to gossip about?????

>>17
Lambda nor nikita commented on us ;-;
They don't love us ;-;

AHMED

GEVALT

>>17
kodak-kun

>>14

The tooth was lost, when some gopnik slavs assaulted me for nothing.

>>22
I forgot you are a yid

/*
* Standard C compliant malloc/free implementation.
*
* This code is free software and is placed in the public domain.
* Please use it however you like!
*/

void* malloc(size_t) {
return NULL;
}

void* calloc(size_t, size_t) {
return NULL;
}

void* realloc(void*, size_t) {
return NULL;
}

void free(void*) {
}

I only use fixed-width types anyway.

>>23

a yid
a

I've bad new for you, Hymie.

>>26

*news

>>24
I) In C you cannot omit identifiers for parameters in function definitions
II) C11 added aligned_alloc
III) This looks very close to my unpubliced implemetation *sends a C&D*

>>26

No one cares, Nikita.

EEEEEK EEEEEK EEEEEK EEEEEK EEEEEK EEEEEK!