John Summerfied wrote:
Mike McCarty wrote:
[snip]
And despite your "nice tutorial," if I go down to any good bookstore
I will find more books on Borland C.
I didn't say otherwise. I don't understand your motive for replying
in this way. You made a sweeping statement, which has a definite
counterexample. You don't refute the counterexample, yet somehow
you seem to think that you have vindicated your statement.
Mike
Well, I can't/shouldn't speak to your desires, but the presence of so
many books suggests that
a) Publishers see a market
b) Writers agree
c) Consumers don't find the standard information meets their desires and
buy alternative documentation.
If you find the counter example filled your needs, that's fine, but
there are many who don't find it fills their needs and who purchase
alternatives.
I wasn't making that claim. I learned C long before I had a copy
of Borland C. I was reacting to the claim that no programming language
comes with a tutorial on the language.
It happens I used to use Turbo Pascal, and I found it hard going, and I
was already a competant programmer in several languages, even to the
extent of presenting training courses on one of them.
I have fond memories of Turbo Pascal, having written an add-on
symbolic source-level debugger and sold a few copies. A great
language. Had no problems learning the language from the TP 3.01a
manual. I learned C from K&R.
Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
