Asp Forum - ===Welcome to comp.lang.c++! Read this first.

Shiva

12/3/2008 5:30:00 PM

Welcome to comp.lang.c++! Read this first.

This post is intended to give the new reader an introduction to reading
and posting in this newsgroup. We respectfully request that you read
all the way through this post, as it helps make for a more pleasant
and useful group for everyone.

First of all, please keep in mind that comp.lang.c++ is a group for discussion
of general issues of the C++ programming language, as defined by the ANSI/ISO
language standard. If you have a problem that is specific to a particular system
or compiler, you are much more likely to get complete and accurate answers in a
group that specializes in your platform. A listing of some newsgroups is given
at the end of this post.

The FAQ (Frequently Asked Question) list has a wealth of information for
both the new and veteran C++ programmer. No matter what your experience
level, you are encouraged to read the entire list, if only to familiarize
yourself with what answers are available to minimize redundant replies.
The comp.lang.c++ FAQ is available at http://www.parashift.com/c++...

If the FAQ list does not help, then many regular readers of this group
are happy to assist with problems of standard C++. We have only a few
requests that we ask be adhered to, for the benefit of all:

* Please put a short summary in the subject line. Descriptions such as
"HELP!!!!!!" are not helpful, and many regular posters ignore such
requests. A good example is, "Problem with Virtual Functions."

* State the question or the problem clearly and concisely. Describe what
you are trying to do, and the problem you are running into. Include all
relevant error messages.

* Include the smallest, complete and compilable program that exhibits your
problem. As a rule, posters in comp.lang.c++ will not do homework, but will
give helpful hints if you have shown some willingness to try a solution.

* comp.lang.c++ is forum for discussion, and as such some regular posters do
not give E-mail replies. Very often follow-ups to postings have corrections,
so plan on taking part in the discussion if you post a question. If you
do receive e-mail replies, it is considered polite to post a summary.

* Don't post in HTML format. Many readers of this newsgroup don't use
newsreaders which can handle HTML postings.

* If you have to include source code in your post, include the
source in the message body. Don't use attachments. A lot
of contributors to this newsgroup won't even notice the existence
of attachments or won't open them. You try to get any help
you can get, don't you?

Some netiquette topics which frequently crop up on comp.lang.c++ are
also answered in the FAQ.

* Should I post job advertisements and/or resumes on comp.lang.c++?
http://www.parashift.com/c++...how-to-post.html#faq-5.10

* What if I really need a job; should I post my resume on comp.lang.c++?
http://www.parashift.com/c++...how-to-post.html#faq-5.11

* What should I do to someone who posts something off-topic?
http://www.parashift.com/c++...how-to-post.html#faq-5.12

A note on comp.lang.c++ etiquette: Accuracy is valued very highly in this
newsgroup; therefore posts are frequently corrected, sometimes perhaps
too harshly, and often to the annoyance of new posters who consider the
correction trivial. Do not take it personally; the best way to fit in
with comp.lang.c++ is to express gratitude for the correction, move on,
and be more careful next time.

This is a very busy group, so these requests are designed to make it as
pleasant and efficient an experience as possible. We hope it proves
a valuable commodity to you.

A list of some Newsgroups :
Languages and Programming
-------------------------
comp.lang.c The C Programming Language
comp.lang.asm.x86 x86 assembly language programming
comp.programming Non-language specific programming
comp.graphics.algorithms Issues of computer graphics

Operating Systems
-----------------
comp.os.msdos.programmer DOS, BIOS, Memory Models, interrupts,
screen handling, hardware
comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32 MS/Windows: Mice, DLLs, hardware
comp.os.os2.programmer.misc OS/2 Programming
comp.sys.mac.programmer.misc Macintosh Programming
comp.unix.programmer General Unix: processes, pipes, POSIX,
curses, sockets
comp.unix.[vendor] Various Unix vendors

Microsoft VC++
-------------
microsoft.public.vc.language VC++ issues
microsoft.public.vc.mfc MFC Issues
microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vc C++/CLR Issues
microsoft.public.dotnet.framework .Net Framework

Borland C++ Builder
-------------------
borland.public.cppbuilder.language Borland C++ Builder
borland.public.cpp.language
borland.public.cppbuilder

-Shiva
http://www.slack.net/~shiva/w...

Wed Dec 3 12:30:00 EST 2008

7 Answers

Herman Rubin

6/18/2014 9:17:00 PM

On 2014-06-17, DoD <danskisanjar@gmail.com> wrote:

><malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:b9031e3a-463e-4d13-98a3-7ad16d77f0ac@googlegroups.com...
>> On Tuesday, June 17, 2014 10:05:43 PM UTC+1, David Makowsky wrote:

>> The fact is that under Bush, Israel was forced to surrender Gaza,

> They were? Do you have a credible cite?

I agree. It was Sharon who made this decision.

It would have been more sensible, after the extent of the
tunneling was discovered, to annex the Philadelphi corridor
and Gush Katif to Israel. Egypt coould have been offered
the part of the Gaza Strip south of the Philadelphi corridor
if they wanted it.

This would have deprived Hamas of much of the illegal
importation of armament, and would in no way have violated
the Geneva Conventions. The number of people to have
been moved would have been small, probably smaller than
the number of inhabitants of Gush Katif who wwere forcibly
relocated.

The Palestinians would still have kept Gaza City and a fair
part of the strip, and would be in a much worse position
than they are now.

--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558

Higgs Boson

6/19/2014 3:59:00 AM

On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 2:16:30 PM UTC-7, Herman Rubin wrote:
> On 2014-06-17, DoD <danskisanjar@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> ><malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> wrote in message
>
> > news:b9031e3a-463e-4d13-98a3-7ad16d77f0ac@googlegroups.com...
>
> >> On Tuesday, June 17, 2014 10:05:43 PM UTC+1, David Makowsky wrote:
>
>
>
> >> The fact is that under Bush, Israel was forced to surrender Gaza,
>
>
>
> > They were? Do you have a credible cite?
>
>
>
> I agree. It was Sharon who made this decision.
>
>
>
> It would have been more sensible, after the extent of the
>
> tunneling was discovered, to annex the Philadelphi corridor
>
> and Gush Katif to Israel. Egypt coould have been offered
>
> the part of the Gaza Strip south of the Philadelphi corridor
>
> if they wanted it.

Thou hast said it. Egypt didn't want any part of Gaza and its population. They WERE, if I recall correctly, offered Gaza at one time -- (didn't they formerly actually HAVE Gaza as their territory???) but said thanks but no thanks. PLO & successors in "Palestine" ditto. Nobody wanted these folks so they defaulted to Israel.

> This would have deprived Hamas of much of the illegal importation of armament, and would in no way have violated the Geneva Conventions. The number of people to have been moved would have been small, probably smaller than the number of inhabitants of Gush Katif who wwere forcibly relocated.

The Palestinians would still have kept Gaza City and a fair part of the strip, and would be in a much worse position than they are now.

Worse? Sincerely confused.

G.

DoD

6/19/2014 4:00:00 AM

"Herman Rubin" <hrubin@skew.stat.purdue.edu> wrote in message
news:slrnlq3pjr.3jf.hrubin@skew.stat.purdue.edu...
> On 2014-06-17, DoD <danskisanjar@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>><malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> wrote in message
>> news:b9031e3a-463e-4d13-98a3-7ad16d77f0ac@googlegroups.com...
>>> On Tuesday, June 17, 2014 10:05:43 PM UTC+1, David Makowsky wrote:
>
>>> The fact is that under Bush, Israel was forced to surrender Gaza,
>
>> They were? Do you have a credible cite?
>
> I agree. It was Sharon who made this decision.

I could never understand the people on the unmoderated forums.... half of
them said Israel ran the U.S. and
half of them said the U.S. ran Israel.... They could never make up their
minds.

mm

6/19/2014 3:30:00 PM

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 21:16:30 +0000 (UTC), Herman Rubin
<hrubin@skew.stat.purdue.edu> wrote:

>On 2014-06-17, DoD <danskisanjar@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>><malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> wrote in message
>> news:b9031e3a-463e-4d13-98a3-7ad16d77f0ac@googlegroups.com...
>>> On Tuesday, June 17, 2014 10:05:43 PM UTC+1, David Makowsky wrote:
>
>>> The fact is that under Bush, Israel was forced to surrender Gaza,
>
>> They were? Do you have a credible cite?
>
>I agree. It was Sharon who made this decision.

Yes, that's right.
>
>It would have been more sensible, after the extent of the
>tunneling was discovered, to annex the Philadelphi corridor

I thought the Philadelphi corridor was under Israeli control -- that is,
they've never renounced their control -- even though they don't exert
control there. I've wondered why they don't.

>and Gush Katif to Israel. Egypt coould have been offered
>the part of the Gaza Strip south of the Philadelphi corridor

I thought there was no part of the Gaza Strip south of the Phil. Cor.

It's straight into Sinai when you're south of the Phil Cor. I spent a
lot of time looking at the map when I was planning my drive from Israel
to Cairo.

It's good for once to be disagreeing on simple facts, easily verifiable.
At least I think they are.

>if they wanted it.
>
>This would have deprived Hamas of much of the illegal
>importation of armament, and would in no way have violated
>the Geneva Conventions. The number of people to have
>been moved would have been small, probably smaller than
>the number of inhabitants of Gush Katif who wwere forcibly
>relocated.
>
>The Palestinians would still have kept Gaza City and a fair
>part of the strip, and would be in a much worse position
>than they are now.

--

Meir
It is better to eat an onion in Jerusalem than a cockerel in Egypt. 1055CE

Herman Rubin

6/20/2014 1:36:00 AM

On 2014-06-19, Giborah <hypatia08@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 2:16:30 PM UTC-7, Herman Rubin wrote:
>> On 2014-06-17, DoD <danskisanjar@gmail.com> wrote:

>> ><malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> wrote in message

>> > news:b9031e3a-463e-4d13-98a3-7ad16d77f0ac@googlegroups.com...

>> >> On Tuesday, June 17, 2014 10:05:43 PM UTC+1, David Makowsky wrote:

>> >> The fact is that under Bush, Israel was forced to surrender Gaza,

>> > They were? Do you have a credible cite?

>> I agree. It was Sharon who made this decision.

>> It would have been more sensible, after the extent of the

>> tunneling was discovered, to annex the Philadelphi corridor

>> and Gush Katif to Israel. Egypt coould have been offered

>> the part of the Gaza Strip south of the Philadelphi corridor

>> if they wanted it.

> Thou hast said it. Egypt didn't want any part of Gaza and its population. They WERE, if I recall correctly, offered Gaza at one time -- (didn't they formerly actually HAVE Gaza as their territory???) but said thanks but no thanks. PLO & successors in "Palestine" ditto. Nobody wanted these folks so they defaulted to Israel.

>> This would have deprived Hamas of much of the illegal importation of armament, and would in no way have violated the Geneva Conventions. The number of people to have been moved would have been small, probably smaller than the number of inhabitants of Gush Katif who wwere forcibly relocated.

> The Palestinians would still have kept Gaza City and a fair part of the strip, and would be in a much worse position than they are now.

> Worse? Sincerely confused.

The northern part of the strip, with Gaza City, would be effectively
cut off from supplies except through Israel or the Israeli blockade.
> G.

--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558

Herman Rubin

6/20/2014 1:37:00 AM

On 2014-06-19, mm <mm2005@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 21:16:30 +0000 (UTC), Herman Rubin
><hrubin@skew.stat.purdue.edu> wrote:

>>On 2014-06-17, DoD <danskisanjar@gmail.com> wrote:

>>><malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> wrote in message
>>> news:b9031e3a-463e-4d13-98a3-7ad16d77f0ac@googlegroups.com...
>>>> On Tuesday, June 17, 2014 10:05:43 PM UTC+1, David Makowsky wrote:

>>>> The fact is that under Bush, Israel was forced to surrender Gaza,

>>> They were? Do you have a credible cite?

>>I agree. It was Sharon who made this decision.

> Yes, that's right.

>>It would have been more sensible, after the extent of the
>>tunneling was discovered, to annex the Philadelphi corridor

> I thought the Philadelphi corridor was under Israeli control -- that is,
> they've never renounced their control -- even though they don't exert
> control there. I've wondered why they don't.

The Philadelphi corridor is supposed to be a demilitarized zone.
The Israeli Army does patrol it. My suggestion was to annex it to
Israel, and connect it to Gush Katif. I believe the 10 kilometer
width would be enough to prevent tunneling; the current Ramah tunnels
are just from one side of the border to the other, and Ramah itself
is split between Egypt and the Gaza Strip.

>>and Gush Katif to Israel. Egypt coould have been offered
>>the part of the Gaza Strip south of the Philadelphi corridor

> I thought there was no part of the Gaza Strip south of the Phil. Cor.

> It's straight into Sinai when you're south of the Phil Cor. I spent a
> lot of time looking at the map when I was planning my drive from Israel
> to Cairo.

> It's good for once to be disagreeing on simple facts, easily verifiable.
> At least I think they are.

>>if they wanted it.

>>This would have deprived Hamas of much of the illegal
>>importation of armament, and would in no way have violated
>>the Geneva Conventions. The number of people to have
>>been moved would have been small, probably smaller than
>>the number of inhabitants of Gush Katif who wwere forcibly
>>relocated.

>>The Palestinians would still have kept Gaza City and a fair
>>part of the strip, and would be in a much worse position
>>than they are now.

--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558

mirjam

6/20/2014 3:14:00 AM

On Friday, June 20, 2014 4:37:13 AM UTC+3, Herman Rubin wrote:

>
>
> The Philadelphi corridor is supposed to be a demilitarized zone.
>
> The Israeli Army does patrol it.
No it is not demilitarized and it is not Under Israeli control it is under the Egyptian army control.
mirjam

comp.lang.c++

===Welcome to comp.lang.c++! Read this first.

Shiva

Herman Rubin

Higgs Boson

DoD

mm

Herman Rubin

Herman Rubin

mirjam

x Login to ForumsZone