The chart of comp.lang.c

Discussion in 'C Programming' started by jacob navia, Jul 27, 2007.

  1. jacob navia

    jacob navia Guest

    This group is too old to have a chart.

    One of the earliest things that could replace a chart however,
    is the message by the founder of the group, Jerry Schwarz.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    Newsgroups : net.news.group, net.lang.c
    From : eagle!jerry
    Date : Fri Oct 22 01:28:04 1982
    Local : Ven 22 oct 1982 01:28
    Subject : C language newsgroup started

    My suggestion for a "C" newsgroup met with support and no
    opposition so net.lang.c (note lower case) has been created.

    It's purpose is to carry on discussion of C programming and
    the C programming language. Appropriate topics are

    Queries on how to write something in C
    Queries about why some C code behaves the way it does
    Suggestions for C modifications or extensions
    C coding "tricks"
    Compiler bugs
    Availability of compilers
    etc.

    Jerry Schwarz
    BTL -- Murray Hill
    harpo!eagle!jerry
    ------------------------------------------------------------------

    In that time, nobody was afraid of discussing the evolution of the
    language. C was considered a living language, i.e. one that can grow,
    adapt to new usages, in a word, evolve.

    Since then, C++ was declared the better C, and C was relegated to
    the museum of programming languages.

    I do not share that view. I find C is a simple language, that with some
    minimal extensions can be used for any project, any usage. That is why
    I post here those extensions, because I want them to become mainstream
    parts of the language.

    Contrary to what many people believe, I am not doing something that is
    not allowed in the chart of this newsgroup. The problem with those
    people is that they have lost the capacity of seeing the language
    as something living, that must be changed/improved over time, and see
    it as a dead corpse, that must be maintained in a mummified state.

    jacob
    jacob navia, Jul 27, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. jacob navia said:

    > This group is too old to have a chart.


    The word is "charter", as you have been told before. Nevertheless, it
    makes a pleasant change to be able to say that you are quite right -
    this group does indeed pre-date charters.

    > One of the earliest things that could replace a chart however,
    > is the message by the founder of the group, Jerry Schwarz.


    Perhaps Jerry Schwarz would care to offer his opinion on whether he
    intended his message to determine topicality 25 years later. In the
    absence of such an expression of opinion, suitably validated for
    authenticity, I see no reason to change current practice.

    Still, for the sake of an open mind, let's look at his suggested topics
    of discussion:

    >
    > ----------------------------------------------------------------
    > Newsgroups : net.news.group, net.lang.c
    > From : eagle!jerry
    > Date : Fri Oct 22 01:28:04 1982
    > Local : Ven 22 oct 1982 01:28
    > Subject : C language newsgroup started
    >
    > My suggestion for a "C" newsgroup met with support and no
    > opposition so net.lang.c (note lower case) has been created.
    >
    > It's purpose is to carry on discussion of C programming and
    > the C programming language. Appropriate topics are
    >
    > Queries on how to write something in C


    That's still topical here.

    > Queries about why some C code behaves the way it does


    That's still topical here.

    > Suggestions for C modifications or extensions


    Modification suggestions become topical in comp.std.c (which appears to
    date back to 1988 or so), so there was no longer any need to support
    such discussions here. Extension suggestions have become the remit of
    individual compiler-dedicated newsgroups, so again there is no longer
    any need to support such discussions here.

    > C coding "tricks"


    That's still topical her.

    > Compiler bugs


    Compiler bugs are now within the purview of individual
    compiler-dedicated newsgroups, so again there is no longer any need to
    support such discussions here.

    > Availability of compilers


    The availability of compilers is now within the purview of individual
    compiler-dedicated newsgroups, so again there is no longer any need to
    support such discussions here.

    > etc.
    >
    > Jerry Schwarz
    > BTL -- Murray Hill
    > harpo!eagle!jerry
    > ------------------------------------------------------------------
    >
    > In that time, nobody was afraid of discussing the evolution of the
    > language.


    That's still true. If you want to discuss it, *YOU CAN*! That's what
    comp.std.c is for.

    > Contrary to what many people believe, I am not doing something that is
    > not allowed in the chart of this newsgroup.


    This group DOES NOT HAVE a charter. Nor does it have a chart. What it
    does have is a set of topicality conventions that work well. All the
    things you want to discuss CAN be discussed in newsgroups where they
    are appropriate. There are far more of these than there used to be.
    Things have come a long way since 1983. Usenet changes, and we change
    with it. Usenet has evolved from "one group for every possible
    discussion subject containing the letter C" to "many groups based
    around the C language, some for compilers, some for extensions, some
    for modifications, some for usage, and so on - so choose the
    appropriate group".

    --
    Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
    Email: -www. +rjh@
    Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
    "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
    Richard Heathfield, Jul 27, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. jacob navia

    Richard Guest

    Richard Heathfield <> writes:

    > jacob navia said:
    >
    >> This group is too old to have a chart.

    >
    > The word is "charter", as you have been told before. Nevertheless, it
    > makes a pleasant change to be able to say that you are quite right -
    > this group does indeed pre-date charters.
    >
    >> One of the earliest things that could replace a chart however,
    >> is the message by the founder of the group, Jerry Schwarz.

    >
    > Perhaps Jerry Schwarz would care to offer his opinion on whether he
    > intended his message to determine topicality 25 years later. In the


    Normally that's what charters do. To prevent cocky young scuds redefining
    it for their own benefit at a later date.

    > absence of such an expression of opinion, suitably validated for
    > authenticity, I see no reason to change current practice.


    Of course you don't.

    >
    > Still, for the sake of an open mind, let's look at his suggested topics
    > of discussion:
    >
    >>
    >> ----------------------------------------------------------------
    >> Newsgroups : net.news.group, net.lang.c
    >> From : eagle!jerry
    >> Date : Fri Oct 22 01:28:04 1982
    >> Local : Ven 22 oct 1982 01:28
    >> Subject : C language newsgroup started
    >>
    >> My suggestion for a "C" newsgroup met with support and no
    >> opposition so net.lang.c (note lower case) has been created.
    >>
    >> It's purpose is to carry on discussion of C programming and
    >> the C programming language. Appropriate topics are
    >>
    >> Queries on how to write something in C

    >
    > That's still topical here.
    >
    >> Queries about why some C code behaves the way it does

    >
    > That's still topical here.
    >
    >> Suggestions for C modifications or extensions

    >
    > Modification suggestions become topical in comp.std.c (which appears to
    > date back to 1988 or so), so there was no longer any need to support
    > such discussions here. Extension suggestions have become the remit of
    > individual compiler-dedicated newsgroups, so again there is no longer
    > any need to support such discussions here.
    >
    >> C coding "tricks"

    >
    > That's still topical her.
    >
    >> Compiler bugs

    >
    > Compiler bugs are now within the purview of individual
    > compiler-dedicated newsgroups, so again there is no longer any need to
    > support such discussions here.
    >
    >> Availability of compilers

    >
    > The availability of compilers is now within the purview of individual
    > compiler-dedicated newsgroups, so again there is no longer any need to
    > support such discussions here.


    Rubbish. Here is a collection of C programmers all using different C
    compilers. Where else is better to get a thread comparing and
    contrasting different C compilers. Hint : if you go to to the gcc forum
    they will recommend .... oh. You get it. Good.

    Ditto for recommended C IDEs and editors.
    Richard, Jul 27, 2007
    #3
  4. jacob navia

    Eric Sosman Guest

    [OT] Re: The chart of comp.lang.c

    jacob navia wrote:
    > This group is too old to have a chart.
    > [...]


    Never too old to acquire one:


    |
    | +----+
    | |####|
    | |####|
    | |####|
    | |####|
    | |####|
    | |####|
    | +----+ |####|
    | |####| |####|
    | |####| |####|
    | |####| |####|
    +---+----+-----+----+------
    Signal Noise





    (This is a "chart." The word you're thinking of is
    "charter," etymologically related but not the same thing
    at all.)

    --
    Eric Sosman
    lid
    Eric Sosman, Jul 27, 2007
    #4
  5. Re: [OT] Re: The chart of comp.lang.c

    Eric Sosman wrote:
    >
    > |
    > | +----+
    > | |####|
    > | |####|
    > | |####|
    > | |####|
    > | |####|
    > | |####|
    > | +----+ |####|
    > | |####| |####|
    > | |####| |####|
    > | |####| |####|
    > +---+----+-----+----+------
    > Signal Noise


    The Y axis is logarithmic, right?

    Roberto Waltman

    [ Please reply to the group,
    return address is invalid ]
    Roberto Waltman, Jul 27, 2007
    #5
  6. jacob navia wrote:
    > This group is too old to have a chart.
    >
    > One of the earliest things that could replace a chart however,
    > is the message by the founder of the group, Jerry Schwarz.
    >

    This is off-topic in comp.lang.c. Try a group dedicated to discussions
    about newsgroups and newsgroup charters.

    (I could not resist.)
    Clever Monkey, Jul 27, 2007
    #6
  7. jacob navia

    Serve Lau Guest

    "Clever Monkey" <> wrote in message
    news:qSoqi.19690$!nnrp1.uunet.ca...
    > jacob navia wrote:
    >> This group is too old to have a chart.
    >>
    >> One of the earliest things that could replace a chart however,
    >> is the message by the founder of the group, Jerry Schwarz.
    >>

    > This is off-topic in comp.lang.c. Try a group dedicated to discussions
    > about newsgroups and newsgroup charters.
    >
    > (I could not resist.)


    I think talking about what is off and on topic is topical :p
    Serve Lau, Jul 27, 2007
    #7
  8. Richard Heathfield <> writes:

    > jacob navia said:


    <posting of original net.lang.c notice snipped>

    > Still, for the sake of an open mind, let's look at his suggested topics
    > of discussion:
    >
    >> Compiler bugs

    >
    > Compiler bugs are now within the purview of individual
    > compiler-dedicated newsgroups, so again there is no longer any need to
    > support such discussions here.


    I'd be quite happy if comp.lang.c were the first point of call for
    many suspected compiler bugs. The number of suspected compiler bugs
    is so many order of magnitude greater than the number of actual bugs
    that the vast majority of these posting are likely to turn out to be
    topical here.

    If a bug is determined to exist, the discussion should be re-directed,
    or course.

    --
    Ben.
    Ben Bacarisse, Jul 27, 2007
    #8
  9. Clever Monkey wrote:
    > jacob navia wrote:
    >> This group is too old to have a chart.
    >>
    >> One of the earliest things that could replace a chart however,
    >> is the message by the founder of the group, Jerry Schwarz.
    >>

    > This is off-topic in comp.lang.c. Try a group dedicated to discussions
    > about newsgroups and newsgroup charters.
    >
    > (I could not resist.)


    You should have resisted, since you are completely wrong. Discussion
    about topicality in a newsgroup is always topical in that newsgroup.
    Martin Ambuhl, Jul 27, 2007
    #9
  10. jacob navia

    Default User Guest

    Martin Ambuhl wrote:

    > Clever Monkey wrote:
    > > jacob navia wrote:
    > > > This group is too old to have a chart.
    > > >
    > > > One of the earliest things that could replace a chart however,
    > > > is the message by the founder of the group, Jerry Schwarz.
    > > >

    > > This is off-topic in comp.lang.c. Try a group dedicated to
    > > discussions about newsgroups and newsgroup charters.
    > >
    > > (I could not resist.)

    >
    > You should have resisted, since you are completely wrong. Discussion
    > about topicality in a newsgroup is always topical in that newsgroup.


    Which it pretty much HAS to be.



    Brian
    Default User, Jul 27, 2007
    #10
  11. On Jul 27, 1:50 pm, Martin Ambuhl <> wrote:
    > Clever Monkey wrote:
    > > jacob navia wrote:
    > >> This group is too old to have a chart.

    >
    > >> One of the earliest things that could replace a chart however,
    > >> is the message by the founder of the group, Jerry Schwarz.

    >
    > > This is off-topic in comp.lang.c. Try a group dedicated to discussions
    > > about newsgroups and newsgroup charters.

    >
    > > (I could not resist.)

    >
    > You should have resisted, since you are completely wrong.


    And you are completely lacking a sense of humor.

    Robert Gamble
    Robert Gamble, Jul 27, 2007
    #11
  12. jacob navia

    Al Balmer Guest

    On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 11:01:51 +0000, Richard Heathfield
    <> wrote:

    >Perhaps Jerry Schwarz would care to offer his opinion on whether he
    >intended his message to determine topicality 25 years later. In the
    >absence of such an expression of opinion, suitably validated for
    >authenticity, I see no reason to change current practice.


    With all due respect for Jerry Schwartz, I see no need to change
    current practice regardless of his intentions 25 years ago :)

    --
    Al Balmer
    Sun City, AZ
    Al Balmer, Jul 27, 2007
    #12
  13. On Jul 27, 7:01 am, Richard Heathfield <> wrote:

    > Perhaps Jerry Schwarz would care to offer his opinion on whether he
    > intended his message to determine topicality 25 years later. In the
    > absence of such an expression of opinion, suitably validated for
    > authenticity, I see no reason to change current practice.


    Even if he did care to dictate topicality based on his original
    intents, it would be a bit like the ghost of George Washington
    insisting that the Three Fifths Compromise was still topical on
    alt.american.politics even after it had long since been relegated to
    alt.american.history :)
    C. Benson Manica, Jul 27, 2007
    #13
  14. Re: [OT] Re: The chart of comp.lang.c

    "Roberto Waltman" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Eric Sosman wrote:
    >>
    >> |
    >> | +----+
    >> | |####|
    >> | |####|
    >> | |####|
    >> | |####|
    >> | |####|
    >> | |####|
    >> | +----+ |####|
    >> | |####| |####|
    >> | |####| |####|
    >> | |####| |####|
    >> +---+----+-----+----+------
    >> Signal Noise

    >
    > The Y axis is logarithmic, right?
    >

    Square. The energy of a wave is proportional to the square of the amplitude.

    --
    Free games and programming goodies.
    http://www.personal.leeds.ac.uk/~bgy1mm
    Malcolm McLean, Jul 28, 2007
    #14
  15. "Richard" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Richard Heathfield <> writes:
    >
    > Rubbish. Here is a collection of C programmers all using different C
    > compilers. Where else is better to get a thread comparing and
    > contrasting different C compilers. Hint : if you go to to the gcc forum
    > they will recommend .... oh. You get it. Good.
    >
    > Ditto for recommended C IDEs and editors.
    >

    Threads comparing compilers aren't inherently non-topical, but it is hard to
    think of such a thread that wouldn't be best handled elsewhere.
    For instance you could compare two compilers for efficiency, but that would
    be platform-specific, so normally it would go on a Unix or Windows group. Or
    you could compare their extensions, but that's more of a comp.std.c thread.
    Or you could have a free software vs evil Microsoft thread, but that's more
    political than technical.

    The same goes for IDEs. Whilst a thread on the general principles of IDEs
    would be topical, such as one on the merits of syntax colouring, discussion
    of a specific IDE, such as "how do I get rid of those stdafx.h inclusions on
    MS VC++ Express" are better on groups for that compiler. Anyone fortunate
    enough never to ahve heard of MS VC++ Express will simply be irritated by
    endless IDE-specific threads.

    That's not to say that topicality must be so tightly drawn that no one must
    ever mention a specific implementation. But generally threads outside of
    actual language issues are not to be encouraged, becasue C is such a
    wdiely-used language that it would rapidly swamp the ng.

    --
    Free games and programming goodies.
    http://www.personal.leeds.ac.uk/~bgy1mm
    Malcolm McLean, Jul 28, 2007
    #15
  16. jacob navia

    santosh Guest

    Malcolm McLean wrote:

    >
    > "Richard" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Richard Heathfield <> writes:
    >>
    >> Rubbish. Here is a collection of C programmers all using different C
    >> compilers. Where else is better to get a thread comparing and
    >> contrasting different C compilers. Hint : if you go to to the gcc forum
    >> they will recommend .... oh. You get it. Good.
    >>
    >> Ditto for recommended C IDEs and editors.
    >>

    > Threads comparing compilers aren't inherently non-topical, but it is hard
    > to think of such a thread that wouldn't be best handled elsewhere.


    The group <news:comp.compilers> might be a better venue.

    > For instance you could compare two compilers for efficiency, but that
    > would be platform-specific, so normally it would go on a Unix or Windows
    > group.


    It'd probably be more topical in a group for one of those compilers.

    > Or you could compare their extensions, but that's more of a
    > comp.std.c thread.


    No it's not. That's topical in the groups for those compilers.

    > Or you could have a free software vs evil Microsoft
    > thread, but that's more political than technical.


    Right.

    > The same goes for IDEs. Whilst a thread on the general principles of IDEs
    > would be topical, such as one on the merits of syntax colouring,


    I don't think so. IDEs have nothing to do with C. Such discussion might be
    topical in <news:comp.programming> though.

    <snip>
    santosh, Jul 28, 2007
    #16
  17. jacob navia

    Richard Guest

    santosh <> writes:

    > Malcolm McLean wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> "Richard" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> Richard Heathfield <> writes:
    >>>
    >>> Rubbish. Here is a collection of C programmers all using different C
    >>> compilers. Where else is better to get a thread comparing and
    >>> contrasting different C compilers. Hint : if you go to to the gcc forum
    >>> they will recommend .... oh. You get it. Good.
    >>>
    >>> Ditto for recommended C IDEs and editors.
    >>>

    >> Threads comparing compilers aren't inherently non-topical, but it is hard
    >> to think of such a thread that wouldn't be best handled elsewhere.

    >
    > The group <news:comp.compilers> might be a better venue.


    No. it wouldnt. Reason? Because there are a bunch of compiler writers
    there. Not C programmers who are interested in "general issues with
    compilers" to improve their daily work.

    >
    >> For instance you could compare two compilers for efficiency, but that
    >> would be platform-specific, so normally it would go on a Unix or Windows
    >> group.

    >
    > It'd probably be more topical in a group for one of those compilers.


    How do you compare with "one" compiler?

    >
    >> Or you could compare their extensions, but that's more of a
    >> comp.std.c thread.

    >
    > No it's not. That's topical in the groups for those compilers.
    >
    >> Or you could have a free software vs evil Microsoft
    >> thread, but that's more political than technical.

    >
    > Right.
    >
    >> The same goes for IDEs. Whilst a thread on the general principles of IDEs
    >> would be topical, such as one on the merits of syntax colouring,

    >
    > I don't think so. IDEs have nothing to do with C. Such discussion might be
    > topical in <news:comp.programming> though.


    IDEs dedicated to C would, IMO, be on topic here. Why? Because C
    programmers live here. They know. Their advice is important and
    valuable. It would be selfish to deprive people of your knowledge.
    Richard, Jul 28, 2007
    #17
  18. jacob navia

    pete Guest

    Re: [OT] Re: The chart of comp.lang.c

    Malcolm McLean wrote:
    >
    > "Roberto Waltman" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > Eric Sosman wrote:
    > >>
    > >> |
    > >> | +----+
    > >> | |####|
    > >> | |####|
    > >> | |####|
    > >> | |####|
    > >> | |####|
    > >> | |####|
    > >> | +----+ |####|
    > >> | |####| |####|
    > >> | |####| |####|
    > >> | |####| |####|
    > >> +---+----+-----+----+------
    > >> Signal Noise

    > >
    > > The Y axis is logarithmic, right?
    > >

    > Square.
    > The energy of a wave is proportional to the square of the amplitude.


    It's logarithmic. The units are decibels.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decibel

    --
    pete
    pete, Jul 28, 2007
    #18
  19. jacob navia

    Chris Dollin Guest

    santosh wrote:

    > Malcolm McLean wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> "Richard" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> Richard Heathfield <> writes:
    >>>
    >>> Rubbish. Here is a collection of C programmers all using different C
    >>> compilers. Where else is better to get a thread comparing and
    >>> contrasting different C compilers. Hint : if you go to to the gcc forum
    >>> they will recommend .... oh. You get it. Good.
    >>>
    >>> Ditto for recommended C IDEs and editors.
    >>>

    >> Threads comparing compilers aren't inherently non-topical, but it is hard
    >> to think of such a thread that wouldn't be best handled elsewhere.

    >
    > The group <news:comp.compilers> might be a better venue.


    comp.compilers is more about the theory and practice of compiler-writing
    than about comparing existing compilers: at least from the message
    content that's what it looks like.

    Oh, wait, the FAQ is to paw:

    | Any message discussing aspects of compiler design and implementation
    | is appropriate. Language design is usually OK as well insofar as it
    | affects compiler design, until it drifts off into theological issues
    | like where the semicolon goes.

    | Questions about particular compilers, programming languages, and
    | systems should go to newsgroups about the language or system.

    --
    Far-Fetched Hedgehog
    "It took a very long time, much longer than the most generous estimates."
    - James White, /Sector General/
    Chris Dollin, Jul 28, 2007
    #19
  20. jacob navia

    jacob navia Guest

    Richard wrote:
    > santosh <> writes:
    >
    >> Malcolm McLean wrote:
    >>
    >>> "Richard" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> Richard Heathfield <> writes:
    >>>>
    >>>> Rubbish. Here is a collection of C programmers all using different C
    >>>> compilers. Where else is better to get a thread comparing and
    >>>> contrasting different C compilers. Hint : if you go to to the gcc forum
    >>>> they will recommend .... oh. You get it. Good.
    >>>>
    >>>> Ditto for recommended C IDEs and editors.
    >>>>
    >>> Threads comparing compilers aren't inherently non-topical, but it is hard
    >>> to think of such a thread that wouldn't be best handled elsewhere.

    >> The group <news:comp.compilers> might be a better venue.

    >
    > No. it wouldnt. Reason? Because there are a bunch of compiler writers
    > there. Not C programmers who are interested in "general issues with
    > compilers" to improve their daily work.
    >
    >>> For instance you could compare two compilers for efficiency, but that
    >>> would be platform-specific, so normally it would go on a Unix or Windows
    >>> group.

    >> It'd probably be more topical in a group for one of those compilers.

    >
    > How do you compare with "one" compiler?
    >
    >>> Or you could compare their extensions, but that's more of a
    >>> comp.std.c thread.

    >> No it's not. That's topical in the groups for those compilers.
    >>
    >>> Or you could have a free software vs evil Microsoft
    >>> thread, but that's more political than technical.

    >> Right.
    >>
    >>> The same goes for IDEs. Whilst a thread on the general principles of IDEs
    >>> would be topical, such as one on the merits of syntax colouring,

    >> I don't think so. IDEs have nothing to do with C. Such discussion might be
    >> topical in <news:comp.programming> though.

    >
    > IDEs dedicated to C would, IMO, be on topic here. Why? Because C
    > programmers live here. They know. Their advice is important and
    > valuable. It would be selfish to deprive people of your knowledge.


    Exactly.
    Most developers now use IDEs, and that issue is completely ignored.
    jacob navia, Jul 28, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.

Share This Page