The chart of comp.lang.c

[Richard]

Serve Lau said:




Um, quite so. From what I've seen of the advice given there, I can't say
I have a great deal of confidence in the site.


That's what FAQs are for.

Good. Then you wont feel the need to answer questions about such
questions about

*d++=*s++

then.

 

[Richard]

Ed Jensen said:


It's certainly making me wonder whether there's any point in trying to
maintain this newsgroup's usefulness any longer. Usenet is dying (film
at 11), and comp.lang.c is just taking longer about it than most other
groups, but the trolls are taking their toll here too now.

No. Really not.

It would make more sense for the trolls to relocate there, where their
stupidities could be modded out completely. But yes, it's quite true

So asking skilled C programmers in their home habitat is now
"stupid". Good. Now you really show your true colours.

that those who actually want to talk about C could go somewhere else,
leaving the C newsgroup to those who want to talk about non-C things.


This should not be a matter of sides, but a matter of common sense.
Yup.

Nevertheless, comp.lang.c has been getting noisier in recent years, and
there will come a point where there is so much noise that there's no
point in trying to find a signal - if indeed that point has not already
been reached.

Yawn. Totally over stated.

--

 

[Richard]

Serve Lau said:


And before long you have comp.lang.c++ syndrome. No thanks.

We *already* have a mechanism for skipping over discussions about
compilers and IDEs that don't interest us. This mechanism is called

"us". Who is "us"? Enough regular posters have stated that they wouldn't
mind answering an IDE question or two.

"not subscribing to newsgroups where compiler and IDE discussions are
topical".

If you want to talk about X, go to a newsgroup where X is topical. If
you want to talk about Y, go to a newsgroup where Y is topical. If you
want to talk about Z, go to a newsgroup where Z is topical. What is so
hard to understand?

Your failure to recognise how much you could really contribute says more
about you then the people you accuse of being "trolls".

--

 

[Richard]

The best place to discuss and compare IDEs (or even compilers) is on a
platform specific group. There are many platforms and each has it's own
set of IDEs. Yes some are cross platform, but many aren't.

As someone else pointed out, there are very few C only IDEs in
widespread use.

The "C" only bit is immaterial. The "C" part of it is the issue.

--

 

[Ian Collins]

The "C" only bit is immaterial. The "C" part of it is the issue.

You could say the same about operating systems, I consider mine a far
more important tool for my C (or any other language) development than
any IDE.

So are you saying we should discuss operating systems here as well?

 

[Default User]

Richard Heathfield wrote:

It's certainly making me wonder whether there's any point in trying
to maintain this newsgroup's usefulness any longer. Usenet is dying
(film at 11), and comp.lang.c is just taking longer about it than
most other groups, but the trolls are taking their toll here too now.

Only because you allow it to happen. You willingly, seemingly eagerly,
engage them in protracted and repetitious debate. I've told you this
many times, but you don't seem to get the message.

Kenny, Richard, Skybuck, Jacob, etc. don't bother me a lick. Why?
Because I killfiled them. If you feel that you can't do the same
because you need to correct any technical malfeasance on their part,
confine yourself to ONE post on the matter.

Trolls have no power over you. They can't really make you read their
posts, and they sure as HELL can't make you reply. And reply. And
reply. And reply. And reply. And reply. And reply.



Brian

 

[¬a\\/b]

Richard Heathfield wrote:

Only because you allow it to happen. You willingly, seemingly eagerly,
engage them in protracted and repetitious debate. I've told you this
many times, but you don't seem to get the message.

Kenny, Richard, Skybuck, Jacob, etc. don't bother me a lick. Why?
Because I killfiled them. If you feel that you can't do the same
because you need to correct any technical malfeasance on their part,
confine yourself to ONE post on the matter.

Trolls have no power over you.
yes

They can't really make you read their
posts, and they sure as HELL can't make you reply. And reply. And
reply. And reply. And reply. And reply. And reply.

i agree
+ i think that if someone has some study can see who is right and who
is wrong and who says something interesting; so read only interesting
things

 

[Rui Maciel]

The pissing contest everyone is involved in is likely doing more
"damage" to this newsgroup than any amount of slightly off topic
conversation like "C IDEs".

That doesn't make sense. Any decent newsreader has the ability to ignore
threads. If a user doesn't like to see threads about topicality then he
simply has to click twice and ignore the thread.

On the other hand, if there is a torrent of off-topic posts then it isn't
viable to simply ignore each and every one of them. Therefore, as a mere
matter of volume, it is easy to see that a torrent of off-topic posts is
incomparably more damaging to a newsgroup than discussions about
topicality.

If you do not believe then don't take my word for it. Just take a look at
comp.os.linux.misc.

For those "hard core" types, there's always comp.lang.c.moderated.
Perhaps you could take the "high road" and relocate there?

Those "hard core types" are the people that built this newsgroup and keep
the group relevant and interesting for the likes of us. They are the ones
that generate the signal and, therefore, the ones that generate the group's
value.

If they follow your ill-conceived suggestion to go away then there will not
be any signal in this group. To put it in other words, this group will be
dedicated to topics similar to "how do I write KDE code" or "what is the
prettiest IDE out there". The users who are at least a bit of interest in
serious topics about the C programming language will follow them and this
group will simply become irrelevant.

Is that what you are advocating?

For the record, this post should not be considered me "taking sides".
My opinion is that both "sides" are acting childish.

If you take the time to look at the history of other groups who went down
the crapper and the path that took them there, you will easily acknowledge
that this type of subject is important. It directly contributes to the
relevancy of the group.


Rui Maciel

 

[Richard]

If they follow your ill-conceived suggestion to go away then there will not
be any signal in this group. To put it in other words, this group will be
dedicated to topics similar to "how do I write KDE code" or "what is the
prettiest IDE out there". The users who are at least a bit of interest in
serious topics about the C programming language will follow them and this
group will simply become irrelevant.

Is that what you are advocating?

No he isn't. He is saying that the group wont degenerate into 20000000
such posts.

There are already a million and a half OT posts about stuff like C++ -
then trebled by the feeding frenzy to tell the OP off. I would advocate
ignoring such posts if they are clearly trolling or to wait 10 minutes
to see if someone else has redirected them.

A reasonable question about C programmers favorite IDE is hardly hostile
and trollish. The only thing being advocated here is a little more open
mindedness and a little less rudeness and arrogance.

 

[Rui Maciel]

No he isn't. He is saying that the group wont degenerate into 20000000
such posts.

I do not believe that that is the case at all. Care to point any hard
numbers to back that statement?

Nonetheless, as posts about topicality are sent in reply to off-topic posts,
if there was such a considerable volume of topicality posts being posted
then it it would clearly indicate that the group was suffering a serious
onslaught of off-topic posts, which, as we all know, render the groups
irrelevant.

There are already a million and a half OT posts about stuff like C++ -
then trebled by the feeding frenzy to tell the OP off. I would advocate
ignoring such posts if they are clearly trolling or to wait 10 minutes
to see if someone else has redirected them.

The topicality posts are, in their essence, redirections. Unless the post
was deliberately written with the intent of the poster sounding like a
dick, all that a topicality post does is inform that:

a) the subject isn't discussed in the particular newsgroup
b) the following list of groups are dedicated to/better suited for that
particular subject

Granted, some redirect posts sound a bit trollish, some due to the poster
being genuinely trolling and some for responding to trollish posts
themselves. Nonetheless, the need to "enforce" topicality does not go away
just because some random user decides to act immaturely or gets a kick out
of trolling usenet groups.

A reasonable question about C programmers favorite IDE is hardly hostile
and trollish. The only thing being advocated here is a little more open
mindedness and a little less rudeness and arrogance.

Indeed. Topicality is not a black and white issue. Regarding IDEs, sometimes
those questions are answered, tips are given and an healthy debate arises.
Sometimes they aren't. That depends on the general state of mind of the
newsgroup community.

For example, the last user who posted a question about IDEs was kindly
redirected although in some other circumstances he would've gotten an
answer. That happened, as I see it, due to a recent heated debate about a
certain user having the nasty habit of insisting on advertising his
commercial compiler in this newsgroup, which, in effect, is spamming the
newsgroup. Naturally, after a heated debate about how advertising
commercial products is spam and should not be debated here, if a new thread
is started about IDEs then naturally it will get it's fair share of flack,
for the sake of coherency.

So this kind of debate comes and goes. Nonetheless, the importance
of "enforcing" topicality is always present. Sometimes the enforces may be
a bit too strict but, at least as I see it, we all benefit from it.
Specialisation increases the value of the resulting work and by maintaining
the various newsgroups highly specialised, we all benefit from a vast
source of technical knowledge. On the other hand, if we all start accepting
and giving incentives to posts about subject which are completely off-topic
(how to write KDE programs, what is the bestest most ever l33t operating
system in the world, what is the best shade of purple, etc...) then we end
up getting back that level of quality when we find the need to clear a
question.


Rui Maciel

 

[Keith Thompson]

There are already a million and a half OT posts about stuff like C++ -
then trebled by the feeding frenzy to tell the OP off. I would advocate
ignoring such posts if they are clearly trolling or to wait 10 minutes
to see if someone else has redirected them.

I would advocate keeping in mind that Usenet is an asynchronous
medium. If the same correct and sensible answer is posted several
times, don't worry about it. (The same thing happens in
comp.lang.c.moderated, but there are are even more parallel answers,
and they don't show up for several days.)

 

[Malcolm McLean]

Indeed. Topicality is not a black and white issue. Regarding IDEs,
sometimes those questions are answered, tips are given and an healthy
debate arises. Sometimes they aren't. That depends on the general state of
mind of the newsgroup community.

For example, the last user who posted a question about IDEs was kindly
redirected although in some other circumstances he would've gotten an
answer.

IDes are bit of a grey area. Clearly it is related topic, different to, say,
a post on knitting. You could argue that since it is impossible to write C
without some kind of editing tool, a general post about IDEs is on topic.
However a post about a specific IDE clearly and also in practise falls
outside the remit of the group. The reason is it leads to "How do I change
the syntax colours in MaroHard C++Latte 3.0", which unless you happen to
have that particular system is both unanswerable and of no interest.
However "Personally I believe in flashing indigo for size_t, why MacroHard's
C++Latte IDE implements just that and productivity is +50%" would be
acceptable.

 

[Walter Roberson]

IDes are bit of a grey area. Clearly it is related topic, different to, say,
a post on knitting. You could argue that since it is impossible to write C
without some kind of editing tool, a general post about IDEs is on topic.

IDE is *integrated* development environment. It is entirely possible
(and often happens in practice) to create extensive C projects
with *non*-integrated development environments.

However a post about a specific IDE clearly and also in practise falls
outside the remit of the group. The reason is it leads to "How do I change
the syntax colours in MaroHard C++Latte 3.0", which unless you happen to
have that particular system is both unanswerable and of no interest.

It has parallels in the realm of vi vs emacs, both "editing tools".
You are quite correct that we don't want to get into matters like
what elisp to use to (say) beep loudly when you cast a malloc() .

However "Personally I believe in flashing indigo for size_t, why MacroHard's
C++Latte IDE implements just that and productivity is +50%" would be
acceptable.

People here spend a lot of time in editors of various sorts, and some
have essentially argued in this thread that that would make any
editor that can deal with C fair game for discussion "since the
experts are already here". And yet somehow people seem to have managed
to avoid confusing editors with C, so I don't think there is a
burning need for discussions of IDEs here; not even a smouldering need.
(At the moment it seems more like a "If you hold a magnifying glass up
just right for long enough, you can darken something drawn in
lemon juice enough to hint that something was written here!")

 

[Kelsey Bjarnason]

[snips]

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

Chances are, they'll recommend you use whatever compiler suits your
requirements best, which may or may not be gcc. Last I checked, the C64
to name but one has no gcc port, so it would be unlikely they'd recommend
gcc for such a platform.

'Course, "best" also depends on you, your code, your target, your other
requirements. For Windows, you could use any of a half dozen or more;
which is "best" can't really be answered based on the compilers
themselves. The only way to really determine that would be to compare
what you need from the compiler to what the compiler actually offers -
which would mean a relatively detailed examination of the compiler, which
suggests you'd be better off asking in a group dedicated to the compiler.

At most, one might narrow it down a bit, then ask: "I've determined that
either gcc or Intel's C compiler will do the job; has anyone used these
enough to recommend one over the other?" Even then, though, one might
note that your best bet is to simply try them and see for yourself; what
_I_ find best for my needs may not be best for yours.

 

[Ed Jensen]

That doesn't make sense. Any decent newsreader has the ability to ignore
threads. If a user doesn't like to see threads about topicality then he
simply has to click twice and ignore the thread.

On the other hand, if there is a torrent of off-topic posts then it isn't
viable to simply ignore each and every one of them. Therefore, as a mere
matter of volume, it is easy to see that a torrent of off-topic posts is
incomparably more damaging to a newsgroup than discussions about
topicality.

You're simply exaggerating here. comp.lang.c doesn't get so much
traffic that it's not viable to ignore the off topic threads.

In any case, you missed the point entirely. The point was never that
the pissing contests were overwhelming the group; after all, they're
easy to ignore (as you pointed out). The point is that the kind of
intelligent people you would *want* to contribute to the group will be
turned off by the pissing contests they see here, and perhaps not
return.

If you do not believe then don't take my word for it. Just take a look at
comp.os.linux.misc.

I've been participating in online discussions since the late 1970s and
early 1980s. I don't need any advice on the dynamics of online
discussions.

Those "hard core types" are the people that built this newsgroup and keep
the group relevant and interesting for the likes of us. They are the ones
that generate the signal and, therefore, the ones that generate the group's
value.

If they follow your ill-conceived suggestion to go away then there will not
be any signal in this group. To put it in other words, this group will be
dedicated to topics similar to "how do I write KDE code" or "what is the
prettiest IDE out there". The users who are at least a bit of interest in
serious topics about the C programming language will follow them and this
group will simply become irrelevant.

Is that what you are advocating?

Are you suggesting you're incapable of pointing your newsreader at
comp.lang.c.moderated? If the "hard core" types are as valuable as
you believe, the people and traffic will follow them there.

I know I would. I could depend on comp.lang.c.moderated to have the
best and the brightest and rely on it always being on topic. At the
same time, I could also enjoy the more flexible topics offered by
comp.lang.c *without* the pissing contests.

If you take the time to look at the history of other groups who went down
the crapper and the path that took them there, you will easily acknowledge
that this type of subject is important. It directly contributes to the
relevancy of the group.

What does it matter if comp.lang.c goes down the crapper as long as
you have comp.lang.c.moderated?

 

[Kelsey Bjarnason]

[snips]

That statement is total rubbish of course. Talking about C IDE is
talking about C.

Really? Hmm. Last I checked, "C" was defined by an ISO standard. Could
you point out where in the standard it discusses IDEs?

Note that even algorithms - which can be expressed purely in C, without
any qualification whatsoever about tools or OS, etc - are likewise
considered off-topic and redirected elsewhere. If something that can be
done purely in ISO C is considered off-topic, why would something having
virtually no relation to ISO C be considered topical?

 

[Kelsey Bjarnason]

"us". Who is "us"?

Pasting original quote, for context:

"We *already* have a mechanism for skipping over discussions about
compilers and IDEs that don't interest us. This mechanism is called "not
subscribing to newsgroups where compiler and IDE discussions are
topical"."

"We", in context, means any users of usenet, or, more specifically, any
who don't wish to engage in discussions of IDEs and the like. Those who
do wish such discussions are welcome to join - or create - whatever groups
would be appropriate for such discussions.

 

[Kelsey Bjarnason]

The pissing contest everyone is involved in is likely doing more
"damage" to this newsgroup than any amount of slightly off topic
conversation like "C IDEs".

For those "hard core" types, there's always comp.lang.c.moderated.
Perhaps you could take the "high road" and relocate there?

Why? clc has been around for a hell of a long time and has been wildly
useful for its entire existence. Why let a pack of lamers overrun and
destroy such a useful resource?

 

[Richard]

Why? clc has been around for a hell of a long time and has been wildly
useful for its entire existence. Why let a pack of lamers overrun and
destroy such a useful resource?

No one is talking about lamers over running anything. It just strikes me
(and clearly some others) that this group has been taken over by a hard
core mafia of strutting big heads who take delight in putting people
down. Read the daily feeding frenzy of "OT messages. As many as 10 on
one single post. Now THAT is affecting signal to noise since its
repeated on each and every OT thread.

I am a programmer and would have no issues with giving advice on IDEs
to some nOOb who comes here knowing that this is where C programmers
hang out. I certainly don't need to be lectured about topicality by some
self appointed jobsworth. Clearly I probably wouldn't deem it the right
place to go into detail about, say, the Win32 API or programming KDE -
there are certainly better places for that.

 

[Kelsey Bjarnason]

[snips]

IDes are bit of a grey area. Clearly it is related topic, different to, say,
a post on knitting. You could argue that since it is impossible to write C
without some kind of editing tool, a general post about IDEs is on
topic.

And by extension, the editor and compiler need to run on a computer, so
computer discussions are topical... and since most of those will require
an OS, OS discussions are topical... and since OSen need to have the
compilers, editors and the like installed in order to use them, therefore
installation tools for the OSen are topical, and...

However a post about a specific IDE clearly and also in practise
falls outside the remit of the group.

What else is there to discuss about IDEs? "Do you use an IDE?" "Yes."
"Which one?" Er... specific IDEs aren't topical. "Okay, which one would
you recommend?" Er... specific IDEs aren't topical.

interest. However "Personally I believe in flashing indigo for size_t,
why MacroHard's C++Latte IDE implements just that and productivity is
+50%" would be acceptable.

Should be *green*, not indigo, and not flashing; that's simply
distracting. (Hmm, what, exactly, does this have to do with C, again?)