The chart of comp.lang.c

[Kenny McCormack]

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?

Yup. This definitely makes you a category 2.

 

[Kenny McCormack]

[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?

Yeah, yeah, yeah. We get it already. It's still rubbish, but we get it
already.

 

[pete]

Ed Jensen wrote:

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

It takes a much longer time for posts to show up there.

 

[Richard Heathfield]

Ed Jensen said:

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

Have you actually *used* comp.lang.c.moderated? The turnaround time is
practically geological compared to clc.

 

[Malcolm McLean]

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

"What colour is best for displaying C source?" is a C question. It is not
about the language standard, except in so far as it might influence our
colouring decisions, but it is certainly not a platform-specific matter.
Flashing indigo is distracting but the underscore is not?

 

[Malcolm McLean]

[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.

OK, which MPI compiler do you recommend for Beowulf clusters?
See the snag?

 

[santosh]

"What colour is best for displaying C source?" is a C question.

[ ... ]

IMHO, it's a question on HID.

 

[Ed Jensen]

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?

The people you're referring to as "lamers" *and* the "regulars" have
cooperated together to turn clc into a lame pissing contest.

Okay, you win. And as no new members ever replace the old, because
they're repulsed by the pissing contests, you can lament the death of
newsgroup.

 

[Old Wolf]

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

What is that? In c.l.c++, off-topic posts are
redirected to win^H^H^Happropriate newsgroups
just as they are here. However there seem to be
fewer trolls there (perhaps C++ is too complex
for the average troll brain).

 

[Old Wolf]

I am a programmer and would have no issues with giving advice

So howcome you have posted hundreds of messages
on this NG, and not a single one contains any
advice even remotely related to C?

 

[Richard Heathfield]

Old Wolf said:

What is that? In c.l.c++, off-topic posts are
redirected to win^H^H^Happropriate newsgroups
just as they are here.

Yes, *now*. It wasn't always that way. In the 1990s the clc++ newsgroup
all but died because of a lax attitude to topicality, an "if you don't
like it, don't read that thread" approach, such as has been advocated
in this group many times recently.

However there seem to be fewer trolls there (perhaps C++ is too
complex for the average troll brain).

It's the +s that do it. For a troll to be positive once is difficult
enough, but twice?

 

[Richard]

So howcome you have posted hundreds of messages
on this NG, and not a single one contains any
advice even remotely related to C?

Incorrect. But regardless, I happen to back on some C projects now and
was dismayed to find this group was basically a stomping ground for a
few show offs who take delight in picking holes in people.

 

[Richard Heathfield]

Richard said:

Incorrect.

Perhaps, but nevertheless not all that far off the mark. You have now
developed a reputation for being someone who attacks those who give
advice - a destroyer rather than a builder. If you want, you can change
that image. It will take some effort, but it can be done. It's up to
you.

But regardless, I happen to back on some C projects now and
was dismayed to find this group was basically a stomping ground for a
few show offs who take delight in picking holes in people.

Incorrect. This group is for discussions about C. Your misperceptions of
it have coloured your reaction to it and made your articles
disproportionately negative in tone. There is still time to fix that.

It is, by the way, true that some people in here do react in an
over-aggressive way to relatively innocent questions. You do have a
point, in other words. But by exaggerating and over-applying that
point, you throw away any chance of improving matters. If you really
want to be a force for good in clc, then ***lead by example*** instead
of throwing stones at those who, no matter what you seem to believe,
really are trying to help people learn more about C.

 

[John Bode]

Exactly.
Most developers now use IDEs, and that issue is completely ignored.

Yes, because discussion about Visual Studio is so relevant to people
who are using Eclipse, or XCode, or emacs, or vim. Meanwhile, we've
got a question about multiple indirection that's languishing because
everyone would rather talk about the merits of syntax highlighting and
whether green or red works better for comments.

 

[CBFalconer]

Ed Jensen said:



Have you actually *used* comp.lang.c.moderated? The turnaround
time is practically geological compared to clc.

I find it to be around two or three days. Post, request for
clarification, clarification, answer will normally require a couple
of weeks.

 

[¬a\\/b]

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

yes the problem is when many people reply to trolls because in that
way i have to read something

in general i not read all, i read only what i like to read
in some sense all you are in my kill-file (and so trolls)
because if i read something that not interest me i stop to read

 

[Al Balmer]

That statement is total rubbish of course. Talking about C IDE is
talking about C. Whichever way you want to cut it.

Many modern IDEs are language independent or multi language. I think
comp.programming would be a better group to discuss them. There are C
programmers there, too.

 

[Al Balmer]

"What colour is best for displaying C source?" is a C question.

Huh? What color to paint my house is a carpentry question, I suppose.

 

[Richard]

Many modern IDEs are language independent or multi language. I think
comp.programming would be a better group to discuss them. There are C
programmers there, too.

Agreed 100%. Another place for it. But someone asking *here* is not
exactly "bringing the group crashing down" IMO.

 

[Al Balmer]

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.

This morning, I downloaded over 400 messages which were posted since
Friday afternoon. That, of course, does not include the few posters
that I've killfiled, or the threads I've marked ignore. comp.lang.c
get quite enough traffic, thank you. We *really* don't need to
encourage off-topic posts.