Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #9053 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "BarryG" <barryg2@peoplepc.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2011-08-06 23:55 -0500 |
| Last post | 2011-08-15 17:03 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 127 — 29 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
Too bad this group is gone "BarryG" <barryg2@peoplepc.com> - 2011-08-06 23:55 -0500
Re: Too bad this group is gone Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2011-08-06 23:44 -0600
Re: Too bad this group is gone cri@tiac.net (Richard Harter) - 2011-08-07 20:38 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone "osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2011-08-07 16:13 -0500
Re: Too bad this group is gone James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-07 18:28 -0400
Re: Too bad this group is gone Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2011-08-08 09:53 -0400
Re: Too bad this group is gone jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-08-08 00:16 +0200
Re: Too bad this group is gone August Karlstrom <fusionfile@gmail.com> - 2011-08-08 00:40 +0200
Re: Too bad this group is gone jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-08-08 10:05 +0200
Re: Too bad this group is gone Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-08-08 12:51 +0100
Re: Too bad this group is gone Jens Gustedt <Jens.Gustedt@loria.fr> - 2011-08-08 10:17 +0200
Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-08 14:25 +0100
Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-08 14:22 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-08 17:30 +0100
Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-08 17:04 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-08 19:10 +0100
Re: Too bad this group is gone Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2011-08-08 18:38 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-08 20:38 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2011-08-08 20:43 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-09 16:02 +0100
Re: Too bad this group is gone Jens Gustedt <Jens.Gustedt@loria.fr> - 2011-08-09 00:15 +0200
Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-09 15:44 +0100
Re: Too bad this group is gone Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-09 08:07 -0700
Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-09 20:20 +0100
Re: Too bad this group is gone Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-09 12:42 -0700
Re: Too bad this group is gone Jens Gustedt <Jens.Gustedt@loria.fr> - 2011-08-08 23:50 +0200
Re: Too bad this group is gone Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-09 10:08 +1200
Re: Too bad this group is gone James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-08 18:18 -0400
Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-09 15:33 +0100
Re: Too bad this group is gone blp@cs.stanford.edu (Ben Pfaff) - 2011-08-08 15:23 -0700
Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-09 15:20 +0100
Re: Too bad this group is gone jt@toerring.de (Jens Thoms Toerring) - 2011-08-08 23:18 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone Todd Carnes <toddcarnes@gmail.com> - 2011-08-09 05:06 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone Jens Gustedt <Jens.Gustedt@loria.fr> - 2011-08-09 11:11 +0200
Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-09 15:01 +0100
Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-09 14:23 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2011-08-09 14:53 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-09 17:45 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-09 20:51 +0100
Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-09 20:23 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-08-10 07:27 -0700
Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-12 22:02 +0100
Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-12 22:28 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone Todd Carnes <toddcarnes@gmail.com> - 2011-08-10 11:16 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-10 14:59 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-10 11:30 -0400
Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-10 16:20 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-10 13:14 -0400
Re: Too bad this group is gone James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-11 08:00 -0400
Re: Too bad this group is gone gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2011-08-11 12:13 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-12 00:06 -0400
Re: Too bad this group is gone James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-12 00:39 -0400
Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-10 17:32 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2011-08-10 23:14 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-11 14:02 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-12 21:49 +0100
Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-12 21:14 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-12 17:49 -0400
Re: Too bad this group is gone Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-08-13 01:46 +0100
Re: Too bad this group is gone Todd Carnes <toddcarnes@gmail.com> - 2011-08-13 09:19 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-13 08:39 -0400
Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-13 16:34 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-13 20:18 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-08-18 06:34 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-08-18 12:20 +0300
Re: Too bad this group is gone BruceS <bruces42@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-18 17:36 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-18 07:10 -0400
Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-13 16:39 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-13 20:15 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-13 18:21 -0700
Re: Too bad this group is gone "J. J. Farrell" <jjf@bcs.org.uk> - 2011-08-12 04:36 +0100
Re: Too bad this group is gone James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-12 00:03 -0400
Re: Too bad this group is gone James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-13 15:29 -0400
Re: Too bad this group is gone Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-14 04:26 -0700
Re: Too bad this group is gone Todd Carnes <toddcarnes@gmail.com> - 2011-08-13 20:51 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone "J. J. Farrell" <jjf@bcs.org.uk> - 2011-08-14 03:15 +0100
Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-14 02:29 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-08-14 05:48 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-14 06:24 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2011-08-14 08:12 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-14 04:39 -0700
Re: Too bad this group is gone Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-14 11:36 -0700
Re: Too bad this group is gone Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-08-10 17:55 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-09 16:43 +0100
Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-09 17:47 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-09 18:26 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-12 21:13 +0100
Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-09 20:42 +0100
Re: Too bad this group is gone Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2011-08-09 19:54 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-12 21:11 +0100
Re: Too bad this group is gone Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2011-08-12 20:25 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-12 22:41 +0100
Re: Too bad this group is gone Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-09 11:28 -0700
Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-09 20:38 +0100
Re: Too bad this group is gone Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-08-09 19:59 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2011-08-09 20:01 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2011-08-09 22:42 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-09 13:16 -0700
Re: Too bad this group is gone jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-08-10 12:12 +0200
Re: Too bad this group is gone Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-10 08:44 -0700
Re: Too bad this group is gone Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-10 11:36 -0700
Re: Too bad this group is gone lovecreatesbeauty <lovecreatesbeauty@gmail.com> - 2011-08-10 23:11 -0700
Re: Too bad this group is gone jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> - 2011-08-11 15:05 +0200
Re: Too bad this group is gone James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-11 08:43 -0400
Re: Too bad this group is gone Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-11 08:02 -0700
Re: Too bad this group is gone Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2011-08-10 10:39 -0600
Re: Too bad this group is gone gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2011-08-11 03:47 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone Jens Gustedt <Jens.Gustedt@loria.fr> - 2011-08-11 00:33 +0200
Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-12 20:57 +0100
Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-12 20:40 +0100
Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-12 20:14 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-12 13:51 -0700
Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-12 22:12 +0100
Re: Too bad this group is gone Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-08-13 01:42 +0100
Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-13 23:52 +0100
Re: Too bad this group is gone Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-08-14 00:35 +0100
Re: Too bad this group is gone Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-13 18:23 -0700
Re: Too bad this group is gone gordonb.mbkym@burditt.org (Gordon Burditt) - 2011-08-10 20:50 -0500
Re: Too bad this group is gone gordonb.6v878@burditt.org (Gordon Burditt) - 2011-08-11 03:34 -0500
Re: Too bad this group is gone Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-11 08:23 -0700
Re: Too bad this group is gone Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-10 03:16 -0700
Re: Too bad this group is gone John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2011-08-11 11:12 -0700
Re: Too bad this group is gone Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> - 2011-08-12 20:15 +0100
Re: Too bad this group is gone John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-12 20:07 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-08-12 20:39 +0000
Re: Too bad this group is gone John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2011-08-15 08:00 -0700
Re: Too bad this group is gone gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2011-08-15 17:03 +0000
Page 1 of 7 [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next page →
| From | "BarryG" <barryg2@peoplepc.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-06 23:55 -0500 |
| Subject | Too bad this group is gone |
| Message-ID | <J9-dnRuNI-dAh6PTnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
#include <stdlib.h>
int main void()
{
return EXIT_FAILURE;
}
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-06 23:44 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <1by5z5epxo.fsf@snowball.wb.pfeifferfamily.net> |
| In reply to | #9053 |
"BarryG" <barryg2@peoplepc.com> writes:
> #include <stdlib.h>
>
> int main void()
> {
> return EXIT_FAILURE;
> }
ITYM
int main(void)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | cri@tiac.net (Richard Harter) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-07 20:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <4e3ef7aa.487616864@text.giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #9053 |
On Sat, 6 Aug 2011 23:55:54 -0500, "BarryG" <barryg2@peoplepc.com>
wrote:
>#include <stdlib.h>
>
>int main void()
>{
> return EXIT_FAILURE;
>}
What hsppened to it?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-07 16:13 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <9a8dfoFli2U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #9060 |
"Richard Harter" wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Aug 2011 23:55:54 -0500, "BarryG" <barryg2@peoplepc.com>
> wrote:
>
>>#include <stdlib.h>
>>
>>int main void()
>>{
>> return EXIT_FAILURE;
>>}
>
> What hsppened to it?
My WAG is that Java happened to it. One could look at the language books
in several college bookstores and get an idea as to whether my guess has any
merit. We had better nourish Bill Cunningham, he is all we have left.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-07 18:28 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <j1n3ht$n4o$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #9061 |
On 08/07/2011 05:13 PM, osmium wrote:
> "Richard Harter" wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 6 Aug 2011 23:55:54 -0500, "BarryG" <barryg2@peoplepc.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> #include <stdlib.h>
>>>
>>> int main void()
>>> {
>>> return EXIT_FAILURE;
>>> }
>>
>> What hsppened to it?
>
> My WAG is that Java happened to it. One could look at the language books
> in several college bookstores and get an idea as to whether my guess has any
> merit. We had better nourish Bill Cunningham, he is all we have left.
According to Google Groups:
<https://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.c/about?hl=en>
this group hit a peak of 7444 messages per month in October 1997, and
has slowly but erratically gone downhill since then. Key point:
"slowly". As recently as June, there were 2069 messages posted in a
single month. Don't pay too much attention to the July and August
numbers; something has been going wrong with Google Groups for the past
several weeks.
It's not clear which Java newsgroup would be the most appropriate
comparison. The most active usenet newsgroup I could find devoted to
Java is comp.lang.java.programming:
<http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.java.programmer/about?hl=en>
Their peak was 9471 messages in March 2001, and they've been dropping
off, too. If anything, their numbers seem to have dropped off further
than ours.
Google Groups is, of course, very flaky, so take all of these numbers
with LARGE grain of salt.
--
James Kuyper
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-08 09:53 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <wvidnXm3gbfyd6LTnZ2dnUVZ_hednZ2d@bestweb.net> |
| In reply to | #9061 |
On 8/7/2011 5:13 PM, osmium wrote:
> "Richard Harter" wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 6 Aug 2011 23:55:54 -0500, "BarryG"<barryg2@peoplepc.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> #include<stdlib.h>
>>>
>>> int main void()
>>> {
>>> return EXIT_FAILURE;
>>> }
>>
>> What hsppened to it?
>
> My WAG is that Java happened to it. One could look at the language books
> in several college bookstores and get an idea as to whether my guess has any
> merit.
My eldest is starting high school next month. I asked his "intro to
computer programming" teacher what language they use. She told me that they
used to teach C++ and Java, but have switched instead to Alice and Scratch.
(The idea being that it's better to teach programming, than a particular
language's syntax.)
> We had better nourish Bill Cunningham, he is all we have left.
:-)
Actually, I think he's a good example of what can happen if you teach "the
syntax of language X" over "how to design and write a program".
--
Kenneth Brody
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-08 00:16 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <j1n2sc$6i1$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #9053 |
Le 07/08/11 06:55, BarryG a écrit :
> #include<stdlib.h>
>
> int main void()
> {
> return EXIT_FAILURE;
> }
>
>
I have contributed a compiler and a development environment that I
distribute for free in the C community and I have been trying to promote
discussion in this group for several years.
My idea is hat a simple language is not necessarily a bad language, to
the contrary. It is the better language exactly because of its
simplicity.
Things shouldn't be too simple however, and I have been proposing here
and in comp.std.c enhancements and modifications to the C language.
The last one is a system I have been developing for over a year that
proposes a CCL: C Containers library, that is essentially inspired
from the STL of C++.
I have posted a message about it recently (Aug 3thrd) and received
exactly zero answers. Maybe because of the holidays, or just because
there are no C developers in this group.
All the code is available at http://code.google.com/p/ccl/ but almost
nobody in this group wants to take notice of it since technical
discussions are banned here.
Or it is simply (as you say) that this group has disappeared.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | August Karlstrom <fusionfile@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-08 00:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <j1n48s$s8a$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #9062 |
On 2011-08-08 00:16, jacob navia wrote: > My idea is hat a simple language is not necessarily a bad language, to > the contrary. It is the better language exactly because of its > simplicity. When the sheer length of the language definition is taken into consideration the language does not appear to be so simple. It is certainly longer than Oberon's 16 pages (to compare with another procedural language). /August -- The competent programmer is fully aware of the limited size of his own skull. He therefore approaches his task with full humility, and avoids clever tricks like the plague. --Edsger Dijkstra
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-08 10:05 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <j1o5ct$cqn$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #9064 |
Le 08/08/11 00:40, August Karlstrom a écrit : > On 2011-08-08 00:16, jacob navia wrote: >> My idea is hat a simple language is not necessarily a bad language, to >> the contrary. It is the better language exactly because of its >> simplicity. > > When the sheer length of the language definition is taken into > consideration the language does not appear to be so simple. It is > certainly longer than Oberon's 16 pages (to compare with another > procedural language). > > > /August > Does those 16 pages include all the standard library? No? Ahh OK.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-08 12:51 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <0.78287bd45292da1efb56.20110808125143BST.87y5z4t92o.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #9068 |
jacob navia <jacob@spamsink.net> writes: > Le 08/08/11 00:40, August Karlstrom a écrit : >> On 2011-08-08 00:16, jacob navia wrote: >>> My idea is hat a simple language is not necessarily a bad language, to >>> the contrary. It is the better language exactly because of its >>> simplicity. >> >> When the sheer length of the language definition is taken into >> consideration the language does not appear to be so simple. It is >> certainly longer than Oberon's 16 pages (to compare with another >> procedural language). <snip> > Does those 16 pages include all the standard library? > > No? > > Ahh OK. If you skip the 19 pages of introductory material and remove the description of the library and all the annexes, C's definition is still 156 pages. I don't know if this measure is at all useful, but that's still a factor of 10. -- Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jens Gustedt <Jens.Gustedt@loria.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-08 10:17 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <4E3F9B9C.7030507@loria.fr> |
| In reply to | #9053 |
Am 08/07/2011 06:55 AM, schrieb BarryG: > int main void() oh! my guess is that first of all news groups are slowly phasing out. If you have a concrete question about C, you are probably better served by a site that is moderated and has some simple rules, such as stackoverflow. But then, this group also has a particular bad culture. Most discussionsn become polemic about nothing and there are some egos that dominate everything. I only follow it for some weeks now, scary. Jens
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-08 14:25 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <4e3fe6b5$0$9121$a729d347@news.telepac.pt> |
| In reply to | #9069 |
Jens Gustedt wrote: > Am 08/07/2011 06:55 AM, schrieb BarryG: >> int main void() > > oh! > > my guess is that first of all news groups are slowly phasing out. If you > have a concrete question about C, you are probably better served by a > site that is moderated and has some simple rules, such as stackoverflow. sites such as stack overflow are only any good to those who aren't able to think for themselves and therefore require a herd, who some members are even more clueless than the poster, to pick an answer to their questions. Meanwhile, searching usenet's backlog returns more valuable results than that, and it has been this way for decades. > But then, this group also has a particular bad culture. Most > discussionsn become polemic about nothing and there are some egos that > dominate everything. I only follow it for some weeks now, scary. If you believe that the usenet's intrinsic value relies on the traffic generated in a couple of weeks then you are oblivious to the tool which you have been using. Pairing usenet with a search engine is the best expert system that humanity ever devised, and it makes it an invaluable tool to anyone who has any interest in any subject which is covered in any newsgroup. Rui Maciel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-08 14:22 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <j1orfr$rc7$1@reader1.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #9074 |
In <4e3fe6b5$0$9121$a729d347@news.telepac.pt> Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> writes:
> sites such as stack overflow are only any good to those who aren't able to
> think for themselves
I disagee strongly. If you're having trouble with, say, a third-party
API method that is behaving contrary to its documentation, how is thinking
about it going to help you?
But a site such as stackoverflow might have people who have experienced
the issue and perhaps know of a workaround, or can at least confirm that
the method is buggy.
--
John Gordon A is for Amy, who fell down the stairs
gordon@panix.com B is for Basil, assaulted by bears
-- Edward Gorey, "The Gashlycrumb Tinies"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-08 17:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <4e401210$0$9122$a729d347@news.telepac.pt> |
| In reply to | #9077 |
John Gordon wrote: > I disagee strongly. If you're having trouble with, say, a third-party > API method that is behaving contrary to its documentation, how is thinking > about it going to help you? I was referring to the moderation process which has been put in place in sites such as stack overflow. If a person presents a question and then picks the "right" answer according to the results of a pole instead of parsing the answers by himself then that person is a moron, with the added problem that he may as well end up with a democratically selected, yet wrong answer. > But a site such as stackoverflow might have people who have experienced > the issue and perhaps know of a workaround, or can at least confirm that > the method is buggy. Which brings us to the following point: exactly what value do these sort of sites have that Usenet hasn't been providing for decades? Users aren't served better by those sites. In fact, it can be argued that those sites actually do the users a disservice when compared with what people get with Usenet. So, what exactly is there to be gained? Rui Maciel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-08 17:04 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <j1p4uu$kep$1@reader1.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #9081 |
In <4e401210$0$9122$a729d347@news.telepac.pt> Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> writes:
> I was referring to the moderation process which has been put in place in
> sites such as stack overflow. If a person presents a question and then
> picks the "right" answer according to the results of a pole instead of
> parsing the answers by himself then that person is a moron, with the added
> problem that he may as well end up with a democratically selected, yet wrong
> answer.
The democratically selected answer is generally most likely to be correct,
so the user can *start* with that one and parse it for himself to see if it
is correct. Why would you assume he blindly accepts it?
> Which brings us to the following point: exactly what value do these sort of
> sites have that Usenet hasn't been providing for decades? Users aren't
> served better by those sites. In fact, it can be argued that those sites
> actually do the users a disservice when compared with what people get with
> Usenet. So, what exactly is there to be gained?
I gain the advantage of seeing all the comments and answers on the specific
topic in one place along with a democratic vote as to which answer is
correct, as opposed to crawling through dozens or hundreds of individual
usenet posts, many of which might be expired from my local newsfeed.
--
John Gordon A is for Amy, who fell down the stairs
gordon@panix.com B is for Basil, assaulted by bears
-- Edward Gorey, "The Gashlycrumb Tinies"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-08 19:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <4e402998$0$9123$a729d347@news.telepac.pt> |
| In reply to | #9082 |
John Gordon wrote: > In <4e401210$0$9122$a729d347@news.telepac.pt> Rui Maciel > <rui.maciel@gmail.com> writes: > >> I was referring to the moderation process which has been put in place in >> sites such as stack overflow. If a person presents a question and then >> picks the "right" answer according to the results of a pole instead of >> parsing the answers by himself then that person is a moron, with the >> added problem that he may as well end up with a democratically selected, >> yet wrong answer. > > The democratically selected answer is generally most likely to be correct, > so the user can *start* with that one and parse it for himself to see if > it > is correct. Why would you assume he blindly accepts it? If a user doesn't blindly accept an answer that has received more votes just because it received more votes then, for that user, it is irrelevant how many votes an answer has received. This means that the vote system is irrelevant and useless. On the other hand, if a user actually gives any weight to what votes an answer received and takes that in consideration when deciding which suggestion to follow, independent of what answer has been provided, then that user is a moron. >> Which brings us to the following point: exactly what value do these sort >> of >> sites have that Usenet hasn't been providing for decades? Users aren't >> served better by those sites. In fact, it can be argued that those sites >> actually do the users a disservice when compared with what people get >> with >> Usenet. So, what exactly is there to be gained? > > I gain the advantage of seeing all the comments and answers on the > specific topic in one place along with a democratic vote as to which > answer is correct Truth and validity isn't defined through a democratic vote. You can't change reality and facts with a 50%+1 vote. > , as opposed to crawling through dozens or hundreds of > individual usenet posts, many of which might be expired from my local > newsfeed. If you use a search engine to filter through the cruft which clogs sites such as stack overflow, why won't you use one to filter through Usenet's backlog? You can't claim that mattress A is better than mattress B because when you are supposed to use mattress B you opt to sleep on the floor. Rui Maciel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-08 18:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnj40b8t.392.willem@toad.stack.nl> |
| In reply to | #9083 |
Rui Maciel wrote:
) John Gordon wrote:
)
)> In <4e401210$0$9122$a729d347@news.telepac.pt> Rui Maciel
)> <rui.maciel@gmail.com> writes:
)>
)>> I was referring to the moderation process which has been put in place in
)>> sites such as stack overflow. If a person presents a question and then
)>> picks the "right" answer according to the results of a pole instead of
)>> parsing the answers by himself then that person is a moron, with the
)>> added problem that he may as well end up with a democratically selected,
)>> yet wrong answer.
)>
)> The democratically selected answer is generally most likely to be correct,
)> so the user can *start* with that one and parse it for himself to see if
)> it
)> is correct. Why would you assume he blindly accepts it?
)
) If a user doesn't blindly accept an answer that has received more votes just
) because it received more votes then, for that user, it is irrelevant how
) many votes an answer has received. This means that the vote system is
) irrelevant and useless.
)
) On the other hand, if a user actually gives any weight to what votes an
) answer received and takes that in consideration when deciding which
) suggestion to follow, independent of what answer has been provided, then
) that user is a moron.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_the_excluded_middle
SaSW, Willem
--
Disclaimer: I am in no way responsible for any of the statements
made in the above text. For all I know I might be
drugged or something..
No I'm not paranoid. You all think I'm paranoid, don't you !
#EOT
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-08 20:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <j1phfo$gbt$1@reader1.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #9083 |
In <4e402998$0$9123$a729d347@news.telepac.pt> Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> writes:
> > The democratically selected answer is generally most likely to be correct,
> > so the user can *start* with that one and parse it for himself to see if
> > it is correct. Why would you assume he blindly accepts it?
> If a user doesn't blindly accept an answer that has received more votes just
> because it received more votes then, for that user, it is irrelevant how
> many votes an answer has received. This means that the vote system is
> irrelevant and useless.
> On the other hand, if a user actually gives any weight to what votes an
> answer received and takes that in consideration when deciding which
> suggestion to follow, independent of what answer has been provided, then
> that user is a moron.
Why do you insist that the user is blindly accepting the most popular
answer? I can't imagine a competent software developer doing that.
They will try the popular answer and verify that it works. If not, they
look at another answer (probably the next most popular.)
--
John Gordon A is for Amy, who fell down the stairs
gordon@panix.com B is for Basil, assaulted by bears
-- Edward Gorey, "The Gashlycrumb Tinies"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-08 20:43 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnj40ijr.rfi.willem@toad.stack.nl> |
| In reply to | #9085 |
John Gordon wrote:
) Why do you insist that the user is blindly accepting the most popular
) answer? I can't imagine a competent software developer doing that.
)
) They will try the popular answer and verify that it works. If not, they
) look at another answer (probably the next most popular.)
Indeed. As anyone with a bit of CS background, specifically
NP-completeness, will know, verifying an answer is usually
a lot simpler than finding an answer.
SaSW, Willem
--
Disclaimer: I am in no way responsible for any of the statements
made in the above text. For all I know I might be
drugged or something..
No I'm not paranoid. You all think I'm paranoid, don't you !
#EOT
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rui Maciel <rui.maciel@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-08-09 16:02 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <4e414ef2$0$9126$a729d347@news.telepac.pt> |
| In reply to | #9085 |
John Gordon wrote: > Why do you insist that the user is blindly accepting the most popular > answer? I can't imagine a competent software developer doing that. > > They will try the popular answer and verify that it works. If not, they > look at another answer (probably the next most popular.) Popularity is irrelevant, and it does not imply neither validity nor correctness. In fact, popularity isn't even what has been implemented in sites such as stackoverflow. It's nothing more than a vote count, which is in effect meaningless. You don't have any guarantee that only knowledgeable users do the voting, nor that they only vote on subjects which they actually know. You may as well have a herd of clueless users voting on an answer to a question they don't have the faintest clue on, exclusively due to things such as who gave it, what answer had already more votes and even what felt more right. With this, an older but wrong answer can receive more votes than a newer but right answer, and a popular user can see his suggestions voted up, no matter how wrong they are, while a newbie with a freshly created account may see his contribution lag behind. Therefore, placing any value on this sort of voting system is absurd. It is a system devised for those who are unable to think for themselves, for those who are unable to actually decide on their own on the merit of any given answer to their own problems. It is a system designed for those who don't know what they are doing and wish to perpetuate their ignorance, justifying any of their actions with a depressing "but a lot of people voted on this". So, claiming that that site provides a better value than that which has been provided by Usenet in decades is simply not true, and no one needs (or should need) a public poll to conclude that. Rui Maciel
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 7 [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web