C FAQ wiki

[Giannis Papadopoulos]

Although Steve Summit's C FAQ is really good, are there any C FAQ wikis?

--
one's freedom stops where others' begin

Giannis Papadopoulos
http://dop.users.uth.gr/
University of Thessaly
Computer & Communications Engineering dept.

[Bob]

Giannis Papadopoulos wrote:

Although Steve Summit's C FAQ is really good, are there any
C FAQ wikis?

--
one's freedom stops where others' begin

Not that I know of, but that's a great idea. The folks over
at comp.graphics.algorithms just inaugurated their FAQ wiki.
After years of stagnatation, their FAQ has become a living
document:

http://cgafaq.info/wiki/Main_Page

[Giannis Papadopoulos]

Bob wrote:

Giannis Papadopoulos wrote:

Although Steve Summit's C FAQ is really good, are there any
C FAQ wikis?

--
one's freedom stops where others' begin

Not that I know of, but that's a great idea. The folks over
at comp.graphics.algorithms just inaugurated their FAQ wiki.
After years of stagnatation, their FAQ has become a living
document:

http://cgafaq.info/wiki/Main_Page

If there is not such a thing, is anyone interested in starting one?

Unfortunately, I am about to acquire my diploma - I have to present my
thesis this month, so if it happens, I was thinking after September.
--
one's freedom stops where others' begin

Giannis Papadopoulos
http://dop.users.uth.gr/
University of Thessaly
Computer & Communications Engineering dept.

[Richard Heathfield]

Giannis Papadopoulos wrote:

Although Steve Summit's C FAQ is really good, are there any C FAQ wikis?

The idea of a document that anyone can edit is very democratic, but
democracy has little to do with correctness.

A C FAQ wiki is likely to end up as yet another Web repository full of junk
waiting to be debunked by clc experts. Life's too short.

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
mail: rjh at above domain

[Netocrat]

Richard Heathfield <in*****@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:

Giannis Papadopoulos wrote:

Although Steve Summit's C FAQ is really good, are there any C FAQ wikis?

The idea of a document that anyone can edit is very democratic, but
democracy has little to do with correctness.

A C FAQ wiki is likely to end up as yet another Web repository full of junk
waiting to be debunked by clc experts. Life's too short.

How about if the wiki:
* were invitation-only and maintained by clc experts
* were initialised with the content of the current FAQ
* emailed individual or batch updates to its invited maintainer list
(to ensure that inaccuracies could be corrected in short order)?

I support the idea of a wiki because many threads contain new and
useful information that isn't in the current FAQ. Whilst this information
may not qualify as a FAQ, it would be better archived in a structured
format rather than newsgroup postings, particularly because many threads
also contain inaccuracies, noise and corrections, and the final correct
information may be hidden or scattered about the thread. I've considered
doing this myself but don't have the time to format the information and
as an individual I'm likely to commit errors myself. A group effort, on
the other hand, could achieve this. In other words I'm suggesting that a
wiki could supplement and summarise the proceedings of the newsgroup.
It's not without problems, but this group's experts are problem solvers
and they aren't insurmountable problems.

--
http://members.dodo.com.au/~netocrat

[Richard Heathfield]

Netocrat wrote:

Richard Heathfield <in*****@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:

A C FAQ wiki is likely to end up as yet another Web repository full of
junk waiting to be debunked by clc experts. Life's too short.

How about if the wiki:
* were invitation-only and maintained by clc experts
* were initialised with the content of the current FAQ
* emailed individual or batch updates to its invited maintainer list
(to ensure that inaccuracies could be corrected in short order)?

Yes, that could work.

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
mail: rjh at above domain

[Richard Bos]

Richard Heathfield <in*****@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:

Netocrat wrote:

Richard Heathfield <in*****@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:

A C FAQ wiki is likely to end up as yet another Web repository full of
junk waiting to be debunked by clc experts. Life's too short.

How about if the wiki:
* were invitation-only and maintained by clc experts
* were initialised with the content of the current FAQ
* emailed individual or batch updates to its invited maintainer list
(to ensure that inaccuracies could be corrected in short order)?

Yes, that could work.

Yes? Who decides who is invited? You? Me? Dan Pop? Paul Hsieh? Xah Lee?

The current FAQ is (c) Steve Summit, btw.

Richard

[Richard Heathfield]

Richard Bos wrote:

Richard Heathfield <in*****@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:

Netocrat wrote:

> Richard Heathfield <in*****@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> A C FAQ wiki is likely to end up as yet another Web repository full of
>> junk waiting to be debunked by clc experts. Life's too short.
>
> How about if the wiki:
> * were invitation-only and maintained by clc experts
> * were initialised with the content of the current FAQ
> * emailed individual or batch updates to its invited maintainer list
> (to ensure that inaccuracies could be corrected in short order)?
Yes, that could work.

Yes? Who decides who is invited? You? Me? Dan Pop? Paul Hsieh? Xah Lee?

Chris Torek, obviously. Duh.

The current FAQ is (c) Steve Summit, btw.

Oops. So it is. Perhaps we should get our own FAQ for this newsgroup,
instead of relying on someone else's all the time.

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
mail: rjh at above domain

[Richard Bos]

Richard Heathfield <in*****@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:

Richard Bos wrote:

Richard Heathfield <in*****@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:

Netocrat wrote:

> Richard Heathfield <in*****@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> A C FAQ wiki is likely to end up as yet another Web repository full of
>> junk waiting to be debunked by clc experts. Life's too short.
>
> How about if the wiki:
> * were invitation-only and maintained by clc experts
> * were initialised with the content of the current FAQ
> * emailed individual or batch updates to its invited maintainer list
> (to ensure that inaccuracies could be corrected in short order)?

Yes, that could work.

Yes? Who decides who is invited? You? Me? Dan Pop? Paul Hsieh? Xah Lee?

Chris Torek, obviously. Duh.

<g> You have a point, but would he?

The current FAQ is (c) Steve Summit, btw.

Oops. So it is. Perhaps we should get our own FAQ for this newsgroup,
instead of relying on someone else's all the time.

To be honest, I'm not altogether happy with the current situation, in
which something called The c.l.c Newsgroup FAQ is sold for money, and
not posted in this newsgroup in its entirety. Then again, I shouldn't
complain, since I don't see myself getting off my arse and doing
something about it.

Richard

[Richard Heathfield]

Richard Bos wrote:

Richard Heathfield <in*****@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:

Richard Bos wrote:

> Yes? Who decides who is invited? You? Me? Dan Pop? Paul Hsieh? Xah Lee?
Chris Torek, obviously. Duh.

<g> You have a point, but would he?

I don't know. We could always ask him, and find out that way.

> The current FAQ is (c) Steve Summit, btw.

Oops. So it is. Perhaps we should get our own FAQ for this newsgroup,
instead of relying on someone else's all the time.

To be honest, I'm not altogether happy with the current situation, in
which something called The c.l.c Newsgroup FAQ is sold for money, and
not posted in this newsgroup in its entirety.

Especially since it doesn't reflect best practice, containing as it does a
number of anachronisms. Many a time I've wanted to fix some of those, but
couldn't because the C FAQ isn't mine to tamper with.
Then again, I shouldn't
complain, since I don't see myself getting off my arse and doing
something about it.

Maybe we could sort out some kind of mirror for you?
--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
mail: rjh at above domain

[Netocrat]

Richard Heathfield <in*****@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:

Richard Bos wrote:

Richard Heathfield <in*****@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:

Richard Bos wrote:

> Yes? Who decides who is invited? You? Me? Dan Pop? Paul Hsieh? Xah Lee?

Chris Torek, obviously. Duh.

<g> You have a point, but would he?

I don't know. We could always ask him, and find out that way.

The "benevolent dictator" approach works for other projects; Chris seems
to meet the job description well. Alternatively - or in addition - new
members could be invited through vote of existing members. Details would
need to be considered further (e.g. How are the initial members selected?
How do the non-votes of inactive members affect the result? Can the
dictator override the democracy?).

> The current FAQ is (c) Steve Summit, btw.

Oops. So it is. Perhaps we should get our own FAQ for this newsgroup,
instead of relying on someone else's all the time.

To be honest, I'm not altogether happy with the current situation, in
which something called The c.l.c Newsgroup FAQ is sold for money, and
not posted in this newsgroup in its entirety.

Especially since it doesn't reflect best practice, containing as it does
a number of anachronisms. Many a time I've wanted to fix some of those,
but couldn't because the C FAQ isn't mine to tamper with.

Then again, I shouldn't
complain, since I don't see myself getting off my arse and doing
something about it.

Maybe we could sort out some kind of mirror for you?

I only thought about the copyright after posting. Perhaps Steve would be
amenable to use of the FAQ material as the initialisation of an official
c.l.c. wiki under terms agreeable to all. If not, the wiki could start
out empty, with additions made based on the currently topical threads.

--
http://members.dodo.com.au/~netocrat

[Anonymous 7843]

In article <pa****************************@dodo.com.au>,
Netocrat <ne******@dodo.com.au> wrote:

I only thought about the copyright after posting. Perhaps Steve would be
amenable to use of the FAQ material as the initialisation of an official
c.l.c. wiki under terms agreeable to all. If not, the wiki could start
out empty, with additions made based on the currently topical threads.

The existing questions could be paraphrased and answered anew.
In some sense Steve does not have a copyright on the questions
since they were originally posted in comp.lang.c by not-Steve.

[Ben Pfaff]

an******@example.com (Anonymous 7843) writes:

[about the FAQ]

In some sense Steve does not have a copyright on the questions
since they were originally posted in comp.lang.c by not-Steve.

He arguably has a compilation copyright on them.
--
Ben Pfaff
email: bl*@cs.stanford.edu
web: http://benpfaff.org

[Alan Balmer]

On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 10:28:59 -0700, Ben Pfaff <bl*@cs.stanford.edu>
wrote:

an******@example.com (Anonymous 7843) writes:

[about the FAQ]

In some sense Steve does not have a copyright on the questions
since they were originally posted in comp.lang.c by not-Steve.

He arguably has a compilation copyright on them.

The questions are an important, but minor part of the text. Perhaps
"Anonymous" doesn't realize that the FAQ is composed of answers as
well as questions.
--
Al Balmer
Balmer Consulting
re************************@att.net

[Anonymous 7843]

In article <ii********************************@4ax.com>,
Alan Balmer <al******@att.net> wrote:

On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 10:28:59 -0700, Ben Pfaff <bl*@cs.stanford.edu>
wrote:

an******@example.com (Anonymous 7843) writes:

[about the FAQ]

In some sense Steve does not have a copyright on the questions
since they were originally posted in comp.lang.c by not-Steve.

He arguably has a compilation copyright on them.

The questions are an important, but minor part of the text. Perhaps
"Anonymous" doesn't realize that the FAQ is composed of answers as
well as questions.

If you would be so kind as to re-read my actual message (and not just
the unsnipped parts that were relevant to Mr. Pfaff's message) you will
find that I did indeed mention the fact that answers would need to be
formulated anew.

Your use of sarcistic items such the word "perhaps" and the scare
quotes around my chosen handle are not helpful and are bording
on ad hominem attacks. Surely you can do better, and I mean
that in the sense of not attacking at all, not in the sense of
attacking better.

[Anonymous 7843]

In article <87************@benpfaff.org>,
Ben Pfaff <bl*@cs.stanford.edu> wrote:

an******@example.com (Anonymous 7843) writes:

[about the FAQ]

In some sense Steve does not have a copyright on the questions
since they were originally posted in comp.lang.c by not-Steve.

He arguably has a compilation copyright on them.

IANAL, but I believe my suggustion of paraphrasing the questions
would take care of that.

It may be unseemly, but we should probably prod Steve Summit
into asking his publisher for a ruling on this. It's probably
less about what's legally actionable in the abstract than
how protective the publisher intends to be about it.

[Mark]

"Anonymous 7843" <an******@example.com> wrote in message
news:lNJOe.675$mH.28@fed1read07...

In article <87************@benpfaff.org>,
Ben Pfaff <bl*@cs.stanford.edu> wrote:

an******@example.com (Anonymous 7843) writes:

[about the FAQ]

> In some sense Steve does not have a copyright on the questions
> since they were originally posted in comp.lang.c by not-Steve.

He arguably has a compilation copyright on them.

IANAL, but I believe my suggustion of paraphrasing the questions
would take care of that.

It may be unseemly, but we should probably prod Steve Summit
into asking his publisher for a ruling on this. It's probably
less about what's legally actionable in the abstract than
how protective the publisher intends to be about it.

Personally, I think a few of you have too much time on your hands.
That being said, why not just start compiling your own list of questions
starting today? Within a few weeks you'll have many of the questions
already answered in the faq (as most newcomers don't read it and ask
the same questions over and over and over...) and a few more for good
measure!

Mark

[Ben Pfaff]

"Mark" <so***@localbar.com> writes:

That being said, why not just start compiling your own list of questions
starting today?

For what it's worth, I have a few supplemental FAQs and answers
on my webpage:
http://benpfaff.org/writings/clc
--
"...Almost makes you wonder why Heisenberg didn't include postinc/dec operators
in the uncertainty principle. Which of course makes the above equivalent to
Schrodinger's pointer..."
--Anthony McDonald

[Netocrat]

Ben Pfaff <bl*@cs.stanford.edu> wrote:

"Mark" <so***@localbar.com> writes:

That being said, why not just start compiling your own list of questions
starting today?

Some of us do, as evidenced by Ben Pfaff's post below. I keep and distill
some of the more informative posts. But a wiki controlled by acknowledged
(however that's defined) c.l.c experts would avoid duplication of effort
and provide a better guarantee of authoritative answers.
For what it's worth, I have a few supplemental FAQs and answers
on my webpage:
http://benpfaff.org/writings/clc

--
http://members.dodo.com.au/~netocrat

[Eric Sosman]

Ben Pfaff wrote:

"Mark" <so***@localbar.com> writes:

That being said, why not just start compiling your own list of questions
starting today?

For what it's worth, I have a few supplemental FAQs and answers
on my webpage:
http://benpfaff.org/writings/clc

No project to update/supplement/improve/replace the FAQ
can afford to ignore Peter Seebach's work:

http://www.plethora.net/~seebs/faqs/c-iaq.html

--
Er*********@sun.com

[Randy Howard]

Richard Heathfield wrote
(in article
<de**********@nwrdmz03.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com>):

Richard Bos wrote:

Richard Heathfield <in*****@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:

Netocrat wrote:

Richard Heathfield <in*****@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>
> A C FAQ wiki is likely to end up as yet another Web repository full of
> junk waiting to be debunked by clc experts. Life's too short.

How about if the wiki:
* were invitation-only and maintained by clc experts
* were initialised with the content of the current FAQ
* emailed individual or batch updates to its invited maintainer list
(to ensure that inaccuracies could be corrected in short order)?

Yes, that could work.

Yes? Who decides who is invited? You? Me? Dan Pop? Paul Hsieh? Xah Lee?

Chris Torek, obviously. Duh.

LOL. Home run for Richard. :-)

The current FAQ is (c) Steve Summit, btw.

Oops. So it is. Perhaps we should get our own FAQ for this newsgroup,
instead of relying on someone else's all the time.

Or simply ask Steve is he is interested in the idea, in which
case perhaps he and Chris would decide who edits what. :-)

--
Randy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR)

[Randy Howard]

Mark wrote
(in article <wv*****************@newshog.newsread.com>):

It may be unseemly, but we should probably prod Steve Summit
into asking his publisher for a ruling on this. It's probably
less about what's legally actionable in the abstract than
how protective the publisher intends to be about it.

Especially since the web version and the published version in
book form are not the same. (I have both)
Personally, I think a few of you have too much time on your hands.
Obviously. usenet is filled with such people. :-)
That being said, why not just start compiling your own list of questions
starting today?
I've been doing that for years. It's mainly a very large text
file filled with questions and good answers collected from here
and a lot of other places for a really long time. It would take
more time to edit it than I wish to contemplate. It works well
for me though, since vi can find whatever part of it I am
interested in quite quickly.
Within a few weeks you'll have many of the questions
already answered in the faq (as most newcomers don't read it and ask
the same questions over and over and over...) and a few more for good
measure!

Actually, the newcomers don't read the FAQ in any form at all,
so I wonder what the point really is. The regulars get lots of
exercise pointing to FAQ chapter and verse, but that seems to be
its primary use.

It would probably be much more widely used if it had more
example code in it, rather than being primarily verbiage.

--
Randy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR)

[Randy Howard]

Eric Sosman wrote
(in article <de**********@news1brm.Central.Sun.COM>):

http://www.plethora.net/~seebs/faqs/c-iaq.html

In the hopes of confusing more newbies? :-)
--
Randy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR)

[Keith Thompson]

Randy Howard <ra*********@FOOverizonBAR.net> writes:
[...]

Actually, the newcomers don't read the FAQ in any form at all,
so I wonder what the point really is. The regulars get lots of
exercise pointing to FAQ chapter and verse, but that seems to be
its primary use.

It's entirely possible that many newcomers *do* read the FAQ, and that
we therefore never hear from them.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.

[pete]

Richard Heathfield wrote:

Richard Bos wrote:

Richard Heathfield <in*****@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:

Netocrat wrote:

> Richard Heathfield <in*****@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> A C FAQ wiki is likely to end up as yet another Web repository full of
>> junk waiting to be debunked by clc experts. Life's too short.
>
> How about if the wiki:
> * were invitation-only and maintained by clc experts
> * were initialised with the content of the current FAQ
> * emailed individual or batch updates to its invited maintainer list
> (to ensure that inaccuracies could be corrected in short order)?

Yes, that could work.

Yes? Who decides who is invited? You? Me? Dan Pop? Paul Hsieh? Xah Lee?

Chris Torek, obviously. Duh.

The current FAQ is (c) Steve Summit, btw.

Oops. So it is. Perhaps we should get our own FAQ for this newsgroup,
instead of relying on someone else's all the time.

I didn't know he was someone else.
I thought he was one of us.

--
pete

[websnarf]

Giannis Papadopoulos wrote:

Although Steve Summit's C FAQ is really good, are there any C FAQ wikis?

Well there is this:

http://www.iso-9899.info/wiki/Main_Page

--
Paul Hsieh
http://www.pobox.com/~qed/
http://bstring.sf.net/

[Richard Heathfield]

pete wrote:

Richard Heathfield wrote:

Richard Bos wrote:

> The current FAQ is (c) Steve Summit, btw.

Oops. So it is. Perhaps we should get our own FAQ for this newsgroup,
instead of relying on someone else's all the time.

I didn't know he was someone else.
I thought he was one of us.

Well, he doesn't post very often nowadays (except for the regular FAQ
posting, of course), but yes - Steve is one of us. His FAQ, however, is
his, not ours. He has copyright over it. Seen that way, I don't think it's
unreasonable to describe it as "someone else's", even if that someone is
the admirable Mr Summit.

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
mail: rjh at above domain

[Mac]

On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 21:28:33 +0000, Randy Howard wrote:

Mark wrote
(in article <wv*****************@newshog.newsread.com>):

It may be unseemly, but we should probably prod Steve Summit
into asking his publisher for a ruling on this. It's probably
less about what's legally actionable in the abstract than
how protective the publisher intends to be about it.

Especially since the web version and the published version in
book form are not the same. (I have both)

Personally, I think a few of you have too much time on your hands.

Obviously. usenet is filled with such people. :-)

That being said, why not just start compiling your own list of questions
starting today?

I've been doing that for years. It's mainly a very large text
file filled with questions and good answers collected from here
and a lot of other places for a really long time. It would take
more time to edit it than I wish to contemplate. It works well
for me though, since vi can find whatever part of it I am
interested in quite quickly.

Within a few weeks you'll have many of the questions
already answered in the faq (as most newcomers don't read it and ask
the same questions over and over and over...) and a few more for good
measure!

Actually, the newcomers don't read the FAQ in any form at all,
so I wonder what the point really is. The regulars get lots of
exercise pointing to FAQ chapter and verse, but that seems to be
its primary use.

AFAICS none of us has any way of knowing how many potential posters found
the answer to their question from the clc faq and then didn't bother
posting. Perhaps I am just being naive. ;-)

--Mac

[Suman]

Netocrat wrote:

Richard Heathfield <in*****@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:

Richard Bos wrote:

Richard Heathfield <in*****@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
Richard Bos wrote:

> Yes? Who decides who is invited? You? Me? Dan Pop? Paul Hsieh? Xah Lee?

Chris Torek, obviously. Duh.

<g> You have a point, but would he?
I don't know. We could always ask him, and find out that way.

The "benevolent dictator" approach works for other projects; Chris seems
to meet the job description well. Alternatively - or in addition - new
members could be invited through vote of existing members. Details would
need to be considered further (e.g. How are the initial members selected?
How do the non-votes of inactive members affect the result? Can the
dictator override the democracy?).

> The current FAQ is (c) Steve Summit, btw.

Oops. So it is. Perhaps we should get our own FAQ for this newsgroup,
instead of relying on someone else's all the time.

To be honest, I'm not altogether happy with the current situation, in
which something called The c.l.c Newsgroup FAQ is sold for money, and
not posted in this newsgroup in its entirety.

Especially since it doesn't reflect best practice, containing as it does
a number of anachronisms. Many a time I've wanted to fix some of those,
but couldn't because the C FAQ isn't mine to tamper with.

Then again, I shouldn't
complain, since I don't see myself getting off my arse and doing
something about it.

Maybe we could sort out some kind of mirror for you?

I only thought about the copyright after posting. Perhaps Steve would be
amenable to use of the FAQ material as the initialisation of an official
c.l.c. wiki under terms agreeable to all. If not, the wiki could start
out empty, with additions made based on the currently topical threads.

A wiki is a wiki is a wiki. Don't make it look like
another *big* FAQ.
I would rather suggest:
0. If we really, *really*, like the idea of a wiki, to start off one,
by someone [or a small group], who knows what he is talking about.
And worry less about the copyright stuff right now.

Maybe two different groups -- one to concentrate on the content,
and the other to correct, and then published on the wiki.

1. Keep links to good things like the FAQ, the IAQ, the draft etc

2. Ususal wiki stuff, history, evolution, etc...
and then,

3. Something like *posts that stirred a hornet's nest* which can
be taken from clc starting from the present & working backwards, if and
when time permits. But then, The Posts should be edited, and mandated.
Maybe, even compiled to some other form. http://members.dodo.com.au/~netocrat

[Peter Nilsson]

Richard Heathfield wrote:

pete wrote:

...
I didn't know he was someone else.
I thought he was one of us.

Well, he doesn't post very often nowadays (except for the regular FAQ
posting, of course), but yes - Steve is one of us. ...

I always knew there was a secret Order in clc. Of course, anyone who's
ever
converted 'The Last Supper' to ascii art already knows that the third
figure
from the left is a dead ringer for Dennis Ritchie...

--
Peter

[Richard Bos]

an******@example.com (Anonymous 7843) wrote:

the scare quotes around my chosen handle are not helpful

Perhaps not. But frankly, being the 7843th to use "Anonymous" as a
handle isn't the wisest of choices, either. It does not automatically
mean that what you write will likely not be taken seriously (as, say,
peppering your posts with l33t-sp33k would), but you shouldn't be
surprised if others react to an obviously unhelpful handle in kind.

Richard

[Alan Balmer]

On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 06:22:52 GMT, rl*@hoekstra-uitgeverij.nl (Richard
Bos) wrote:

an******@example.com (Anonymous 7843) wrote:

the scare quotes around my chosen handle are not helpful

"Scare quotes"? Do I detect a feeling of persecution here? <G> I
quoted it because it didn't seem to be a real name.
Perhaps not. But frankly, being the 7843th to use "Anonymous" as a
handle isn't the wisest of choices, either. It does not automatically
mean that what you write will likely not be taken seriously (as, say,
peppering your posts with l33t-sp33k would), but you shouldn't be
surprised if others react to an obviously unhelpful handle in kind.

Fact is, I have for years filtered messages with "anonymous" in the
address. Many of them are trolls from psychotics using anonymous
remailers, and I don't think I've missed a lot from the others.

So, "Anonymous", I'm not even seeing your posts, unless they're quoted
by someone else.
--
Al Balmer
Balmer Consulting
re************************@att.net

[Randy Howard]

Keith Thompson wrote
(in article <ln************@nuthaus.mib.org>):

Randy Howard <ra*********@FOOverizonBAR.net> writes:
[...]

Actually, the newcomers don't read the FAQ in any form at all,
so I wonder what the point really is. The regulars get lots of
exercise pointing to FAQ chapter and verse, but that seems to be
its primary use.

It's entirely possible that many newcomers *do* read the FAQ, and that
we therefore never hear from them.

True, it is possible. I don't find it likely, but it is
possible.
--
Randy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR)

[Denis Kasak]

Randy Howard wrote:

Actually, the newcomers don't read the FAQ in any form at all,
so I wonder what the point really is. The regulars get lots of
exercise pointing to FAQ chapter and verse, but that seems to be
its primary use.
You really cannot know how many of them actually do read the FAQ. I
think the number would be significant, despite what can be concluded
from looking at the number and quality of newcomer posts. If one is
intelligent enough to read and understand the FAQ, there is most
probably no room for asking stupid questions.

Also, a wiki could probably make the FAQ more popular, making it known
and useful not only to clc visitors, but to anyone who has interest in C.
It would probably be much more widely used if it had more
example code in it, rather than being primarily verbiage.

Not a bad idea. A few well-written examples might provide C beginners a
starting nudge in the direction of Good Code.

-- Denis

[Randy Howard]

Denis Kasak wrote
(in article <de**********@news1.xnet.hr>):

Randy Howard wrote:

Actually, the newcomers don't read the FAQ in any form at all,
so I wonder what the point really is. The regulars get lots of
exercise pointing to FAQ chapter and verse, but that seems to be
its primary use.

You really cannot know how many of them actually do read the FAQ. I
think the number would be significant, despite what can be concluded
from looking at the number and quality of newcomer posts. If one is
intelligent enough to read and understand the FAQ, there is most
probably no room for asking stupid questions.

When was the last time you a saw a post saying:

"I just read the CLC FAQ, and am still confused about..."
--
Randy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR)

[Denis Kasak]

Randy Howard wrote:

When was the last time you a saw a post saying:

"I just read the CLC FAQ, and am still confused about..."

You do have a point there, but I was counting on those people that did
read it and had no need to ask further questions about it. My
assumptions were based on personal experience. I was new to the group a
while back and one of the first things I did was read it's FAQ, despite
the fact that I was far from being a C beginner. Maybe I'm too
optimistic to think other people do the same?

-- Denis

[CBFalconer]

Denis Kasak wrote:

Randy Howard wrote:

When was the last time you a saw a post saying:

"I just read the CLC FAQ, and am still confused about..."

You do have a point there, but I was counting on those people that
did read it and had no need to ask further questions about it. My
assumptions were based on personal experience. I was new to the
group a while back and one of the first things I did was read it's
FAQ, despite the fact that I was far from being a C beginner.
Maybe I'm too optimistic to think other people do the same?

I have an alias set, so that I just type 'cfaq phrase' and it is
loaded and searched for that phrase. Similarly for the c standard,
with 'cstd phrase'. That's why I insist on using the N869 text
version.

--
"If you want to post a followup via groups.google.com, don't use
the broken "Reply" link at the bottom of the article. Click on
"show options" at the top of the article, then click on the
"Reply" at the bottom of the article headers." - Keith Thompson

[Michael Mair]

Randy Howard wrote:

Keith Thompson wrote
(in article <ln************@nuthaus.mib.org>):

Randy Howard <ra*********@FOOverizonBAR.net> writes:
[...]

Actually, the newcomers don't read the FAQ in any form at all,
so I wonder what the point really is. The regulars get lots of
exercise pointing to FAQ chapter and verse, but that seems to be
its primary use.

It's entirely possible that many newcomers *do* read the FAQ, and that
we therefore never hear from them.

True, it is possible. I don't find it likely, but it is
possible.

Well, I read (parts of) the FAQ and followed the discussions for a few
months before writing a message for the first time :-)

Cheers
Michael
--
E-Mail: Mine is an /at/ gmx /dot/ de address.

[Richard Heathfield]

Peter Nilsson wrote:

Richard Heathfield wrote:

Well, he doesn't post very often nowadays (except for the regular FAQ
posting, of course), but yes - Steve is one of us. ...

I always knew there was a secret Order in clc.

TINC!

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
mail: rjh at above domain

[CBFalconer]

Richard Heathfield wrote:

Peter Nilsson wrote:

Richard Heathfield wrote:

Well, he doesn't post very often nowadays (except for the regular
FAQ posting, of course), but yes - Steve is one of us. ...

I always knew there was a secret Order in clc.

TINC!

???

--
Chuck F (cb********@yahoo.com) (cb********@worldnet.att.net)
Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
<http://cbfalconer.home.att.net> USE worldnet address!

[Denis Kasak]

CBFalconer wrote:

Richard Heathfield wrote:

Peter Nilsson wrote:

I always knew there was a secret Order in clc.

TINC!

???

TINC is shortened for "There Is No Cabal", as explained here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TINC

-- Denis

[Giannis Papadopoulos]

Giannis Papadopoulos wrote:

Although Steve Summit's C FAQ is really good, are there any C FAQ wikis?

As I see it, there are no C wikis.
I was away for some days, and I've just read all the relevant answers.

Firstly, copyright issues are number one priority for a wiki or
open-sourcem, since when the project gets bigger, it is very difficult
to reform and remove the copyrighted part.

If such is a wiki is to be created, is anyone interested? I am currently
searching for a free wiki hosting service (there are many and I have to
check them all, since not all offer backup or have too many ads).
And yes, such a wiki could result in a real mess, but if you don't try
it, you don't know how it would end up...

--
one's freedom stops where others' begin

Giannis Papadopoulos
http://dop.users.uth.gr/
University of Thessaly
Computer & Communications Engineering dept.

[Netocrat]

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 17:32:33 +0300, Giannis Papadopoulos wrote:
[...]

As I see it, there are no C wikis.
I was away for some days, and I've just read all the relevant answers. [...] If such is a wiki is to be created, is anyone interested? I am currently
searching for a free wiki hosting service (there are many and I have to
check them all, since not all offer backup or have too many ads).
Have you considered finding a general hosting provider allowing the group
to implement its own potentially customised wiki software? It may be that
the group needs/wants to modify the wiki software somewhat to support such
things as limiting access and emailing updates to contributors. I
also have a few ideas on democratic and collaborative documentation
development that might be neat to test out on a c.l.c wiki (had to
disclose my personal bias ;).

It may not be possible to find a free host in that case though.
And yes, such a wiki could result in a real mess, but if you don't try
it, you don't know how it would end up...

The important thing is getting the support and assistance of the regulars
of the group so that the wiki has actual authority.

--
http://members.dodo.com.au/~netocrat

[Flash Gordon]

Netocrat wrote:

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 17:32:33 +0300, Giannis Papadopoulos wrote:
[...]

As I see it, there are no C wikis.
I was away for some days, and I've just read all the relevant answers.

[...]

If such is a wiki is to be created, is anyone interested? I am currently
searching for a free wiki hosting service (there are many and I have to
check them all, since not all offer backup or have too many ads).

Have you considered finding a general hosting provider allowing the group
to implement its own potentially customised wiki software? It may be that
the group needs/wants to modify the wiki software somewhat to support such
things as limiting access and emailing updates to contributors. I
also have a few ideas on democratic and collaborative documentation
development that might be neat to test out on a c.l.c wiki (had to
disclose my personal bias ;).

It may not be possible to find a free host in that case though.

Well, I could probably host that myself whilst it is low bandwidth. I
have a small machine permanently switched on connected to the internet
acting as web server for a couple of photo albums and some other stuff.

I would not give people root access to the box, but would not have any
problem with installing customised SW after appropriate review.

If it ever started being hit heavily it would of course have to be
migrated else where since the machine is just sitting on the end of my
broadband connection.

And yes, such a wiki could result in a real mess, but if you don't try
it, you don't know how it would end up...

The important thing is getting the support and assistance of the regulars
of the group so that the wiki has actual authority.

Indeed.
--
Flash Gordon
Living in interesting times.
Although my email address says spam, it is real and I read it.

[Netocrat]

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 21:50:47 +0100, Flash Gordon wrote:

Netocrat wrote:

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 17:32:33 +0300, Giannis Papadopoulos wrote: [...]

If such is a wiki is to be created, is anyone interested? I am
currently searching for a free wiki hosting service (there are many and
I have to check them all, since not all offer backup or have too many
ads).
Have you considered finding a general hosting provider allowing the
group to implement its own potentially customised wiki software? It
may be that the group needs/wants to modify the wiki software somewhat
to support such things as limiting access and emailing updates to
contributors. I also have a few ideas on democratic and collaborative
documentation development that might be neat to test out on a c.l.c
wiki (had to disclose my personal bias ;).

It may not be possible to find a free host in that case though.

Well, I could probably host that myself whilst it is low bandwidth. I
have a small machine permanently switched on connected to the internet
acting as web server for a couple of photo albums and some other stuff.

Neat - what are the server's specs so we can make sure that the
chosen/developed wiki software is supported? i.e. which OS, which web
server, any installed database servers, any server side scripting support
esp. PHP and Perl. Are you willing to install any new software e.g. db
server or scripting language?

Anything else you think is relevant that I've missed...
I would not give people root access to the box, but would not have any
problem with installing customised SW after appropriate review.
Should work fine so long as you don't disappear leaving other maintainers
unable to access the raw data (e.g. db server dumps) or perform admin
tasks on the site.
If it ever started being hit heavily it would of course have to be
migrated else where since the machine is just sitting on the end of my
broadband connection.

Does the server have a domain name yet?

[...]
--
http://members.dodo.com.au/~netocrat

[Flash Gordon]

Netocrat wrote:

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 21:50:47 +0100, Flash Gordon wrote:

Netocrat wrote:

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 17:32:33 +0300, Giannis Papadopoulos wrote:
[...]
If such is a wiki is to be created, is anyone interested? I am
currently searching for a free wiki hosting service (there are many and
I have to check them all, since not all offer backup or have too many
ads).

Have you considered finding a general hosting provider allowing the
group to implement its own potentially customised wiki software? It
may be that the group needs/wants to modify the wiki software somewhat
to support such things as limiting access and emailing updates to
contributors. I also have a few ideas on democratic and collaborative
documentation development that might be neat to test out on a c.l.c
wiki (had to disclose my personal bias ;).

It may not be possible to find a free host in that case though.
Well, I could probably host that myself whilst it is low bandwidth. I
have a small machine permanently switched on connected to the internet
acting as web server for a couple of photo albums and some other stuff.

Neat - what are the server's specs so we can make sure that the
chosen/developed wiki software is supported?

It's an Apple iMac running Gentoo Linux up in my bedroom. Currently only
a couple of gig oh HD space free, but I've got a HD about 180G larger
sitting waiting for me to install it.
i.e. which OS, which web
server,
Gentoo Linux with Apache.
any installed database servers,
I've got some installed but not yet configured. I can easily have MySQL,
PostreSQL or anything else that is free.
any server side scripting support
esp. PHP and Perl.
The photo albums are done with Perl, something else is done with
mod_perl and I think PHP got pulled in but I'm not using it.
Are you willing to install any new software e.g. db
server or scripting language?
Yes, which was the reason for my offer.
Anything else you think is relevant that I've missed...

Probably.

I would not give people root access to the box, but would not have any
problem with installing customised SW after appropriate review.

Should work fine so long as you don't disappear leaving other maintainers
unable to access the raw data (e.g. db server dumps) or perform admin
tasks on the site.

Well, there is always the risk of me (or anyone else) disappearing.
However, I have been here off and on for a while.

If it ever started being hit heavily it would of course have to be
migrated else where since the machine is just sitting on the end of my
broadband connection.

Does the server have a domain name yet?

I have a domain and a few sub-domains point at it. The main ones
pointing at it are home.flash-gordon.me.uk and www.home.flash-gordon.me.uk

However, I have full control of the domain, so I could easily point
clc.flash-gordon.me.uk at it. I've also got Apache configured to run
virtual servers, so I can have clc.flash-gordon.me.uk purely for this.

I don't currently have time to research the SW, but if people spec what
SW they want I can install it and get it configured I'm sure.
--
Flash Gordon
Living in interesting times.
Although my email address says spam, it is real and I read it.

[Netocrat]

On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 02:15:42 +0100, Flash Gordon wrote:

Netocrat wrote:

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 21:50:47 +0100, Flash Gordon wrote: [regarding a c.l.c wiki]

Well, I could probably host that myself whilst it is low bandwidth. I
have a small machine permanently switched on connected to the internet
acting as web server for a couple of photo albums and some other stuff.
Neat - what are the server's specs so we can make sure that the
chosen/developed wiki software is supported?

It's an Apple iMac running Gentoo Linux up in my bedroom. Currently only
a couple of gig oh HD space free, but I've got a HD about 180G larger
sitting waiting for me to install it.

[...] Gentoo Linux with Apache. [...] I can easily have MySQL, PostreSQL or
anything else that is free. [...] The photo albums are done with Perl,
something else is done with mod_perl and I think PHP got pulled in but
I'm not using it.
That setup should be supported by most (probably all) wiki software.

[...] Well, there is always the risk of me (or anyone else) disappearing.
However, I have been here off and on for a while.
Perhaps others could store backups of the site, or we could make sure that
others have access to raw data through an html interface in case of
misadventure.

If it ever started being hit heavily it would of course have to be
migrated else where since the machine is just sitting on the end of my
broadband connection.

Does the server have a domain name yet?

I have a domain and a few sub-domains point at it. The main ones
pointing at it are home.flash-gordon.me.uk and
www.home.flash-gordon.me.uk

However, I have full control of the domain, so I could easily point
clc.flash-gordon.me.uk at it. I've also got Apache configured to run
virtual servers, so I can have clc.flash-gordon.me.uk purely for this.

That would work well. I looked at clc.net and clc.org but they're already
taken. There are some other options that aren't yet taken but I won't
publicise them.
I don't currently have time to research the SW, but if people spec what
SW they want I can install it and get it configured I'm sure.

I'd imagine the wiki to be accepted by regulars here would have to have
user management to limit who can post and notification facilities to
indicate to maintainers when changes occur.

Based on this comparison:
http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/onlamp/2...hich_wiki.html it looks
like MediaWiki is a good choice. It's the software that
http://wikipedia.org uses.

It uses PHP and mySQL, it has some basic user rights management and a
description of email notification is here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Watching_pages

Email notification seems to be somewhat in development but may be
sufficient to start with: "Having a separate email for every edited page
that one likes to watch in the sense of the other watch features, may be
too much. New features are being proposed and developed to deal with this:
the option to have emails sent, after a delay, with a list of edited
pages, and/or the possibility to specify a subset of watched pages for
email notification."

However I haven't used it, so others may have comments as to its
suitability.

--
http://members.dodo.com.au/~netocrat

[Mark F. Haigh]

Netocrat wrote:

On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 02:15:42 +0100, Flash Gordon wrote:

Netocrat wrote:

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 21:50:47 +0100, Flash Gordon wrote:

[regarding a c.l.c wiki]
<snip>

That would work well. I looked at clc.net and clc.org but they're already
taken. There are some other options that aren't yet taken but I won't
publicise them.

On a whim I just bought complangc.net for a year. I've been busy for
the last several weeks on a rather strenuous contract, but hopefully
I'll get a bit of a break in a week or so.

When that time comes, I'll sit down and try to find a dedicated server
or a dedicated virtual server plan where we can install and run
whatever we like, including:

* Run a collaboritive editing system (probably a
wiki), and necessary associated databases.

* Run a source control management server (subversion,
perforce if they'll let us have a free license, etc).

* Run plain old Apache with per-user HTML directories
for code, articles, notes, etc.

* nntpd, qmail, webmail, sftp, ssh to the shell, etc.

If there's something out there that's reasonably priced enough, I'll
buy the first year of hosting as a way of saying thanks.

Obviously only trustworthy regulars are likely to receive an account.
If there's interest, I'll continue; otherwise, I'll eat the domain
registration fee-- it wasn't very expensive.
Mark F. Haigh
mf*****@sbcglobal.net

[Mac]

On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 02:42:33 +0000, CBFalconer wrote:

Richard Heathfield wrote:

Peter Nilsson wrote:

Richard Heathfield wrote:

Well, he doesn't post very often nowadays (except for the regular
FAQ posting, of course), but yes - Steve is one of us. ...

I always knew there was a secret Order in clc.

TINC!

???

I had to use wtf for that one.

$ which wtf
/usr/games/bin/wtf
$
$ wtf is TINC
TINC: there is no cabal
$
--Mac

[Steve Summit]

Richard Heathfield wrote:

Well, he doesn't post very often nowadays...
Too true, alas. (As you can see, it took me rather a while to
pick up on this thread. :-( )
His FAQ, however, is his, not ours. He has copyright over it.
Seen that way, I don't think it's unreasonable to describe it
as "someone else's"...

For what it's worth, copyright issues aside, I do try not to be
too possessive of it, or use the word "my" to qualify it. And in
a very important way it does "belong" to the group -- as I wrote
in the Preface,

This book also retains, I hope, the philosophy of correct
C programming which I began learning when I started
reading net.lang.c...

I was the one who stuck his neck out and started writing
the Frequent questions down, but I would hate to give the
impression that the answers are somehow mine.

Steve Summit
sc*@eskimo.com