bonnett@seismo.CSS.GOV (H. David Bonnett) (12/06/90)
In article <4529@idunno.Princeton.EDU>, subbarao@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Kartik Subbarao) writes: About homework on the net... |> Anyway -- what does everyone else think about this? I've seen both sorts of |> attitudes on the subject. What do you guys think comp.lang.c should do? Since you asked for opinions; I will offer mine. I feel the same way about homework that I feel about questions that can be answered by a quick (maybe not-so-quick) perusal of a manual. **DO YOUR OWN WORK: DO NOT EXPECT A FREE RIDE HERE*** There, now I feel better... Honestly, I try to only post questions here when there does not appear to be any answer available in the docs or from the several gurus kicking around here. If you are given a problem to solve in a class, even if it is merely a proof-of-concept; do it yourself. I can guarantee that it will make far more sense than if you cut-n-paste code from the net (or a book). People like Chris Torek, Doug Gwyn, and many others are far too busy to provide handholding or pointer to man pages. They learned their C from doing it, so should others. Take this point of view or throw it away, I really don't care, it is merely an opinion.... -Legalese: Nothing spouted here should or can be taken to represent the official, unofficial, or implicit opinion of the Center for Seismic Studies, SAIC, DARPA, or anybody but me (and I don't matter....) -dave bonnett; A geographer running amok in unix bonnett@seismo.css.gov : Center for Seismic Studies -
bilbo@bisco.kodak.COM (Charles Tryon) (12/07/90)
In <49248@seismo.CSS.GOV> bonnett@seismo.CSS.GOV (H. David Bonnett) writes: > In article <4529@idunno.Princeton.EDU>, subbarao@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Kartik Subbarao) writes: > About homework on the net... > > |> Anyway -- what does everyone else think about this? I've seen both sorts of > |> attitudes on the subject. What do you guys think comp.lang.c should do? > > **DO YOUR OWN WORK: DO NOT EXPECT A FREE RIDE HERE*** > > There, now I feel better... Honestly, I try to only post questions here > when there does not appear to be any answer available in the docs or from > the several gurus kicking around here. ... True enough. However, we shouldn't have to be playing "Net Police" and jumping all over people who ask what WE consider to be a simple question. All those Un*x and C manuals can be downright intimidating to the novice, or even experienced programmers. (I STILL have an awful time finding things when the manuals aren't on line.) Sometimes, as was noted in an earlier article, the books are flat out WRONG (e.g., pointers and arrays). We should be able to take the questions at face value and not try to guess if the person is trying to cheat. They have to make their own choices, based on their conscience. If the answer is in an obvious place, like the FAQ list, we might give a hint, and point the person to the source, but don't flame them as a stupid IDIOT because they didn't RTFM, or worse yet, accuse them of cheating on a test. > People like Chris Torek, Doug Gwyn, and many others are far too busy to > provide handholding or pointer to man pages. ... Sometimes the local "gurus" are too busy also. > They learned their C from doing it, so should others. This is truly the best way to learn, but sometimes new people need hints where to turn. Sometimes experienced people don't have the luxury of time since they are under pressure of deadlines. Not everyone is still in school. > Take this point of view or throw it away, I really don't care, it is > merely an opinion.... No problem. Life would be awful dull if we all agreed all the time. :-) > -dave bonnett; A geographer running amok in unix > bonnett@seismo.css.gov : Center for Seismic Studies - -- Chuck Tryon <bilbo@bisco.kodak.com> USmail: 46 Post Ave.;Roch. NY 14619 B. Baggins <<...include standard disclamer...>> At Your Service "Swagger knows no upper bound, but the laws of physics remain unimpressed." (D. Mocsny)
bonnett@seismo.CSS.GOV (H. David Bonnett) (12/08/90)
In article <9012071443.AA01722@bisco.kodak.COM>, bilbo@bisco.kodak.COM (Charles Tryon) writes: |> In <49248@seismo.CSS.GOV> bonnett@seismo.CSS.GOV (H. David Bonnett) writes: |> > In article <4529@idunno.Princeton.EDU>, subbarao@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Kartik Subbarao) writes: |> > About homework on the net... and my reply ... |> True enough. However, we shouldn't have to be playing "Net Police" and |> jumping all over people who ask what WE consider to be a simple question. I agree wholeheartedly with that. I have neither the time nor the desire to ferret out all posts that are questionable in intent. My post was meant to encourage the neophyte users (and I still consider myself one in many ways) to exhaust other means before coming here. It is analogous to free user support; if it is badly abused, the supply of information will go away. And that is something I would REALLY hate to see happen. In all honesty, I try to respond to new user questions as often as possible and usually follow up by mail to see if I was really of some help. I believe I have only used "RTFM" once or twice in 3 years. Just me 2 pence worth. -dave bonnett; Center for Seismic Studies bonnett@seismo.css.gov "Don't take me seriously, no one here does..."
ok@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au (Richard A. O'Keefe) (12/10/90)
I'd like to (a) give the original poster some help, and (b) offer a slightly
different point of view.
(a) Get a copy of the book "Numerical Recipes" (the Fortran and Pascal
version) or the C version "Numerical Recipes in C". If you have a
use for complex roots of polynomials, you have a use for this book.
Look at the subroutines ZROOTS and QROOT. *Read* *the* *entire*
*chapter*.
(b) I spent enough time this year telling my students that when they
start to work as programmers it will be better to ask for help
than to deliver incorrect or irrelevant code to the customer that
I don't like to see people who ask for help stepped on.
When it's a case of something really obvious that anyone using C
_must_ have access to, then "RTFM" is appropriate. I was rather
annoyed by the person who said "I can't find XXXX in the SunOS
manuals" when a few minutes of probing with "man" gets you there.
But I don't think it hurts to mention _which_ manual in an RTFM flame.
Did it occur to anyone that the poster's _real_ question may have been
"how do I do complex arithmetic in C"? The C and Pascal versions of the
Numerical Recipes code have some rather subtle code to implement complex
division and square root. I wonder how many readers of this newsgroup
could code up complex division so that it never overflows or underflows
when it doesn't have to? Fortran still has its uses (as does f2c).
--
The Marxists have merely _interpreted_ Marxism in various ways;
the point, however, is to _change_ it. -- R. Hochhuth.gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn) (12/11/90)
In article <4470@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au> ok@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au (Richard A. O'Keefe) writes: >I wonder how many readers of this newsgroup could code up complex >division so that it never overflows or underflows when it doesn't >have to? They don't have to, because they could simply use the complex arithmetic package that I posted here long ago.