bjaspan@athena.mit.edu (Barr3y Jaspan) (04/16/91)
Since I posted my Matrix class here a few weeks ago, I have been receiving a steady stream of requests for it. Several people have asked me to post it here regularly so they can get any extensions/improvements I've made, and my response has been "no, comp.lang.c++ is not a sources group." Is there such a group? Is comp.lang.c appropriate? Where does everyone else post their public-domain classes, etc.? Note that I am not offering to moderate such a group, go about getting it created, and so on. Please respond directly to me. -- Barr3y Jaspan, bjaspan@mit.edu Watchmaker Computing
randall@Virginia.EDU (Ran Atkinson) (04/16/91)
In article <1991Apr15.171030.7130@athena.mit.edu> bjaspan@athena.mit.edu (Barr3y Jaspan) writes: >Since I posted my Matrix class here a few weeks ago, I have been receiving a >steady stream of requests for it. Several people have asked me to post it >here regularly so they can get any extensions/improvements I've made, and my >response has been "no, comp.lang.c++ is not a sources group." You are right that no sources should be posted anywhere but alt.sources or a comp.sources.* group. >Is there such a group? Is comp.lang.c appropriate? Where does everyone else >post their public-domain classes, etc.? Note that I am not offering to >moderate such a group, go about getting it created, and so on. alt.sources is unmoderated, but unarchived and is often used for early releases of sources. comp.sources.unix is moderated and tests its sources before posting and is archived widely across the net. Despite its name, sources need only be usable on UNIX not UNIX-only source. comp.sources.misc is moderated but has fast turnaround because it doesn't have heavy testing. It is widely archived across the net. Any sources may be submitted here. comp.sources.x is moderated and only for X11 related sources and archived across the net. A matrix class might be best in comp.sources.misc, but could go elsewhere... A windowing class for X11 probably belongs in comp.sources.x, and an OS class for UNIX or POSIX probably belongs in comp.sources.unix These aren't hard and fast rules, but just top-of-the-head sorting by newsgroup. I've posted because this is a frequently asked question and I hope to forestall other postings... Ran randall@Virginia.EDU
tron1@tronsbox.xei.com (Kenneth Jamieson) (04/17/91)
In article <1991Apr15.171030.7130@athena.mit.edu> bjaspan@athena.mit.edu (Barr3y Jaspan) writes: >Is there such a group? Is comp.lang.c appropriate? Where does everyone else >post their public-domain classes, etc.? Note that I am not offering to >moderate such a group, go about getting it created, and so on. You know .. this is a really important question. With the modulare nature of C++ , PD classes are inevitable. We need to set up at least a alt* group. -- ========[ Xanadu Enterprises Inc. Amiga & Unix Software Development]======= = "I know how you feel, you don't know if you want to hit me or kiss me - = = --- I get a lot of that." Madonna as Breathless Mahoney (Dick Tracy) = =========== Ken Jamieson: uunet!tronsbox.xei.com!tron1 =================== = NONE of the opinions represented here are endorsed by anybody. = === The Romantic Encounters BBS 201-759-8450(PEP) / 201-759-8568(2400) ====
jgro@lia (Jeremy Grodberg) (04/18/91)
In article <1550@tronsbox.xei.com> tron1@tronsbox.xei.com (Kenneth Jamieson) writes: >In article <1991Apr15.171030.7130@athena.mit.edu> bjaspan@athena.mit.edu (Barr3y Jaspan) writes: >>Is there such a group? Is comp.lang.c appropriate? Where does everyone else >>post their public-domain classes, etc.? Note that I am not offering to >>moderate such a group, go about getting it created, and so on. > > You know .. this is a really important question. With the >modulare nature of C++ , PD classes are inevitable. We need to set up >at least a alt* group. > The newly formed "comp.sources.reviewed" is an ideal place for this. Code is peer-reviewed before being distributed over the net, and thus people can have some degree of confidence that the distributed code is not obviuosly flawed. I hope this becomes the standard place to distrubute source code libraries. Check it out. And volunteer to review some code. Disclaimer: I have nothing to do with comp.sources.reviewed, yet. -- Jeremy Grodberg "Show me a new widget that's bug-free, and I'll show jgro@lia.com you something that's been through several releases."