peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) (11/21/89)
Isn't it time to create a .tech, .programmer, .wizard, whatever group to give the people in comp.sys.ibm.pc somewhere other than comp.lang.c to take arms against a C of segments? -- `-_-' Peter da Silva <peter@ficc.uu.net> <peter@sugar.lonestar.org>. 'U` -------------- +1 713 274 5180. "ERROR: trust not in UUCP routing tables" -- MAILER-DAEMON@mcsun.EU.net
bobmon@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (RAMontante) (11/22/89)
How about alt.msdos.programmer? Now that the spate of batch-file hacking is over with...
usenet@cps3xx.UUCP (Usenet file owner) (11/22/89)
From article <7064@ficc.uu.net>, by peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva): $ Isn't it time to create a .tech, .programmer, .wizard, whatever group to $ give the people in comp.sys.ibm.pc somewhere other than comp.lang.c to $ take arms against a C of segments? It's called alt.msdos.programmer j |%|John Lawitzke, Dale Computer Corp., R&D |%|UUCP: uunet!frith!dale1!jhl Work |%| uunet!frith!dale1!ipecac!jhl Home Inquiring minds just wondering. |%|Internet: jhl@frith.egr.msu.edu
smasters@gmuvax2.gmu.edu (Shawn Masters) (11/22/89)
I thought that was what alt.msdos.programmers was for. I know that I've answered the same questions there about IBM PC C compilers as often appear here. Of course who would think the equivalent of a technical help news group would fall under alt.? Shawn Masters George Mason University smasters@gmuvax2.gmu.edu
davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.COM (Wm E Davidsen Jr) (11/23/89)
In article <603@gmuvax2.gmu.edu> smasters@gmuvax2.UUCP (Shawn Masters) writes: | I thought that was what alt.msdos.programmers was for. I know that I've | answered the same questions there about IBM PC C compilers as often | appear here. Of course who would think the equivalent of a technical | help news group would fall under alt.? If the group can keep it's technical image there might be a consensus about moving it. I certainly would support a REASONABLE split of c.s.i.p into some small set of groups like applications, utilities, hardware, and techniques. There are topics which would be appropriate to cross post, but that's not a massive problem. -- bill davidsen (davidsen@crdos1.crd.GE.COM -or- uunet!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen) "The world is filled with fools. They blindly follow their so-called 'reason' in the face of the church and common sense. Any fool can see that the world is flat!" - anon
peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) (11/23/89)
In article <603@gmuvax2.gmu.edu> smasters@gmuvax2.UUCP (Shawn Masters) writes: > I thought that was what alt.msdos.programmers was for. I was vaguely aware of this group. But it didn't seem to have made much difference to the number of "How do you use a COM port in MS-DOS" type questions in comp.lang.c (the answer, BTW, is "you don't: you write a driver")... Thus I think it would probably help to have a mainstream group for this purpose as well. Perhaps a split like comp.sys.mac.{programmer,hardware} would even be in order... -- `-_-' Peter da Silva <peter@ficc.uu.net> <peter@sugar.lonestar.org>. 'U` -------------- +1 713 274 5180. "The basic notion underlying USENET is the flame." -- Chuq Von Rospach, chuq@Apple.COM
pete@cavevax.ucsb.edu (GurgleKat) (11/23/89)
In article <7064@ficc.uu.net>, peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes: > Isn't it time to create a .tech, .programmer, .wizard, whatever group to > give the people in comp.sys.ibm.pc somewhere other than comp.lang.c to > take arms against a C of segments? My $.02: yes, it's time. And I think it's time to do the same to comp.lang.pascal, in some way or another, but its readers seem resistant to it because most of them are PC people anyway. -- Pete Gontier : pete@cavevax.ucsb.edu; outgoing .UUCP cause me grief Editor, Macker : Online Macintosh Programming Journal; mail for subscription Hire this kid : Mac, DOS, C, Pascal, asm, excellent communication skills "This was it. This was what he was, who he was, his being. He forgot to eat. Sometimes he'd resent having to leave the deck to use the toilet..." -- William Gibson, _Neuromancer_