C FAQ wiki

[Netocrat]

Mark B said:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C_programming_language

So I went. And I looked. And I corrected a few silly stupid problems
[a]nd uncritical praise ... it was written by people who really, really
don't understand what it's about.

No, if we're going to have a C FAQ wiki, let's have a good one, that
starts from a solid base

[...]

So what should the content of a clc wiki be?

A general FAQ list is obvious and, assuming that we gain Steve's
permission to start from the current FAQ contents, is a good base. I've
made some other suggestions on the planning wiki:
* supportable and representative clc views (e.g. that casting should
be avoided where possible - this is already part of the faq from memory;
gets should not be used; the definition of lvalue is broken in C99)
* more variable representative clc views (e.g. style issues); this content
may include various alternatives and their pros and cons
* opinion pieces (e.g. on a proposed change/addition to the standard)
* different ways to solve a problem and their pros and cons (e.g. overflow
checking on integer arithmetic)

It needn't duplicate content such as that in the wikipedia article, which
although it may have a bias, is not wildly inaccurate. It makes sense for
wikipedia to be the primary source for communally-maintained encyclopedic
knowledge. The clc wiki would be the source to consult for peer-reviewed
expert knowledge/advice/opinion on portable, standard C.

The current FAQ structure i.e. sectioned and numbered by question - can be
imported into the wiki with some work (I've put up a demonstration
on the planning wiki at
http://clc.flash-gordon.me.uk/wiki/Category:FAQ_top_level) - probably a
reasonably sophisticated script could automate it.

Whether all additional content should be fit into that structure is an
open question, but it seems reasonable given the full-text search
functionality.

 

[Ravi Uday]

So are you guys really putting in a new FAQ..
Sounds exciting !!!
will there be a tape-cutting ceremony

- Ravi

Mark B said:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C_programming_language

So I went. And I looked. And I corrected a few silly stupid problems
[a]nd uncritical praise ... it was written by people who really, really
don't understand what it's about.

No, if we're going to have a C FAQ wiki, let's have a good one, that
starts from a solid base

[...]

So what should the content of a clc wiki be?

A general FAQ list is obvious and, assuming that we gain Steve's
permission to start from the current FAQ contents, is a good base. I've
made some other suggestions on the planning wiki:
* supportable and representative clc views (e.g. that casting should
be avoided where possible - this is already part of the faq from memory;
gets should not be used; the definition of lvalue is broken in C99)
* more variable representative clc views (e.g. style issues); this content
may include various alternatives and their pros and cons
* opinion pieces (e.g. on a proposed change/addition to the standard)
* different ways to solve a problem and their pros and cons (e.g. overflow
checking on integer arithmetic)

It needn't duplicate content such as that in the wikipedia article, which
although it may have a bias, is not wildly inaccurate. It makes sense for
wikipedia to be the primary source for communally-maintained encyclopedic
knowledge. The clc wiki would be the source to consult for peer-reviewed
expert knowledge/advice/opinion on portable, standard C.

The current FAQ structure i.e. sectioned and numbered by question - can be
imported into the wiki with some work (I've put up a demonstration
on the planning wiki at
http://clc.flash-gordon.me.uk/wiki/Category:FAQ_top_level) - probably a
reasonably sophisticated script could automate it.

Whether all additional content should be fit into that structure is an
open question, but it seems reasonable given the full-text search
functionality.

 

[Netocrat]

So are you guys really putting in a new FAQ..
Sounds exciting !!!

I'm glad you think so. It's a good way to distribute the load of
maintaining a consistently high-quality FAQ and to allow the senior group
members to permanently document their advice/knowledge in a better
structure than newsgroup archives.

Those of us not acting as editors can suggest new content or corrections
via the discussion page of each content page. A separate more public
section of the wiki for less official tips and tricks could be created if
there's a demand.

will there be a tape-cutting ceremony

Sure - create a streaming video and it can be broadcast at an official
opening. The creative possibilities are boundless. On that note, a site
logo is also missing.

 

[Mark B]

Mark B said:


So I went. And I looked. And I corrected a few silly stupid problems with
their description of "hello world". And I hacked at the rather uncritical
praise of NRIC. And I thought "no, this is no good, the whole tone of the
wikipedia C entry is "this language is broken, use something else instead"

Change the tone! I'm certain that you (along with a few other clc regulars)
could whip that entry into shape in no time!

- and no wonder, because it was written by people who really, really don't
understand what it's about.

Ah, but that could be easily changed, no? I noticed Steve Summit has
personally worked on that particular wiki in the past... a few more clc
regulars and you could make it the most informative wiki on wikipedia!

No, if we're going to have a C FAQ wiki, let's have a good one, that
starts
from a solid base, not a heap of junk like the article on wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C_programming_language
I like their title: 'C programming language'. At first glance it looks like
the
definitive wiki for the 'C programming language'... you have the capability
to make it just that.
Benefits: the name - already established (links to) - references already
written - it needs you!
Disadvantages: current tone doesn't convey what you want it to
Solution: Throw out the $*** you don't like and make it the official clc
wiki!

 

[Chris Torek]

... a C FAQ wiki, controlled (naturally!) by the Cabal. After all,
you [Steve Summit] would be the other "of course!" candidate for
Chief Cabalier alongside Chris Torek (who has remained ominously
silent on the subject).

I have had a little too much Real Life going on lately.

(I am not going to commit to working on such a wiki, though.)

 

[Richard Heathfield]

Chris Torek said:

... a C FAQ wiki, controlled (naturally!) by the Cabal. After all,
you [Steve Summit] would be the other "of course!" candidate for
Chief Cabalier alongside Chris Torek (who has remained ominously
silent on the subject).

I have had a little too much Real Life going on lately.

I know that feeling. Usenet United 1, Real Life Wanderers 6 (after extra
time).

(I am not going to commit to working on such a wiki, though.)

Understandable, but you are one of the very few people in clc who has the
respect of the entire newsgroup and could thus be trusted to pick an
initial cadre of cabaliers who might be prepared to do such work, if they
had the Summit FAQ as a starting point (which seems to be the case). That
in itself is not an enviable task, I agree, but if you don't pick such a
cadre, and if Steve doesn't do it, and if dmr(!) doesn't do it, we'll be
right out of universally respected people to pick that cadre, which means
either the wiki won't happen at all, in which case we will be stuck with
the FAQ "as is" (and we all know, especially Steve, that it's not perfect),
or it'll be done by a bunch of banana-brained void mainers who have the
ability to edit and won't be afraid to (ab)use it.