Why foo and bar in every tutorial i read?

[Richard Heathfield]

Mark McIntyre said:

Google have absolutely no clue what they're talking about, in that
case. Heck, they just make it up based on the title I expect.

More likely, they get the text automatically from the news server's control
file.

 

[tmp123]

....

Its not. The topic of this group is clearly defined.

Please, where?

 

[tmp123]

....

Its not. The topic of this group is clearly defined.

Please, where?

 

[tmp123]

Mark McIntyre said:


More likely, they get the text automatically from the news server's control
file.

Sorry to ignore the details of USENET, (and yes, this post is OT), but
who writed the file you say? Was this file written by the "original
creator" of the group (if there are)? Is it like a
"manifest/objectives/definition" of the group?

Thanks for the info.

 

[Richard Heathfield]

tmp123 said:

Sorry to ignore the details of USENET, (and yes, this post is OT), but
who writed the file you say? Was this file written by the "original
creator" of the group (if there are)? Is it like a
"manifest/objectives/definition" of the group?

There isn't just one file. There is one file per news server. The file is
written by the news server software. It may or may not get its content from
some other news server. It is not like a "manifest/objectives/definition"
of the group. It is merely intended to be a file containing one line per
newsgroup, giving a rough indication of the kind of articles that go into
that newsgroup.

Many newsgroups have a charter, which does define the purpose of the group
in much the way you seem to want - but comp.lang.c does not have a charter,
as it was created long before charters were introduced.

The de facto topic of comp.lang.c is discussion of the C computer
programming language (comp for computer, lang for language, c for C).

Other newsgroups exist to discuss other aspects of C programming, such as
platform-specific extensions and the like.

 

[Arndt Jonasson]

Google have absolutely no clue what they're talking about, in that
case. Heck, they just make it up based on the title I expect. They
probably think that alt.sex.tv is for discussions about roman numbers
on the telly.

I looked for "comp.lang.c charter" with Google and found this
on ftp://ftp.uu.net/usenet/control/comp/comp.lang.c:

From (e-mail address removed) Thu May 23 13:33:04 1991
Path: rpi!think.com!compass!news
From: (e-mail address removed) (news)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c.ctl
Subject: newgroup comp.lang.c
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Date: 23 May 91 16:11:45 GMT
Control: newgroup comp.lang.c
Distribution: world
Organization: Compass, Inc., Wakefield, MA
Lines: 1
Approved: (e-mail address removed)

Discussion about C.

There are perhaps better places to look, not to say newer, but do you
mean the description "Discussion about C" is wrong?

 

[tmp123]

Those who persist in posting off-topic messages, and the ones you
reference are, will find themselves shunned by the majority of the
participants. If your goal is to talk to no one except Kenny and Rod
and the other trolls, keep on what you're doing.



Brian

This is one of the older messages of this group (dutifully to all
person who creates and enhanced C):

#My suggestion for a "C" newsgroup met with support and no
#opposition so net.lang.c (note lower case) has been created.
#
#
#It's purpose is to carry on discussion of C programming and
#the C programming language. Appropriate topics are
#
#
# Queries on how to write something in C
# Queries about why some C code behaves the way it does
# Suggestions for C modifications or extensions
# C coding "tricks"
# Compiler bugs
# Availability of compilers
# etc.
#
#
#Jerry Schwarz
#BTL -- Murray Hill
#harpo!eagle!jerry

I do not known who is Mr.Jerry Schwart, but probably he is one of the
person that has made of C what it is.

 

[Jordan Abel]

This is one of the older messages of this group (dutifully to all
person who creates and enhanced C):

#My suggestion for a "C" newsgroup met with support and no
#opposition so net.lang.c (note lower case) has been created.
#
#
#It's purpose is to carry on discussion of C programming and
#the C programming language. Appropriate topics are
#
#
# Queries on how to write something in C

Which would seem to support the various posts which people seem to think
should be moved to comp.programming

# Queries about why some C code behaves the way it does

Which supports my own claim that it is reasonable to go further and
explain why undefined behavior manifests in a particular way.

# Suggestions for C modifications or extensions

Probably should go more to comp.std.c now.

# C coding "tricks"
# Compiler bugs
# Availability of compilers
# etc.

One must wonder what "etc." means.

 

[tmp123]

Which would seem to support the various posts which people seem to think
should be moved to comp.programming


Which supports my own claim that it is reasonable to go further and
explain why undefined behavior manifests in a particular way.


Probably should go more to comp.std.c now.


One must wonder what "etc." means.

The question seems that, if we clasify off-topic according to group
description, the OP was topic.

If we clasify OT according to group users concept, 5 person have been
answered to the OP, and only one has claimed it was OT.

In both ways, the final clasification seems to be on-topic.

(From this point of view, it is not valid to name as "troll" to the
ones who say on-topic. In fact, facts points in the opposite sense.
Better do not call troll to anybody for just this kind of things. There
are more clear trolling situations).

 

[Richard Heathfield]

Arndt Jonasson said:

I looked for "comp.lang.c charter" with Google

That sounds a bit pointless, since it doesn't have one.

and found this
on ftp://ftp.uu.net/usenet/control/comp/comp.lang.c:

From (e-mail address removed) Thu May 23 13:33:04 1991
Path: rpi!think.com!compass!news
From: (e-mail address removed) (news)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c.ctl

That's a control file, not a charter.

Subject: newgroup comp.lang.c
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Date: 23 May 91 16:11:45 GMT
Control: newgroup comp.lang.c
Distribution: world
Organization: Compass, Inc., Wakefield, MA
Lines: 1
Approved: (e-mail address removed)

Discussion about C.

There are perhaps better places to look, not to say newer, but do you
mean the description "Discussion about C" is wrong?

It's not a charter, but at least it's an accurate description of what we
discuss here: the C language. Not Unix. Not Windows. Not threads. Not
ASCII. Not sockets. Just C.

 

[Kenny McCormack]

I looked for "comp.lang.c charter" with Google and found this
on ftp://ftp.uu.net/usenet/control/comp/comp.lang.c:

From (e-mail address removed) Thu May 23 13:33:04 1991
Path: rpi!think.com!compass!news
From: (e-mail address removed) (news)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c.ctl
Subject: newgroup comp.lang.c
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Date: 23 May 91 16:11:45 GMT
Control: newgroup comp.lang.c
Distribution: world
Organization: Compass, Inc., Wakefield, MA
Lines: 1
Approved: (e-mail address removed)

Discussion about C.

There are perhaps better places to look, not to say newer, but do you
mean the description "Discussion about C" is wrong?

The first thing you learn when you go to law school is that any set of
words can be interpreted to mean whatever you like. That's why the cases
are always won by the side with the best lawyer(s) - i.e., the side with
the most money.

So it is here. The so-called "regulars" will gladly agree that the topic
here is "C". It's just that they define the term and the auxilliary
concepts so narrowly as to be absurd. You will learn to live with it.

I've often thought that they and their various sock puppets could just as
easily define "C" to mean "Bartlett Pears" and thus, through their constant
brow-beating and other BS, convince everyone that any discussion of
anything other than Bartlett Pears is OT here. It is just that arbitrary.

 

[Al Balmer]

Which would seem to support the various posts which people seem to think
should be moved to comp.programming


Which supports my own claim that it is reasonable to go further and
explain why undefined behavior manifests in a particular way.


Probably should go more to comp.std.c now.


One must wonder what "etc." means.

 

[Jordan Abel]

<G> So, the original purpose is OK as long as it supports your
personal notion of what's topical, but obsolete if it doesn't?

I view comp.std.c as being, metaphorically if not literally, the result
of a "split", and thus some of the topics for net.lang.c go there
instead of here. I'd have to look up what happened to get comp.std.c
created to figure out if i'm actually right.

 

[Mark McIntyre]

Please, where?

Right here, every single day, in several posts. Also in the welcome
message, which is posted periodically and referenced in many sigs, my
own included.

Mark McIntyre

 

[Mark McIntyre]

I looked for "comp.lang.c charter" with Google and found this
on ftp://ftp.uu.net/usenet/control/comp/comp.lang.c:

comp.lang.c has no charter as it existed before the charter system.

Discussion about C.

There are perhaps better places to look, not to say newer, but do you
mean the description "Discussion about C" is wrong?

Nope, its perfect. What you need to bear in mind is that C is a
language specified by international treaty. C-like languages that are
not defined by that Standard are thus definitionally offtopic.
Mark McIntyre

 

[Mark McIntyre]

This is one of the older messages of this group (dutifully to all
person who creates and enhanced C):

#My suggestion for a "C" newsgroup met with support and no
#opposition so net.lang.c (note lower case) has been created.

*shrug*.
Whenever someone is trying to be clever about topicality, they end up
digging up decades old posts and trying to use them to bolster their
view. It doesn't work - the topic here is well defined *right now*.

If you want to change it, feel free to try. Just don't expect much
support from any of the regulars. And do expect to get told to stop
annoying and timewasting.

By the way, the description covers material thats since been split
into several groups, comp.std.c included.

I do not known who is Mr.Jerry Schwart, but probably he is one of the
person that has made of C what it is.

I've never heard of him either. That doesn't mean he isn't a great C
programmer, but founding CLC does not make him one of the people that
made C what it is. It merely makes him someone who knows how to create
newsgroups.

I have a feeling that Ken Thompson, Dennis Richie, Brian Kernighan,
and the members of the ISO committees did that. [maybe he /was/ a
committee member?]
Mark McIntyre

 

[Walter Roberson]

What you need to bear in mind is that C is a
language specified by international treaty.

By treaty?? Wow!!!

In Canada, treaties override federal and provincial laws...

"Your honour, I cite in my defence paragraph 3.1.1.2 of
the 1999 ISO Treaty on the C Programming Language, which
clearly states on line 14 that one -must- ...."

 

[Randy Howard]

P.J. Plauger wrote

I went to Princeton, not MIT.

Excellent.

 

[Mark McIntyre]

Please, where?

Right here. Every single day.
Mark McIntyre

 

[Mark McIntyre]

Sorry to ignore the details of USENET, (and yes, this post is OT), but

If you want to understand how news servers work, please ask in a more
appropriate place.

who writed the file you say?

The news server.

Was this file written by the "original creator" of the group (if there are)?

No.

Is it like a "manifest/objectives/definition" of the group?

Its a one-line description in a control file. How can that be like a
manifest / objectives/ definition ?
Does your description (lets say "five feet ten, blue eyes, brown hair,
90kg") describe your objectives in life, purpose and desires?
Mark McIntyre