Any comment from the moderator(s) on what moderation criteria are
being used?
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks...@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Nokia
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
--
comp.lang.c.moderated - moderation address: cl...@plethora.net -- you must
have an appropriate newsgroups line in your header for your mail to be seen,
or the newsgroup name in square brackets in the subject line. Sorry.
Me too!
Long story short: I'm gradually getting the hang of scheduling, although
it's still not easy for me. I'll probably still occasionally forget for
a while.
> Any comment from the moderator(s) on what moderation criteria are
> being used?
Discussion of C is fine by me.
There is a fuzzy boundary when a question involves a non-standard API.
Consider, for instance, a question about the unix-like "select()". If
the question is "why do some systems change the timeval argument, and
others not", I'm likely to bounce that to a Unix-related group. If the
question is "how can I pass in a literal structure instead of declaring
one as a local variable", I'm likely to view it as topical.
The big goal is to have the option of making long, tedious, off-topic
flame wars go away, weeding out stuff like off-topic software announcements,
spam, and so on. I don't think a discussion of C is significantly harmed
by the mere existence of or occasional discussions of system-specific
details, but I like the questions to be fundamentally related to C.
If the question would go just as well in a discussion of Ruby or perl,
it's probably off-topic.
Which is to say, probably a lot less dogmatic than I was ten years ago.
-s
--
Copyright 2009, all wrongs reversed. Peter Seebach / usenet...@seebs.net
http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!
Entertainment value?
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - d...@des.no