C FAQ wiki
Giannis Papadopoulos
--
one's freedom stops where others' begin
Giannis Papadopoulos
http://dop.users.uth.gr/
University of Thessaly
Computer & Communications Engineering dept.
Bob
Giannis Papadopoulos wrote:
> Although Steve Summit's C FAQ is really good, are there any
> C FAQ wikis?
>
> --
> one's freedom stops where others' begin
>
Not that I know of, but that's a great idea. The folks over
at comp.graphics.algorithms just inaugurated their FAQ wiki.
After years of stagnatation, their FAQ has become a living
document:
Giannis Papadopoulos
If there is not such a thing, is anyone interested in starting one?
Unfortunately, I am about to acquire my diploma - I have to present my
thesis this month, so if it happens, I was thinking after September.
--
one's freedom stops where others' begin
Giannis Papadopoulos
Richard Heathfield
> Although Steve Summit's C FAQ is really good, are there any C FAQ wikis?
The idea of a document that anyone can edit is very democratic, but
democracy has little to do with correctness.
A C FAQ wiki is likely to end up as yet another Web repository full of junk
waiting to be debunked by clc experts. Life's too short.
--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
mail: rjh at above domain
Netocrat
> Giannis Papadopoulos wrote:
>
>> Although Steve Summit's C FAQ is really good, are there any C FAQ wikis?
>
> The idea of a document that anyone can edit is very democratic, but
> democracy has little to do with correctness.
>
> A C FAQ wiki is likely to end up as yet another Web repository full of junk
> waiting to be debunked by clc experts. Life's too short.
How about if the wiki:
* were invitation-only and maintained by clc experts
* were initialised with the content of the current FAQ
* emailed individual or batch updates to its invited maintainer list
(to ensure that inaccuracies could be corrected in short order)?
I support the idea of a wiki because many threads contain new and
useful information that isn't in the current FAQ. Whilst this information
may not qualify as a FAQ, it would be better archived in a structured
format rather than newsgroup postings, particularly because many threads
also contain inaccuracies, noise and corrections, and the final correct
information may be hidden or scattered about the thread. I've considered
doing this myself but don't have the time to format the information and
as an individual I'm likely to commit errors myself. A group effort, on
the other hand, could achieve this. In other words I'm suggesting that a
wiki could supplement and summarise the proceedings of the newsgroup.
It's not without problems, but this group's experts are problem solvers
and they aren't insurmountable problems.
Richard Heathfield
> Richard Heathfield <inv...@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> A C FAQ wiki is likely to end up as yet another Web repository full of
>> junk waiting to be debunked by clc experts. Life's too short.
>
> How about if the wiki:
> * were invitation-only and maintained by clc experts
> * were initialised with the content of the current FAQ
> * emailed individual or batch updates to its invited maintainer list
> (to ensure that inaccuracies could be corrected in short order)?
Yes, that could work.
Richard Bos
> Netocrat wrote:
>
> > Richard Heathfield <inv...@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >> A C FAQ wiki is likely to end up as yet another Web repository full of
> >> junk waiting to be debunked by clc experts. Life's too short.
> >
> > How about if the wiki:
> > * were invitation-only and maintained by clc experts
> > * were initialised with the content of the current FAQ
> > * emailed individual or batch updates to its invited maintainer list
> > (to ensure that inaccuracies could be corrected in short order)?
>
> Yes, that could work.
Yes? Who decides who is invited? You? Me? Dan Pop? Paul Hsieh? Xah Lee?
The current FAQ is (c) Steve Summit, btw.
Richard
Richard Heathfield
> Richard Heathfield <inv...@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Netocrat wrote:
>>
>> > Richard Heathfield <inv...@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> A C FAQ wiki is likely to end up as yet another Web repository full of
>> >> junk waiting to be debunked by clc experts. Life's too short.
>> >
>> > How about if the wiki:
>> > * were invitation-only and maintained by clc experts
>> > * were initialised with the content of the current FAQ
>> > * emailed individual or batch updates to its invited maintainer list
>> > (to ensure that inaccuracies could be corrected in short order)?
>>
>> Yes, that could work.
>
> Yes? Who decides who is invited? You? Me? Dan Pop? Paul Hsieh? Xah Lee?
Chris Torek, obviously. Duh.
>
> The current FAQ is (c) Steve Summit, btw.
Oops. So it is. Perhaps we should get our own FAQ for this newsgroup,
instead of relying on someone else's all the time.
Richard Bos
> Richard Bos wrote:
>
> > Richard Heathfield <inv...@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> Netocrat wrote:
> >>
> >> > Richard Heathfield <inv...@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> A C FAQ wiki is likely to end up as yet another Web repository full of
> >> >> junk waiting to be debunked by clc experts. Life's too short.
> >> >
> >> > How about if the wiki:
> >> > * were invitation-only and maintained by clc experts
> >> > * were initialised with the content of the current FAQ
> >> > * emailed individual or batch updates to its invited maintainer list
> >> > (to ensure that inaccuracies could be corrected in short order)?
> >>
> >> Yes, that could work.
> >
> > Yes? Who decides who is invited? You? Me? Dan Pop? Paul Hsieh? Xah Lee?
>
> Chris Torek, obviously. Duh.
<g> You have a point, but would he?
> > The current FAQ is (c) Steve Summit, btw.
>
> Oops. So it is. Perhaps we should get our own FAQ for this newsgroup,
> instead of relying on someone else's all the time.
To be honest, I'm not altogether happy with the current situation, in
which something called The c.l.c Newsgroup FAQ is sold for money, and
not posted in this newsgroup in its entirety. Then again, I shouldn't
complain, since I don't see myself getting off my arse and doing
something about it.
Richard
Richard Heathfield
> Richard Heathfield <inv...@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Richard Bos wrote:
>>
>> > Yes? Who decides who is invited? You? Me? Dan Pop? Paul Hsieh? Xah Lee?
>>
>> Chris Torek, obviously. Duh.
>
> <g> You have a point, but would he?
I don't know. We could always ask him, and find out that way.
>> > The current FAQ is (c) Steve Summit, btw.
>>
>> Oops. So it is. Perhaps we should get our own FAQ for this newsgroup,
>> instead of relying on someone else's all the time.
>
> To be honest, I'm not altogether happy with the current situation, in
> which something called The c.l.c Newsgroup FAQ is sold for money, and
> not posted in this newsgroup in its entirety.
Especially since it doesn't reflect best practice, containing as it does a
number of anachronisms. Many a time I've wanted to fix some of those, but
couldn't because the C FAQ isn't mine to tamper with.
> Then again, I shouldn't
> complain, since I don't see myself getting off my arse and doing
> something about it.
Maybe we could sort out some kind of mirror for you?
Netocrat
> Richard Bos wrote:
>> Richard Heathfield <inv...@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>>> Richard Bos wrote:
>>>
>>> > Yes? Who decides who is invited? You? Me? Dan Pop? Paul Hsieh? Xah Lee?
>>>
>>> Chris Torek, obviously. Duh.
>>
>> <g> You have a point, but would he?
>
> I don't know. We could always ask him, and find out that way.
The "benevolent dictator" approach works for other projects; Chris seems
to meet the job description well. Alternatively - or in addition - new
members could be invited through vote of existing members. Details would
need to be considered further (e.g. How are the initial members selected?
How do the non-votes of inactive members affect the result? Can the
dictator override the democracy?).
>>> > The current FAQ is (c) Steve Summit, btw.
>>>
>>> Oops. So it is. Perhaps we should get our own FAQ for this newsgroup,
>>> instead of relying on someone else's all the time.
>>
>> To be honest, I'm not altogether happy with the current situation, in
>> which something called The c.l.c Newsgroup FAQ is sold for money, and
>> not posted in this newsgroup in its entirety.
>
> Especially since it doesn't reflect best practice, containing as it does
> a number of anachronisms. Many a time I've wanted to fix some of those,
> but couldn't because the C FAQ isn't mine to tamper with.
>
>> Then again, I shouldn't
>> complain, since I don't see myself getting off my arse and doing
>> something about it.
>
> Maybe we could sort out some kind of mirror for you?
I only thought about the copyright after posting. Perhaps Steve would be
amenable to use of the FAQ material as the initialisation of an official
c.l.c. wiki under terms agreeable to all. If not, the wiki could start
out empty, with additions made based on the currently topical threads.
Anonymous 7843
Netocrat <neto...@dodo.com.au> wrote:
>
> I only thought about the copyright after posting. Perhaps Steve would be
> amenable to use of the FAQ material as the initialisation of an official
> c.l.c. wiki under terms agreeable to all. If not, the wiki could start
> out empty, with additions made based on the currently topical threads.
The existing questions could be paraphrased and answered anew.
In some sense Steve does not have a copyright on the questions
since they were originally posted in comp.lang.c by not-Steve.
Ben Pfaff
[about the FAQ]
> In some sense Steve does not have a copyright on the questions
> since they were originally posted in comp.lang.c by not-Steve.
He arguably has a compilation copyright on them.
--
Ben Pfaff
email: b...@cs.stanford.edu
web: http://benpfaff.org
Alan Balmer
wrote:
>anon...@example.com (Anonymous 7843) writes:
>
>[about the FAQ]
>
>> In some sense Steve does not have a copyright on the questions
>> since they were originally posted in comp.lang.c by not-Steve.
>
>He arguably has a compilation copyright on them.
The questions are an important, but minor part of the text. Perhaps
"Anonymous" doesn't realize that the FAQ is composed of answers as
well as questions.
--
Al Balmer
Balmer Consulting
removebalmerc...@att.net
Anonymous 7843
Alan Balmer <alba...@att.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 10:28:59 -0700, Ben Pfaff <b...@cs.stanford.edu>
> wrote:
>
> >anon...@example.com (Anonymous 7843) writes:
> >
> >[about the FAQ]
> >
> >> In some sense Steve does not have a copyright on the questions
> >> since they were originally posted in comp.lang.c by not-Steve.
> >
> >He arguably has a compilation copyright on them.
>
> The questions are an important, but minor part of the text. Perhaps
> "Anonymous" doesn't realize that the FAQ is composed of answers as
> well as questions.
If you would be so kind as to re-read my actual message (and not just
the unsnipped parts that were relevant to Mr. Pfaff's message) you will
find that I did indeed mention the fact that answers would need to be
formulated anew.
Your use of sarcistic items such the word "perhaps" and the scare
quotes around my chosen handle are not helpful and are bording
on ad hominem attacks. Surely you can do better, and I mean
that in the sense of not attacking at all, not in the sense of
attacking better.
Anonymous 7843
Ben Pfaff <b...@cs.stanford.edu> wrote:
> anon...@example.com (Anonymous 7843) writes:
>
> [about the FAQ]
>
> > In some sense Steve does not have a copyright on the questions
> > since they were originally posted in comp.lang.c by not-Steve.
>
> He arguably has a compilation copyright on them.
IANAL, but I believe my suggustion of paraphrasing the questions
would take care of that.
It may be unseemly, but we should probably prod Steve Summit
into asking his publisher for a ruling on this. It's probably
less about what's legally actionable in the abstract than
how protective the publisher intends to be about it.
Mark
news:lNJOe.675$mH.28@fed1read07...
Personally, I think a few of you have too much time on your hands.
That being said, why not just start compiling your own list of questions
starting today? Within a few weeks you'll have many of the questions
already answered in the faq (as most newcomers don't read it and ask
the same questions over and over and over...) and a few more for good
measure!
Mark
Ben Pfaff
> That being said, why not just start compiling your own list of questions
> starting today?
For what it's worth, I have a few supplemental FAQs and answers
on my webpage:
http://benpfaff.org/writings/clc
--
"...Almost makes you wonder why Heisenberg didn't include postinc/dec operators
in the uncertainty principle. Which of course makes the above equivalent to
Schrodinger's pointer..."
--Anthony McDonald
Netocrat
> "Mark" <so...@localbar.com> writes:
>
>> That being said, why not just start compiling your own list of questions
>> starting today?
Some of us do, as evidenced by Ben Pfaff's post below. I keep and distill
some of the more informative posts. But a wiki controlled by acknowledged
(however that's defined) c.l.c experts would avoid duplication of effort
and provide a better guarantee of authoritative answers.
> For what it's worth, I have a few supplemental FAQs and answers
> on my webpage:
> http://benpfaff.org/writings/clc
Eric Sosman
Ben Pfaff wrote:
> "Mark" <so...@localbar.com> writes:
>
>
>>That being said, why not just start compiling your own list of questions
>>starting today?
>
>
> For what it's worth, I have a few supplemental FAQs and answers
> on my webpage:
> http://benpfaff.org/writings/clc
No project to update/supplement/improve/replace the FAQ
can afford to ignore Peter Seebach's work:
Randy Howard
(in article
<defem8$r3c$3...@nwrdmz03.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com>):
> Richard Bos wrote:
>
>> Richard Heathfield <inv...@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> Netocrat wrote:
>>>
>>>> Richard Heathfield <inv...@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> A C FAQ wiki is likely to end up as yet another Web repository full of
>>>>> junk waiting to be debunked by clc experts. Life's too short.
>>>>
>>>> How about if the wiki:
>>>> * were invitation-only and maintained by clc experts
>>>> * were initialised with the content of the current FAQ
>>>> * emailed individual or batch updates to its invited maintainer list
>>>> (to ensure that inaccuracies could be corrected in short order)?
>>>
>>> Yes, that could work.
>>
>> Yes? Who decides who is invited? You? Me? Dan Pop? Paul Hsieh? Xah Lee?
>
> Chris Torek, obviously. Duh.
LOL. Home run for Richard. :-)
>> The current FAQ is (c) Steve Summit, btw.
>
> Oops. So it is. Perhaps we should get our own FAQ for this newsgroup,
> instead of relying on someone else's all the time.
Or simply ask Steve is he is interested in the idea, in which
case perhaps he and Chris would decide who edits what. :-)
--
Randy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR)
Randy Howard
(in article <wvKOe.338$hn4....@newshog.newsread.com>):
>> It may be unseemly, but we should probably prod Steve Summit
>> into asking his publisher for a ruling on this. It's probably
>> less about what's legally actionable in the abstract than
>> how protective the publisher intends to be about it.
Especially since the web version and the published version in
book form are not the same. (I have both)
> Personally, I think a few of you have too much time on your hands.
Obviously. usenet is filled with such people. :-)
> That being said, why not just start compiling your own list of questions
> starting today?
I've been doing that for years. It's mainly a very large text
file filled with questions and good answers collected from here
and a lot of other places for a really long time. It would take
more time to edit it than I wish to contemplate. It works well
for me though, since vi can find whatever part of it I am
interested in quite quickly.
> Within a few weeks you'll have many of the questions
> already answered in the faq (as most newcomers don't read it and ask
> the same questions over and over and over...) and a few more for good
> measure!
Actually, the newcomers don't read the FAQ in any form at all,
so I wonder what the point really is. The regulars get lots of
exercise pointing to FAQ chapter and verse, but that seems to be
its primary use.
It would probably be much more widely used if it had more
example code in it, rather than being primarily verbiage.
Randy Howard
(in article <deg0mg$qnt$1...@news1brm.Central.Sun.COM>):
> http://www.plethora.net/~seebs/faqs/c-iaq.html
In the hopes of confusing more newbies? :-)
Keith Thompson
[...]
> Actually, the newcomers don't read the FAQ in any form at all,
> so I wonder what the point really is. The regulars get lots of
> exercise pointing to FAQ chapter and verse, but that seems to be
> its primary use.
It's entirely possible that many newcomers *do* read the FAQ, and that
we therefore never hear from them.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks...@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.
pete
>
> Richard Bos wrote:
>
> > Richard Heathfield <inv...@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> Netocrat wrote:
> >>
> >> > Richard Heathfield <inv...@address.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> A C FAQ wiki is likely to end up as yet another Web repository full of
> >> >> junk waiting to be debunked by clc experts. Life's too short.
> >> >
> >> > How about if the wiki:
> >> > * were invitation-only and maintained by clc experts
> >> > * were initialised with the content of the current FAQ
> >> > * emailed individual or batch updates to its invited maintainer list
> >> > (to ensure that inaccuracies could be corrected in short order)?
> >>
> >> Yes, that could work.
> >
> > Yes? Who decides who is invited? You? Me? Dan Pop? Paul Hsieh? Xah Lee?
>
> Chris Torek, obviously. Duh.
>
> >
> > The current FAQ is (c) Steve Summit, btw.
>
> Oops. So it is. Perhaps we should get our own FAQ for this newsgroup,
> instead of relying on someone else's all the time.
I didn't know he was someone else.
I thought he was one of us.
--
pete
webs...@gmail.com
> Although Steve Summit's C FAQ is really good, are there any C FAQ wikis?
Well there is this:
http://www.iso-9899.info/wiki/Main_Page
--
Paul Hsieh
http://www.pobox.com/~qed/
http://bstring.sf.net/
Richard Heathfield
Well, he doesn't post very often nowadays (except for the regular FAQ
posting, of course), but yes - Steve is one of us. His FAQ, however, is
his, not ours. He has copyright over it. Seen that way, I don't think it's
unreasonable to describe it as "someone else's", even if that someone is
the admirable Mr Summit.
Mac
AFAICS none of us has any way of knowing how many potential posters found
the answer to their question from the clc faq and then didn't bother
posting. Perhaps I am just being naive. ;-)
--Mac
Suman
A wiki is a wiki is a wiki. Don't make it look like
another *big* FAQ.
I would rather suggest:
0. If we really, *really*, like the idea of a wiki, to start off one,
by someone [or a small group], who knows what he is talking about.
And worry less about the copyright stuff right now.
Maybe two different groups -- one to concentrate on the content,
and the other to correct, and then published on the wiki.
1. Keep links to good things like the FAQ, the IAQ, the draft etc
2. Ususal wiki stuff, history, evolution, etc...
and then,
3. Something like *posts that stirred a hornet's nest* which can
be taken from clc starting from the present & working backwards, if and
when time permits. But then, The Posts should be edited, and mandated.
Maybe, even compiled to some other form.
> http://members.dodo.com.au/~netocrat
Peter Nilsson
> pete wrote:
> > ...
> > I didn't know he was someone else.
> > I thought he was one of us.
>
> Well, he doesn't post very often nowadays (except for the regular FAQ
I always knew there was a secret Order in clc. Of course, anyone who's
ever
converted 'The Last Supper' to ascii art already knows that the third
figure
from the left is a dead ringer for Dennis Ritchie...
--
Peter
Richard Bos
> the scare quotes around my chosen handle are not helpful
Perhaps not. But frankly, being the 7843th to use "Anonymous" as a
handle isn't the wisest of choices, either. It does not automatically
mean that what you write will likely not be taken seriously (as, say,
peppering your posts with l33t-sp33k would), but you shouldn't be
surprised if others react to an obviously unhelpful handle in kind.
Richard
Alan Balmer
Bos) wrote:
>anon...@example.com (Anonymous 7843) wrote:
>
>> the scare quotes around my chosen handle are not helpful
>
"Scare quotes"? Do I detect a feeling of persecution here? <G> I
quoted it because it didn't seem to be a real name.
>Perhaps not. But frankly, being the 7843th to use "Anonymous" as a
>handle isn't the wisest of choices, either. It does not automatically
>mean that what you write will likely not be taken seriously (as, say,
>peppering your posts with l33t-sp33k would), but you shouldn't be
>surprised if others react to an obviously unhelpful handle in kind.
>
Fact is, I have for years filtered messages with "anonymous" in the
address. Many of them are trolls from psychotics using anonymous
remailers, and I don't think I've missed a lot from the others.
So, "Anonymous", I'm not even seeing your posts, unless they're quoted
by someone else.
Randy Howard
(in article <lnhddg2...@nuthaus.mib.org>):
> Randy Howard <randy...@FOOverizonBAR.net> writes:
> [...]
>> Actually, the newcomers don't read the FAQ in any form at all,
>> so I wonder what the point really is. The regulars get lots of
>> exercise pointing to FAQ chapter and verse, but that seems to be
>> its primary use.
>
> It's entirely possible that many newcomers *do* read the FAQ, and that
> we therefore never hear from them.
True, it is possible. I don't find it likely, but it is
possible.
Denis Kasak
>
> Actually, the newcomers don't read the FAQ in any form at all,
> so I wonder what the point really is. The regulars get lots of
> exercise pointing to FAQ chapter and verse, but that seems to be
> its primary use.
You really cannot know how many of them actually do read the FAQ. I
think the number would be significant, despite what can be concluded
from looking at the number and quality of newcomer posts. If one is
intelligent enough to read and understand the FAQ, there is most
probably no room for asking stupid questions.
Also, a wiki could probably make the FAQ more popular, making it known
and useful not only to clc visitors, but to anyone who has interest in C.
> It would probably be much more widely used if it had more
> example code in it, rather than being primarily verbiage.
Not a bad idea. A few well-written examples might provide C beginners a
starting nudge in the direction of Good Code.
-- Denis
Randy Howard
(in article <deir23$g06$1...@news1.xnet.hr>):
> Randy Howard wrote:
>>
>> Actually, the newcomers don't read the FAQ in any form at all,
>> so I wonder what the point really is. The regulars get lots of
>> exercise pointing to FAQ chapter and verse, but that seems to be
>> its primary use.
>
> You really cannot know how many of them actually do read the FAQ. I
> think the number would be significant, despite what can be concluded
> from looking at the number and quality of newcomer posts. If one is
> intelligent enough to read and understand the FAQ, there is most
> probably no room for asking stupid questions.
When was the last time you a saw a post saying:
"I just read the CLC FAQ, and am still confused about..."
Denis Kasak
>
> When was the last time you a saw a post saying:
>
> "I just read the CLC FAQ, and am still confused about..."
You do have a point there, but I was counting on those people that did
read it and had no need to ask further questions about it. My
assumptions were based on personal experience. I was new to the group a
while back and one of the first things I did was read it's FAQ, despite
the fact that I was far from being a C beginner. Maybe I'm too
optimistic to think other people do the same?
-- Denis
CBFalconer
I have an alias set, so that I just type 'cfaq phrase' and it is
loaded and searched for that phrase. Similarly for the c standard,
with 'cstd phrase'. That's why I insist on using the N869 text
version.
--
"If you want to post a followup via groups.google.com, don't use
the broken "Reply" link at the bottom of the article. Click on
"show options" at the top of the article, then click on the
"Reply" at the bottom of the article headers." - Keith Thompson
Michael Mair
Well, I read (parts of) the FAQ and followed the discussions for a few
months before writing a message for the first time :-)
Cheers
Michael
--
E-Mail: Mine is an /at/ gmx /dot/ de address.
Richard Heathfield
> Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> Well, he doesn't post very often nowadays (except for the regular FAQ
>> posting, of course), but yes - Steve is one of us. ...
>
> I always knew there was a secret Order in clc.
TINC!
CBFalconer
> Peter Nilsson wrote:
>> Richard Heathfield wrote:
>
>>> Well, he doesn't post very often nowadays (except for the regular
>>> FAQ posting, of course), but yes - Steve is one of us. ...
>>
>> I always knew there was a secret Order in clc.
>
> TINC!
???
--
Chuck F (cbfal...@yahoo.com) (cbfal...@worldnet.att.net)
Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
<http://cbfalconer.home.att.net> USE worldnet address!
Denis Kasak
> Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> Peter Nilsson wrote:
>>> I always knew there was a secret Order in clc.
>>
>> TINC!
>
> ???
TINC is shortened for "There Is No Cabal", as explained here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TINC
-- Denis
Giannis Papadopoulos
> Although Steve Summit's C FAQ is really good, are there any C FAQ wikis?
As I see it, there are no C wikis.
I was away for some days, and I've just read all the relevant answers.
Firstly, copyright issues are number one priority for a wiki or
open-sourcem, since when the project gets bigger, it is very difficult
to reform and remove the copyrighted part.
If such is a wiki is to be created, is anyone interested? I am currently
searching for a free wiki hosting service (there are many and I have to
check them all, since not all offer backup or have too many ads).
And yes, such a wiki could result in a real mess, but if you don't try
it, you don't know how it would end up...
--
one's freedom stops where others' begin
Giannis Papadopoulos
http://dop.users.uth.gr/
University of Thessaly
Computer & Communications Engineering dept.
Netocrat
[...]
> As I see it, there are no C wikis.
> I was away for some days, and I've just read all the relevant answers.
> searching for a free wiki hosting service (there are many and I have to
> check them all, since not all offer backup or have too many ads).
Have you considered finding a general hosting provider allowing the group
to implement its own potentially customised wiki software? It may be that
the group needs/wants to modify the wiki software somewhat to support such
things as limiting access and emailing updates to contributors. I
also have a few ideas on democratic and collaborative documentation
development that might be neat to test out on a c.l.c wiki (had to
disclose my personal bias ;).
It may not be possible to find a free host in that case though.
> And yes, such a wiki could result in a real mess, but if you don't try
> it, you don't know how it would end up...
The important thing is getting the support and assistance of the regulars
of the group so that the wiki has actual authority.
Flash Gordon
> On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 17:32:33 +0300, Giannis Papadopoulos wrote:
> [...]
>
>>As I see it, there are no C wikis.
>>I was away for some days, and I've just read all the relevant answers.
>
> [...]
>
>>If such is a wiki is to be created, is anyone interested? I am currently
>>searching for a free wiki hosting service (there are many and I have to
>>check them all, since not all offer backup or have too many ads).
>
> Have you considered finding a general hosting provider allowing the group
> to implement its own potentially customised wiki software? It may be that
> the group needs/wants to modify the wiki software somewhat to support such
> things as limiting access and emailing updates to contributors. I
> also have a few ideas on democratic and collaborative documentation
> development that might be neat to test out on a c.l.c wiki (had to
> disclose my personal bias ;).
>
> It may not be possible to find a free host in that case though.
Well, I could probably host that myself whilst it is low bandwidth. I
have a small machine permanently switched on connected to the internet
acting as web server for a couple of photo albums and some other stuff.
I would not give people root access to the box, but would not have any
problem with installing customised SW after appropriate review.
If it ever started being hit heavily it would of course have to be
migrated else where since the machine is just sitting on the end of my
broadband connection.
>>And yes, such a wiki could result in a real mess, but if you don't try
>>it, you don't know how it would end up...
>
> The important thing is getting the support and assistance of the regulars
> of the group so that the wiki has actual authority.
Indeed.
--
Flash Gordon
Living in interesting times.
Although my email address says spam, it is real and I read it.
Netocrat
> Netocrat wrote:
>> On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 17:32:33 +0300, Giannis Papadopoulos wrote:
[...]
>>>currently searching for a free wiki hosting service (there are many and
>>>I have to check them all, since not all offer backup or have too many
>>>ads).
>>
>> Have you considered finding a general hosting provider allowing the
>> group to implement its own potentially customised wiki software? It
>> may be that the group needs/wants to modify the wiki software somewhat
>> to support such things as limiting access and emailing updates to
>> contributors. I also have a few ideas on democratic and collaborative
>> documentation development that might be neat to test out on a c.l.c
>> wiki (had to disclose my personal bias ;).
>>
>> It may not be possible to find a free host in that case though.
>
> Well, I could probably host that myself whilst it is low bandwidth. I
> have a small machine permanently switched on connected to the internet
> acting as web server for a couple of photo albums and some other stuff.
Neat - what are the server's specs so we can make sure that the
chosen/developed wiki software is supported? i.e. which OS, which web
server, any installed database servers, any server side scripting support
esp. PHP and Perl. Are you willing to install any new software e.g. db
server or scripting language?
Anything else you think is relevant that I've missed...
> I would not give people root access to the box, but would not have any
> problem with installing customised SW after appropriate review.
Should work fine so long as you don't disappear leaving other maintainers
unable to access the raw data (e.g. db server dumps) or perform admin
tasks on the site.
> If it ever started being hit heavily it would of course have to be
> migrated else where since the machine is just sitting on the end of my
> broadband connection.
Does the server have a domain name yet?
[...]
--
http://members.dodo.com.au/~netocrat
Flash Gordon
> On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 21:50:47 +0100, Flash Gordon wrote:
>
>>Netocrat wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 17:32:33 +0300, Giannis Papadopoulos wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>>>>If such is a wiki is to be created, is anyone interested? I am
>>>>currently searching for a free wiki hosting service (there are many and
>>>>I have to check them all, since not all offer backup or have too many
>>>>ads).
>>>
>>>Have you considered finding a general hosting provider allowing the
>>>group to implement its own potentially customised wiki software? It
>>>may be that the group needs/wants to modify the wiki software somewhat
>>>to support such things as limiting access and emailing updates to
>>>contributors. I also have a few ideas on democratic and collaborative
>>>documentation development that might be neat to test out on a c.l.c
>>>wiki (had to disclose my personal bias ;).
>>>
>>>It may not be possible to find a free host in that case though.
>>
>>Well, I could probably host that myself whilst it is low bandwidth. I
>>have a small machine permanently switched on connected to the internet
>>acting as web server for a couple of photo albums and some other stuff.
>
> Neat - what are the server's specs so we can make sure that the
> chosen/developed wiki software is supported?
It's an Apple iMac running Gentoo Linux up in my bedroom. Currently only
a couple of gig oh HD space free, but I've got a HD about 180G larger
sitting waiting for me to install it.
> i.e. which OS, which web
> server,
Gentoo Linux with Apache.
> any installed database servers,
I've got some installed but not yet configured. I can easily have MySQL,
PostreSQL or anything else that is free.
> any server side scripting support
> esp. PHP and Perl.
The photo albums are done with Perl, something else is done with
mod_perl and I think PHP got pulled in but I'm not using it.
> Are you willing to install any new software e.g. db
> server or scripting language?
Yes, which was the reason for my offer.
> Anything else you think is relevant that I've missed...
Probably.
>>I would not give people root access to the box, but would not have any
>>problem with installing customised SW after appropriate review.
>
> Should work fine so long as you don't disappear leaving other maintainers
> unable to access the raw data (e.g. db server dumps) or perform admin
> tasks on the site.
Well, there is always the risk of me (or anyone else) disappearing.
However, I have been here off and on for a while.
>>If it ever started being hit heavily it would of course have to be
>>migrated else where since the machine is just sitting on the end of my
>>broadband connection.
>
> Does the server have a domain name yet?
I have a domain and a few sub-domains point at it. The main ones
pointing at it are home.flash-gordon.me.uk and www.home.flash-gordon.me.uk
However, I have full control of the domain, so I could easily point
clc.flash-gordon.me.uk at it. I've also got Apache configured to run
virtual servers, so I can have clc.flash-gordon.me.uk purely for this.
I don't currently have time to research the SW, but if people spec what
SW they want I can install it and get it configured I'm sure.
Netocrat
> Netocrat wrote:
>> On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 21:50:47 +0100, Flash Gordon wrote:
>>>Well, I could probably host that myself whilst it is low bandwidth. I
>>>have a small machine permanently switched on connected to the internet
>>>acting as web server for a couple of photo albums and some other stuff.
>>
>> Neat - what are the server's specs so we can make sure that the
>> chosen/developed wiki software is supported?
>
> It's an Apple iMac running Gentoo Linux up in my bedroom. Currently only
> a couple of gig oh HD space free, but I've got a HD about 180G larger
> sitting waiting for me to install it.
> Gentoo Linux with Apache. [...] I can easily have MySQL, PostreSQL or
> anything else that is free. [...] The photo albums are done with Perl,
> something else is done with mod_perl and I think PHP got pulled in but
> I'm not using it.
That setup should be supported by most (probably all) wiki software.
[...]
> Well, there is always the risk of me (or anyone else) disappearing.
> However, I have been here off and on for a while.
Perhaps others could store backups of the site, or we could make sure that
others have access to raw data through an html interface in case of
misadventure.
>>>If it ever started being hit heavily it would of course have to be
>>>migrated else where since the machine is just sitting on the end of my
>>>broadband connection.
>>
>> Does the server have a domain name yet?
>
> I have a domain and a few sub-domains point at it. The main ones
> pointing at it are home.flash-gordon.me.uk and
> www.home.flash-gordon.me.uk
>
> However, I have full control of the domain, so I could easily point
> clc.flash-gordon.me.uk at it. I've also got Apache configured to run
> virtual servers, so I can have clc.flash-gordon.me.uk purely for this.
That would work well. I looked at clc.net and clc.org but they're already
taken. There are some other options that aren't yet taken but I won't
publicise them.
> I don't currently have time to research the SW, but if people spec what
> SW they want I can install it and get it configured I'm sure.
I'd imagine the wiki to be accepted by regulars here would have to have
user management to limit who can post and notification facilities to
indicate to maintainers when changes occur.
Based on this comparison:
http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/onlamp/2004/11/04/which_wiki.html it looks
like MediaWiki is a good choice. It's the software that
http://wikipedia.org uses.
It uses PHP and mySQL, it has some basic user rights management and a
description of email notification is here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Watching_pages
Email notification seems to be somewhat in development but may be
sufficient to start with: "Having a separate email for every edited page
that one likes to watch in the sense of the other watch features, may be
too much. New features are being proposed and developed to deal with this:
the option to have emails sent, after a delay, with a list of edited
pages, and/or the possibility to specify a subset of watched pages for
email notification."
However I haven't used it, so others may have comments as to its
suitability.
Mark F. Haigh
> On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 02:15:42 +0100, Flash Gordon wrote:
> > Netocrat wrote:
> >> On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 21:50:47 +0100, Flash Gordon wrote:
> [regarding a c.l.c wiki]
<snip>
>
> That would work well. I looked at clc.net and clc.org but they're already
> taken. There are some other options that aren't yet taken but I won't
> publicise them.
On a whim I just bought complangc.net for a year. I've been busy for
the last several weeks on a rather strenuous contract, but hopefully
I'll get a bit of a break in a week or so.
When that time comes, I'll sit down and try to find a dedicated server
or a dedicated virtual server plan where we can install and run
whatever we like, including:
* Run a collaboritive editing system (probably a
wiki), and necessary associated databases.
* Run a source control management server (subversion,
perforce if they'll let us have a free license, etc).
* Run plain old Apache with per-user HTML directories
for code, articles, notes, etc.
* nntpd, qmail, webmail, sftp, ssh to the shell, etc.
If there's something out there that's reasonably priced enough, I'll
buy the first year of hosting as a way of saying thanks.
Obviously only trustworthy regulars are likely to receive an account.
If there's interest, I'll continue; otherwise, I'll eat the domain
registration fee-- it wasn't very expensive.
Mark F. Haigh
mfh...@sbcglobal.net
Mac
> Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> Peter Nilsson wrote:
>>> Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>
>>>> Well, he doesn't post very often nowadays (except for the regular
>>>> FAQ posting, of course), but yes - Steve is one of us. ...
>>>
>>> I always knew there was a secret Order in clc.
>>
>> TINC!
>
> ???
I had to use wtf for that one.
$ which wtf
/usr/games/bin/wtf
$
$ wtf is TINC
TINC: there is no cabal
$
--Mac
Steve Summit
> Well, he doesn't post very often nowadays...
Too true, alas. (As you can see, it took me rather a while to
pick up on this thread. :-( )
> His FAQ, however, is his, not ours. He has copyright over it.
> Seen that way, I don't think it's unreasonable to describe it
> as "someone else's"...
For what it's worth, copyright issues aside, I do try not to be
too possessive of it, or use the word "my" to qualify it. And in
a very important way it does "belong" to the group -- as I wrote
in the Preface,
This book also retains, I hope, the philosophy of correct
C programming which I began learning when I started
reading net.lang.c...
I was the one who stuck his neck out and started writing
the Frequent questions down, but I would hate to give the
impression that the answers are somehow mine.
Steve Summit
s...@eskimo.com
Steve Summit
> anon7...@example.com (Anonymous 7843) writes:
>> In some sense Steve does not have a copyright on the questions
>> since they were originally posted in comp.lang.c by not-Steve.
>
> He arguably has a compilation copyright on them.
True, and if I were worried about copyright (which for the most
part I'm not), I could assert it on the questions, too, since
they're *not* verbatim copies of any actually-posted questions;
they're all paraphrased. (This actually came in handy, once,
in deflecting the criticisms of a somewhat confused, irate
individual. Set your wayback machine to <http://groups.google.com/
group/comp.lang.c/msg/b4b8a8deaff89a63>, if you're curious.)
But, as I said, I'm not too worried about copyright, and (as far
as the book-length version of the FAQ list is concerned) I doubt
Addison-Wesley is too concerned any more, either. And I do
retain the right to post the entire content of the book to the
net (a right which I've been threatening/promising to exercise
for an uncomfortable number of years now), though I'm not sure
how that right would translate into the proposed "c.l.c FAQ wiki".
Steve Summit
s...@eskimo.com
Joe Wright
How impressively humble. You clearly deserve more credit than you demand
here. Your stock, in my book, has gone up.
--
Joe Wright
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."
--- Albert Einstein ---
Richard Heathfield
> Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> Well, he doesn't post very often nowadays...
>
> Too true, alas. (As you can see, it took me rather a while to
> pick up on this thread. :-( )
Better late than never. :-)
Now that you appear to be fully awake, I'd be curious to know your attitude
to a C FAQ wiki, controlled (naturally!) by the Cabal. After all, you would
be the other "of course!" candidate for Chief Cabalier alongside Chris*
Torek (who has remained ominously silent on the subject).
Would you be:
(a) open to the idea of a C FAQ wiki?
(b) prepared to perform the necessary incantations and
rune-casting required for deciding on Cabal members?
*I initially mistyped this as "Christ" instead of "Chris" - apologies to
Jesus and Chris, and definitely in that order!
--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/2005
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at above domain
Flash Gordon
> Steve Summit said:
>
>>Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>
>>>Well, he doesn't post very often nowadays...
>>
>>Too true, alas. (As you can see, it took me rather a while to
>>pick up on this thread. :-( )
>
> Better late than never. :-)
>
> Now that you appear to be fully awake, I'd be curious to know your attitude
> to a C FAQ wiki, controlled (naturally!) by the Cabal. After all, you would
> be the other "of course!" candidate for Chief Cabalier alongside Chris*
> Torek (who has remained ominously silent on the subject).
>
> Would you be:
>
> (a) open to the idea of a C FAQ wiki?
> (b) prepared to perform the necessary incantations and
> rune-casting required for deciding on Cabal members?
As a matter of fact (rather than principal) whoever is hosting it has
ultimate power, after all if you have root access on the box you can do
what you want to it. On which subject, I've put up an initial site at
http://clc.flash-gordon.me.uk/ with some initial discussions between a
few of us on organisation. Others are welcome and will be given full
privilege on request (including the ability to grant privilege) as long
as one of us recognises you and think you have a sufficient degree of
(un)common sense.
I have absolutely no intention of trying to control the site myself
since I know others here know more about C than I do. The only thing I
intend to keep personal control of is the software installed and running
on the machine. I will happily install/upgrade SW within reason.
> *I initially mistyped this as "Christ" instead of "Chris" - apologies to
> Jesus and Chris, and definitely in that order!
IRTA Jesus Chris...
Richard Heathfield
> Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> Steve Summit said:
>>
>>>Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>>
>>>>Well, he doesn't post very often nowadays...
>>>
>>>Too true, alas. (As you can see, it took me rather a while to
>>>pick up on this thread. :-( )
>>
>> Better late than never. :-)
>>
>> Now that you appear to be fully awake, I'd be curious to know your
>> attitude to a C FAQ wiki, controlled (naturally!) by the Cabal. After
>> all, you would be the other "of course!" candidate for Chief Cabalier
>> alongside Chris* Torek (who has remained ominously silent on the
>> subject).
>>
>> Would you be:
>>
>> (a) open to the idea of a C FAQ wiki?
>> (b) prepared to perform the necessary incantations and
>> rune-casting required for deciding on Cabal members?
>
> As a matter of fact (rather than principal) whoever is hosting it has
> ultimate power, after all if you have root access on the box you can do
> what you want to it.
So either you'd have to place amazing trust in the host, or you'd have to
come up with a way to make up a RAIH on which to host the wiki.
> On which subject, I've put up an initial site at
> http://clc.flash-gordon.me.uk/ with some initial discussions between a
> few of us on organisation.
The few I saw were: FlashGordon, Ipapadop, and Netocrat.
What you actually need is the likes of Martin Ambuhl, Christian Bau, Mark
Brader, Billy Chambless, Dann Corbit, Chris Dollin, Chuck Falconer, Jack
Klein, Kaz Kylheku, Lawrence Kirby, Mikey Lee, Joe Maun, Ben Pfaff, Dan
Pop, Sunil Rao, Will Rose, Richard Stamp, Steve Summit, Dave Thompson,
Keith Thompson, Chris Torek (aargh, did it again), Stephan Wilms, Dik
Winter, ...
You know... the Cabal!
> Others are welcome and will be given full
> privilege on request (including the ability to grant privilege) as long
> as one of us recognises you and think you have a sufficient degree of
> (un)common sense.
Let me know when you have Chris or Steve on board, or at least six others
out of those I listed above. Or Dennis Ritchie, of course.
Netocrat
> Flash Gordon said:
>> Richard Heathfield wrote:
[on Steve Summit's participation in this thread]
>>> Now that you appear to be fully awake, I'd be curious to know your
>>> attitude to a C FAQ wiki, controlled (naturally!) by the Cabal. After
>>> all, you would be the other "of course!" candidate for Chief Cabalier
>>> alongside Chris* Torek (who has remained ominously silent on the
>>> subject).
[...]
>> As a matter of fact (rather than principal) whoever is hosting it has
>> ultimate power, after all if you have root access on the box you can do
>> what you want to it.
>
> So either you'd have to place amazing trust in the host, or you'd have
> to come up with a way to make up a RAIH on which to host the wiki.
>
>> On which subject, I've put up an initial site at
>> http://clc.flash-gordon.me.uk/ with some initial discussions between a
>> few of us on organisation.
>
> The few I saw were: FlashGordon, Ipapadop, and Netocrat.
To date, we three are the active planners, but we welcome any
comp.lang.c contributors who wish to join us.
[...]
>> Others are welcome and will be given full privilege on request
>> (including the ability to grant privilege) as long as one of us
>> recognises you and think you have a sufficient degree of (un)common
>> sense.
The wording of parts of Flash Gordon's post may have been a little
hasty and ill-considered, particularly regarding the host having
"ultimate power" over the site and "as long as one of us recognises
you" possibly seeming to imply that the current 3 planners confer some
special status upon themselves.
In fact, we want the site to succeed and are not at all pretentious in
our attitude. There is some ambiguity as to how to decide who should
be allowed to moderate/edit, and any ideas on that issue are welcome.
Ultimately I'd like to develop an endorsement/reputation system that
wouldn't require restricted access at all but (a) that wiki technology
doesn't exist yet and it's not clear that it would have the support of
the more senior/expert comp.lang.c contributors and (b) it is simplest
to try a natural approach of adding people as moderators by invitation
or request which may work until/unless conflict develops; this is the
idea that Flash was attempting to communicate.
We don't consider ourselves owners of the wiki; we want c.l.c regulars
to feel (justifiably, by whatever means are most appropriate) that they
communally own it.
Trust is definitely an issue. The Mediawiki software that we're using
may support something like a RAIH; if not then it does at least have
reasonable export/import backup support. The minimal trust solution
that I can think of is to find a way of sharing
ownership/administration of the domain name amongst the moderators.
That way if the administrator of a machine screws around, the
moderators can simply point the domain to a more trustworthy machine
set up from backups.
This requires the registrar of the domain to recognise that the
domain's ownership is shared. I don't know if this is currently
possible. OTOH, there is a precedent in that financial institutions
generally allow shared accounts.
[reordered]
> What you actually need is the likes of Martin Ambuhl, Christian Bau,
> Mark Brader, Billy Chambless, Dann Corbit, Chris Dollin, Chuck Falconer,
> Jack Klein, Kaz Kylheku, Lawrence Kirby, Mikey Lee, Joe Maun, Ben Pfaff,
> Dan Pop, Sunil Rao, Will Rose, Richard Stamp, Steve Summit, Dave
> Thompson, Keith Thompson, Chris Torek (aargh, did it again), Stephan
> Wilms, Dik Winter, ...
[...]
> Let me know when you have Chris or Steve on board, or at least six
> others out of those I listed above. Or Dennis Ritchie, of course.
The group of people you proposed seem like good candidates as those who
should have moderation/edit access to a comp.lang.c wiki. Their
input/advice would be welcome and should any of them choose to create
an account on the planning site as referenced above, they would of
course also be given sysop privileges.
We have privately contacted Steve Summit regarding whether he would be
willing to support a comp.lang.c wiki site by donating the FAQ under
the copyright we propose, which is the GNU FDL. I won't disclose the
details of his response without his permission, but it was at least
positive. I hope that he continues to participate in this thread as
time allows.
Richard Heathfield
> On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 23:51:19 +0000, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> What you actually need is the likes of Martin Ambuhl, Christian Bau,
>> Mark Brader, Billy Chambless, Dann Corbit, Chris Dollin, Chuck Falconer,
>> Jack Klein, Kaz Kylheku, Lawrence Kirby, Mikey Lee, Joe Maun, Ben Pfaff,
>> Dan Pop, Sunil Rao, Will Rose, Richard Stamp, Steve Summit, Dave
>> Thompson, Keith Thompson, Chris Torek (aargh, did it again), Stephan
>> Wilms, Dik Winter, ...
> [...]
>> Let me know when you have Chris or Steve on board, or at least six
>> others out of those I listed above. Or Dennis Ritchie, of course.
<snip>
>
> We have privately contacted Steve Summit regarding whether he would be
> willing to support a comp.lang.c wiki site by donating the FAQ under
> the copyright we propose, which is the GNU FDL. I won't disclose the
> details of his response without his permission, but it was at least
> positive. I hope that he continues to participate in this thread as
> time allows.
If he lets you use the FAQ as an initial base for the project, you're
halfway home - I reckon quite a few of the clc experts would be prepared to
follow that up positively, since they've secretly been itching to edit the
FAQ for years.
Flash Gordon
> Flash Gordon said:
>
>>Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>
>>>Steve Summit said:
>>>
>>>>Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Well, he doesn't post very often nowadays...
>>>>
>>>>Too true, alas. (As you can see, it took me rather a while to
>>>>pick up on this thread. :-( )
>>>
>>>Better late than never. :-)
>>>
>>>Now that you appear to be fully awake, I'd be curious to know your
>>>attitude to a C FAQ wiki, controlled (naturally!) by the Cabal. After
>>>all, you would be the other "of course!" candidate for Chief Cabalier
>>>alongside Chris* Torek (who has remained ominously silent on the
>>>subject).
>>>
>>>Would you be:
>>>
>>> (a) open to the idea of a C FAQ wiki?
>>> (b) prepared to perform the necessary incantations and
>>> rune-casting required for deciding on Cabal members?
>>
>>As a matter of fact (rather than principal) whoever is hosting it has
>>ultimate power, after all if you have root access on the box you can do
>>what you want to it.
>
> So either you'd have to place amazing trust in the host, or you'd have to
> come up with a way to make up a RAIH on which to host the wiki.
It has been suggested privately that it might have looked like I am on a
power trip, if so I apologise. This was not my intent and, indeed, I
would have no objection to any other hosting arrangements.
I have every intention of bowing to majority verdict, It's just that I
will have to action any changes that require root access whilst I am
doing the hosting on the current system since I can't afford to give
root access to people I don't know personally since I am also hosting
other stuff for friends.
I am merely the person who has initially stepped forward to provide as
flexible hosting as possible.
>>On which subject, I've put up an initial site at
>>http://clc.flash-gordon.me.uk/ with some initial discussions between a
>>few of us on organisation.
>
> The few I saw were: FlashGordon, Ipapadop, and Netocrat.
>
> What you actually need is the likes of Martin Ambuhl, Christian Bau, Mark
> Brader, Billy Chambless, Dann Corbit, Chris Dollin, Chuck Falconer, Jack
> Klein, Kaz Kylheku, Lawrence Kirby, Mikey Lee, Joe Maun, Ben Pfaff, Dan
> Pop, Sunil Rao, Will Rose, Richard Stamp, Steve Summit, Dave Thompson,
> Keith Thompson, Chris Torek (aargh, did it again), Stephan Wilms, Dik
> Winter, ...
>
> You know... the Cabal!
A few names there I don't recognise, but I entirely agree with those I
do and would bow to their superior knowledge of standard C.
>>Others are welcome and will be given full
>>privilege on request (including the ability to grant privilege) as long
>>as one of us recognises you and think you have a sufficient degree of
>>(un)common sense.
>
> Let me know when you have Chris or Steve on board, or at least six others
> out of those I listed above. Or Dennis Ritchie, of course.
We will, of course, post here when we have news. Discussions were only
taken off here so that we don't clutter up the group with off topic
discussions about Wiki's etc. We are not trying to exclude people and,
indeed, we would welcome more input and will give away Wiki sysop
privileges and access to the back end DB if people want the access.
Mark B
<webs...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1124845420.4...@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Giannis Papadopoulos wrote:
>> Although Steve Summit's C FAQ is really good, are there any C FAQ wikis?
>
>
> http://www.iso-9899.info/wiki/Main_Page
And this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C_programming_language
Richard Heathfield
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"
- and no wonder, because 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, not a heap of junk like the article on wikipedia.
--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/2005
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at above domain (but drop the www, obviously)
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
Sounds exciting !!!
will there be a tape-cutting ceremony :-)
- Ravi
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
"Richard Heathfield" <inv...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:dgssli$8no$1...@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...
> Mark B said:
>
>>
>> <webs...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1124845420.4...@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>>> Giannis Papadopoulos wrote:
>>>> Although Steve Summit's C FAQ is really good, are there any C FAQ
>>>> wikis?
>>>
>>> Well there is this:
>>>
>>> http://www.iso-9899.info/wiki/Main_Page
>>
>> And this:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C_programming_language
>
> 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
Richard Heathfield <inv...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>... 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.)
--
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Wind River Systems
Salt Lake City, UT, USA (40°39.22'N, 111°50.29'W) +1 801 277 2603
email: forget about it http://web.torek.net/torek/index.html
Reading email is like searching for food in the garbage, thanks to spammers.
Richard Heathfield
> In article <dg50h4$9j8$1...@nwrdmz03.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com>
> Richard Heathfield <inv...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>... 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.
--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/2005
http://www.cpax.org.uk