Mail Archives: djgpp/1997/08/04/02:19:47
Richard Sanders (richard AT stardate DOT bc DOT ca) wrote:
: I know what you mean, I often respond to the "stupid questions" via
: email to save hassle. There are no stupid question, just stupid
: answers. We all live in glass houses when it come to programming.
: Kind of dumb to start throwing stones. RTFM is not a good answer.
: READ "xyz manual section abc" is.
That's a nice summary, and seems to me the way that Eli Zaretskii often
responds to FAQ's -- including some where it seems not unreasonable to
guess that omission of reading the manual rather than trouble
understanding it might be the problem <grin>.
One possible solution might be a kind of "pre-FAQ" responding to certain
FAQ's that maybe shouldn't, strictly speaking, be asked here, but _do_ get
asked here in a rather predictable way. For example:
Q. How do I go about learning C/Unix/TeX etc.?
A. [A list of some standard references such as K&R II for ANSI C, etc.,
plus possibly some Internet resources.]
Q. Why might I _not_ be wise to assume that my favorite code for Brand-X
compiler will also run with DJGPP?
A. Lots of DOS compilers permit/encourage coding practices that violate
the rules of 32-bit protected mode -- thus the importance of reading the
FAQ for problems and solutions.
Maybe the precedent of other newsgroups suggests a sort of DJGPP
orientation guide, including things like the above plus an explanation of
how the topicality of comp.os.msdos.djgpp does or doesn't overlap with
other C/GNU/TeX newgroups.
Anyway, I'd be glad to share in such a project.
Most respectfully,
Margo Schulter
mschulter AT value DOT net
(To reply, please remove the extra . in my default address;
the correct address is mschulter AT value DOT net)
- Raw text -