Wiki FAQ

This is a discussion on Wiki FAQ within the A Brief History of Cprogramming.com forums, part of the Community Boards category; Originally Posted by citizen Pointers (again): This time Elysia's restated that stray pointers should not be dereferenced and provided at ...

  1. #181
    C++まいる!Cをこわせ! Elysia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,604
    Quote Originally Posted by citizen View Post
    Pointers (again): This time Elysia's restated that stray pointers should not be dereferenced and provided at least one entirely wrong and narrow minded (pointers == dynamic memory mentality) example of how to fix it. And const correctness as it relates to char*. Const correctness is an article I linked to that needs writing.
    I changed it to "one way of doing it the correct way" instead. Perhaps that's more to your tastes?

    I request, Elysia, that you avoid creating articles that overlap one another for the time being, for two important reasons. The encyclopedia is not at all complete and we can argue about what articles can be coupled together as "common mistakes" and where to refer readers to at a later date. By the incompleteness statement I mean that there are a lot of topics still out there - inheritance is another big place where people screw up a lot, is it "common"? Does anybody want to teach OOP? We're hardly ready to start this sort of spit-shining.
    Do you want to write an entire const correctness article for fixing char* when it should be const char*? Go ahead. However, I don't want to.
    There are a lot of things and you can argue what to be added and not. But I don't think small things like that do not hurt.

    And secondly, some of the articles you've referenced don't seem to apply best to the mistakes in question. Why does const correctness relate to your article on vertual memory? Why not write the const correctness article instead?
    Should it be linked to const correctness? Yes. Is there one one? No. Do I want to write one? No.
    Feel free to write one and change the link.

    Quote Originally Posted by jEssYcAt View Post
    The "Right Way" for C appears to pass a garbage value to malloc for how much to allocate:

    If this isn't an error, can someone explain why the value of some random memory location is given to malloc() here?
    Forgot sizeof. Fixed.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

  2. #182
    Kernel hacker
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Farncombe, Surrey, England
    Posts
    15,677
    I added a section "extending strings" and "format usage with printf/scanf", since these are common problems. Not very much "meat on the bones there", but at least it's something.

    I also fixed a trivial typo where a variable name got a bit confused in Elysia's pointer example.

    --
    Mats
    Compilers can produce warnings - make the compiler programmers happy: Use them!
    Please don't PM me for help - and no, I don't do help over instant messengers.

  3. #183
    Registered User whiteflags's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    7,701
    Elysia, I just don't want any of us to get ahead of ourselves. "Small things like this" do not hurt but there is a time and a place for everything. Man is it going to be a pain to maintain such a broad, sweeping article about subjects we haven't even written about yet.

    Do you want to write an entire const correctness article for fixing char* when it should be const char*? Go ahead.
    Is that the only place you ever apply const correctness? No it isn't. Don't be arrogant like that.

  4. #184
    C++まいる!Cをこわせ! Elysia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,604
    That's not what I meant.
    "Do you want to write an entire article about const correctness to supply a link to while the only thing linking to it as char* to const char* correction?"
    Or in other words, I didn't want to spend the time creating a const correctness article just for covering a little topic about char* which should be const char*. I didn't feel like I wanted to spend time on it just for that.

    And... I'm thinking the article is meant to be a small guide on common errors and mistakes and a quick way of fixing them. Not one big explanation. It's not supposed to be rocket science there, so it doesn't really need linking to in-depth explanations for everything.
    You opinion may vary, but that's how I see it. I think it's great to have a faq on common errors that we see everyday so we don't need to repeat ourselves. And perhaps teach newbies to avoid common errors, as well.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

  5. #185
    Registered User whiteflags's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    7,701
    I think it's great to have a faq on common errors that we see everyday so we don't need to repeat ourselves. And perhaps teach newbies to avoid common errors, as well.
    But didn't we write those articles yet? What's wrong with them?

    I'm thinking the article is meant to be a small guide on common errors and mistakes and a quick way of fixing them.
    So what's a common error? Does it make sense to address them all in the same page, whether or not we cross-reference?

    It's important to question what needs doing with the resources we have, and I'm not sure how great an idea it is to create yet another index for people's programming issues. You must really think that the people who are doing the searching are going to be the question askers instead of us. Don't pollute or be pointlessly redundant. That's the only reason I'm such a hard@ss really.

  6. #186
    C++まいる!Cをこわせ! Elysia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,604
    Quote Originally Posted by citizen View Post
    But didn't we write those articles yet? What's wrong with them?
    We do, and it's terrific, but we don't do everything. Plus sometimes, even linking to them, they don't understand the problem at hand.
    See someone calling scanf without passing a pointer? Link 'em to a pointer to pointer.... and they'll do the same mistake again -_-

    So what's a common error? Does it make sense to address them all in the same page, whether or not we cross-reference?

    It's important to question what needs doing with the resources we have, and I'm not sure how great an idea it is to create yet another index for people's programming issues. You must really think that the people who are doing the searching are going to be the question askers instead of us. Don't pollute or e pointlessly redundant. That's the only reason I'm such a hard@ss really.
    Most of these common issues do not have a page explaining or simply is not too direct at the issue they are facing, so they do not think it through or ignore it. Give them a something to look at and a solution and they'll use it. Throw in a link to an in-depth explanation and maybe they'll brush up on their skills or bookmark it for a later time.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

  7. #187
    Registered User whiteflags's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    7,701
    We do, and it's terrific, but we don't do everything. Plus sometimes, even linking to them, they don't understand the problem at hand.
    See someone calling scanf without passing a pointer? Link 'em to a pointer to pointer.... and they'll do the same mistake again -_-
    You are not personally responsible if people refuse to accept your advice. Just trying to help you cope with aselfish, uncaring world.

    Most of these common issues do not have a page explaining or simply is not too direct at the issue they are facing, so they do not think it through or ignore it. Give them a something to look at and a solution and they'll use it. Throw in a link to an in-depth explanation and maybe they'll brush up on their skills or bookmark it for a later time.
    I'm really uncomfortable by this presumption. Your help at cboard is not to spam links to pages with homework answers that "directly addresses the issue they are facing," and you have no reason to presume laziness all the time. If people are too lazy to do work or learn, that is not our problem. It is simply that the opportunity cost of learning to program was too high for them to go through with it. Most people here are generous enough to give answers eventually, but only eventually.

    The board used to be content rich. Really.

  8. #188
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    2,129
    Quote Originally Posted by citizen View Post
    The board used to be content rich. Really.
    When are you referring to?

  9. #189
    Registered User whiteflags's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    7,701
    Before I was here. I'm usually a sign things are going downhill.

  10. #190
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,465
    Quote Originally Posted by robwhit View Post
    When are you referring to?
    Probably a time when people answered questions with their fingers, not their ego. And probably also a time when a question didn't have to be answered by 20 different people all nitpicking the poster above them.

    I'm not saying everyone is doing it, I'm saying there's a lot more of that around than before. One of the reasons I hardly visit the C++ board and why, quite frankly, I'm slowly withering my presence on the entire forums. I've been having whatever few questions I have these days answered on other places with half the noise. And no, that's not daniweb either.

    Regardless, I can see the cpwiki is going downhill pretty quickly. There's one person thinking everybody else in the world is stupid, ignorant and needs to be hand fed. For her sake, the cpwiki is turning into a downgraded version of a unabridged and unedited C++ for Idiots that only Herb Schildt could envy. The "Look ma, I did this!" attitude that is starting to prevail has probably killed the project already. I would take more comfort if the wiki had a hierarchy. I don't see that happening though. As far as I'm concerned, I've lost all interest in the project other than fulfilling my promise to have it upgraded to the new version. After that, I'm out.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  11. #191
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    7,317
    I actually think the quality of the forum is quite good right now relative to other times (at least back since 2003 when I first started paying attention). There are always going to be ebbs and flows, and there will always be posters that come and go who disrupt the atmosphere. There is not much to be done about it beyond hoping that people understand when they are more of a detriment to the forum than an asset.

    That said, there is currently a high number of very knowledgable posters answering questions (at least in the C++ forum that I read). There are also not very many rude or standoffish posters helping either. That leads to good advice and constructive conversations.
    Last edited by Daved; 04-25-2008 at 08:24 AM.

  12. #192
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,465
    The value of the boards doesn't reside only on the expertise of those answering the questions. The Cboard has always been blessed with the cream of the cream on that regard. And I know what I'm talking about. I know CBoard since 2002. There's however more to it.

    Sometimes a bad answer has more value if followed with an honest and open discussion of its demerits. It has been through these type of discussions that I always learned more about the hows and whys. What I see however is a constant incapacity to handle such problems on behalf of most of the best posters on this forum. For the most part an answer is either right or wrong, it is hardly ever seen as a point worth debating.

    Does anyone really care why someone might post a wrong or inadequate answer? Does anyone care past proving it wrong? Very few people (none that I ever knew about) has ever posted anything knowing they were saying something ridiculous. There's value in their answer that should be acknowledge even when showing why it may be the wrong answer. Instead of, start quote "understand when they are more of a detriment to the forum than an asset", end quote, I'd suggest accepting thatthe only detrimental thing in a programming board is not recognizing the value of people... even when they don't share our knowledge level but still insist on trying to help.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  13. #193
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    7,317
    I think you have a different litmus test on what constitutes a high quality forum. Personally, I look to things like quality of answers and ease of access to those answers.

    I agree that every voice is important. I think it should be obvious, though, that some voices can either degrade the quality of answers by providing incomplete or incorrect responses, or make it more difficult to access those answers by cluttering threads with opinions and disagreements that are more self-serving than discussion provoking.

    So while I would not advocate silencing those voices that reduce the quality of the forum (within reason), that doesn't mean I consider the forum a better place just because it allows those people to post. Considering someone a "detriment" and acknowledging their value (or respecting their right to contribute) are not mutually exclusive concepts.

Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 345678910111213
Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. Wiki FAQ
    By Queatrix in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-25-2007, 03:39 AM
  2. Wiki for Tutorials
    By jverkoey in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-16-2005, 03:03 PM
  3. FAQ Check/Lock
    By RoD in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-15-2002, 11:21 AM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21