Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > C Programming > coderwiki.com is starting and needs you!

Reply
Thread Tools

coderwiki.com is starting and needs you!

 
 
da404LewZer
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-22-2006
i'm starting a wiki on coding, keeping everything seperate. anyone who
wants to help check out the site. i want to document every function for
every language ever


www.coderwiki.com

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Richard Heathfield
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-22-2006
da404LewZer said:

> i'm starting a wiki on coding, keeping everything seperate. anyone who
> wants to help check out the site. i want to document every function for
> every language ever
>
>
> www.coderwiki.com


From "hello world" example:

"-where stdio.h is the name of library."

Er, no.

I suggest you fix what you've got before adding anything else.

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at above domain (but drop the www, obviously)
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
pete
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-22-2006
Richard Heathfield wrote:
>
> da404LewZer said:
>
> > i'm starting a wiki on coding, keeping everything seperate.
> > anyone who wants to help check out the site.
> > i want to document every function for every language ever
> >
> >
> > www.coderwiki.com

>
> From "hello world" example:
>
> "-where stdio.h is the name of library."
>
> Er, no.
>
> I suggest you fix what you've got before adding anything else.


Now it says:
"-where stdio.h is the name of include file."

stdio.h is a "standard header".
Whether or not stdio.h exists as a file
in any particular implementation of C,
is unspecified by the C standard.

--
pete
 
Reply With Quote
 
Richard Heathfield
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-22-2006
pete said:

>
> Now it says:
> "-where stdio.h is the name of include file."
>
> stdio.h is a "standard header".
> Whether or not stdio.h exists as a file
> in any particular implementation of C,
> is unspecified by the C standard.


In other words, it suffers from the same problem that any wiki suffers from
- editing can be carried out by anyone, no matter how ignorant.

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at above domain (but drop the www, obviously)
 
Reply With Quote
 
Richard G. Riley
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-22-2006

Richard Heathfield <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

> pete said:
>
>>
>> Now it says:
>> "-where stdio.h is the name of include file."
>>
>> stdio.h is a "standard header".
>> Whether or not stdio.h exists as a file
>> in any particular implementation of C,
>> is unspecified by the C standard.

>
> In other words, it suffers from the same problem that any wiki suffers from
> - editing can be carried out by anyone, no matter how ignorant.
>


Or, in all fairness, how well informed. No different from any techy
newsgroup really where google will reveal all sorts of wrong answers,
misleading information and general rubbish : invariably bad data is unremovable
though - giving Wikis the edge when uptodate and well maintained.

Wikis are, in general, a good thing IMO. They are certainly gaining in
popularity.

Thats not to say, however, that I would support any pie in the sky idea
of documenting "every function ever" ...
 
Reply With Quote
 
Default User
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-22-2006
Richard Heathfield wrote:

> pete said:
>
> >
> > Now it says:
> > "-where stdio.h is the name of include file."


> In other words, it suffers from the same problem that any wiki
> suffers from - editing can be carried out by anyone, no matter how
> ignorant.



I have to say that the page now has some suspiciously correct
information. I think some of the people here have been doing some work.



Brian
 
Reply With Quote
 
Richard Heathfield
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-22-2006
Default User said:

> Richard Heathfield wrote:
>
>> pete said:
>>
>> >
>> > Now it says:
>> > "-where stdio.h is the name of include file."

>
>> In other words, it suffers from the same problem that any wiki
>> suffers from - editing can be carried out by anyone, no matter how
>> ignorant.

>
> I have to say that the page now has some suspiciously correct
> information. I think some of the people here have been doing some work.


....which is fine as far as it goes, and very public-spirited, but are they
signing up to make corrections to it every day for the next N years? I
don't think so. So their good work is very likely either to be undone
completely or to be swamped by more dreck.

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at above domain (but drop the www, obviously)
 
Reply With Quote
 
Richard Bos
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-23-2006
Richard G. Riley <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Richard Heathfield <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>
> > In other words, it suffers from the same problem that any wiki suffers from
> > - editing can be carried out by anyone, no matter how ignorant.

>
> Or, in all fairness, how well informed. No different from any techy
> newsgroup really where google will reveal all sorts of wrong answers,
> misleading information and general rubbish : invariably bad data is unremovable
> though - giving Wikis the edge when uptodate and well maintained.


Wrong. On any techy newsgroup, when misinformation is published, one
will generally find a follow-up posted that corrects the bad
information, and that correction is just as unremovable as the original
rubbish. On a Wiki, when misinformation is posted, anyone can correct
that misinformation - and anyone else can, _and will_, re-uncorrect that
correction just as quickly.
On a newsgroup, the winner is the reader with the patience to read the
entire thread rather than the single post. On a Wiki, the winner is the
poster with the most patience to keep re-"correcting" this rubbish
poster who keeps asserting that void main() is bad C, and the patient
reader, no matter how patient, loses out.

> Wikis are, in general, a good thing IMO. They are certainly gaining in
> popularity.


Popularity means nothing. James Blunt is also gaining popularity, and
he's probably the worst example of nothingness to rise to the Top of the
Pops recently - and that's some accolade given the existence of Girls
Disallowed.

The mere existence of Wikis is, in general, a good thing. _Relying_ on a
Wiki, for anything, but especially for correctness, is quite egregiously
unwise.

Richard
 
Reply With Quote
 
Richard G. Riley
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-23-2006
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) (Richard Bos) writes:

> Richard G. Riley <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> Richard Heathfield <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>>
>> > In other words, it suffers from the same problem that any wiki suffers from
>> > - editing can be carried out by anyone, no matter how ignorant.

>>
>> Or, in all fairness, how well informed. No different from any techy
>> newsgroup really where google will reveal all sorts of wrong answers,
>> misleading information and general rubbish : invariably bad data is unremovable
>> though - giving Wikis the edge when uptodate and well maintained.

>
> Wrong. On any techy newsgroup, when misinformation is published, one
> will generally find a follow-up posted that corrects the bad
> information, and that correction is just as unremovable as the
> original


Not wrong at all. There might well be corrections and followups but the
original bad info/posts tends to stay there. Surely you dont refute that?

> rubbish. On a Wiki, when misinformation is posted, anyone can correct
> that misinformation - and anyone else can, _and will_, re-uncorrect that
> correction just as quickly.


If they have malice aforethough this could be a problem. See the Beorge
Bush wiki for an example.

> On a newsgroup, the winner is the reader with the patience to read the
> entire thread rather than the single post. On a Wiki, the winner is
> the


Some can be somewhat long and winding :-;

> poster with the most patience to keep re-"correcting" this rubbish
> poster who keeps asserting that void main() is bad C, and the patient
> reader, no matter how patient, loses out.
>
>> Wikis are, in general, a good thing IMO. They are certainly gaining in
>> popularity.

>
> Popularity means nothing. James Blunt is also gaining popularity, and


Popularity often means that people find a use for them : and in techy
areas its not really the equivalent of "oh, hes gorgeous" ...

> he's probably the worst example of nothingness to rise to the Top of the
> Pops recently - and that's some accolade given the existence of Girls
> Disallowed.
>
> The mere existence of Wikis is, in general, a good thing. _Relying_ on a
> Wiki, for anything, but especially for correctness, is quite egregiously
> unwise.


I would nearly always cross check a wiki. But it is fast and convenient
and I think you are being a little too distrustful. Certainly with
setting up some Linux systems recently they were invaluable whereas
usenet was a hotchpotch of coflicting threads that invariably ended up
in slanging matches.

A wiki might have errors, it is usually concise enough that finding the
errors doesnt take long. This is not the case with millions of usenet
threads : there is invariably NOT a summary post hiliting who was wrong
and who was right.

A wiki certainly is not a replacement for usenet discussions.

>
> Richard


--
 
Reply With Quote
 
Chris Dollin
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-23-2006
da404LewZer wrote:

> i'm starting a wiki on coding, keeping everything seperate. anyone who
> wants to help check out the site. i want to document every function for
> every language ever.


There's an infinite number of them. What's your budget?

--
Chris "(\x. x), (\x. (\x. x)), (\x. (\x. (\x. x))) ..." Dollin
"We did not have time to find out everything we wanted to know." /A Clash of Cymbals/

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
3 ESSENTIAL TOOLS FOR STARTING AND MAINTAINING...3 ESSENTIAL TOOLSFOR STARTING AND MAINTAINING...3 ESSENTIAL TOOLS FOR STARTING ANDMAINTAINING... Oanh Bui C++ 0 04-27-2009 12:51 PM
3 ESSENTIAL TOOLS FOR STARTING AND MAINTAINING...3 ESSENTIAL TOOLSFOR STARTING AND MAINTAINING...3 ESSENTIAL TOOLS FOR STARTING ANDMAINTAINING... Oanh Bui C Programming 0 04-27-2009 12:51 PM
3 ESSENTIAL TOOLS FOR STARTING AND MAINTAINING...3 ESSENTIAL TOOLSFOR STARTING AND MAINTAINING...3 ESSENTIAL TOOLS FOR STARTING ANDMAINTAINING... Oanh Bui Python 0 04-27-2009 12:46 PM
coderwiki.com is starting and needs you! da404LewZer Python 0 06-22-2006 11:40 PM
coderwiki.com is starting and needs you! da404lewzer C++ 1 06-22-2006 08:55 PM



Advertisments