Re: Should attachments be accepted in comp.lang.c?
- From: Mikhail Teterin <usenet+meow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 02:15:21 -0400
Keith Thompson wrote:
This was discussed recently in the "passing a union's field to a
function" thread, particularly in the "Posting sample C-code as
attachment" subthread. There was some disagreement about whether any
conclusion had been reached. I thought it would be useful to have
this discussion in its own thread.
You may also start another thread on the subject:
Should everyone be *forced* to post in the same manner?
Because I don't see, how your troubles (or lack thereof) are supposed to
compell *me*. My postings are on-topic of the news-group, and so are the
attachements.
I'm at a loss over this desire for uniformity, you are displaying...
While I'm here, let me quickly go over the objections raised so far:
* Various systems will automatically strip attachments from news
posts, or even totally suppress the post.
That's a problem with those "various systems". A poster, aware of the issue,
may still attach C-code to postings, hurting no one, but him/herself.
* It is inconvenient for me to have to download an attachment
That's a reason for *you* not to bother, but not a reason to ban such posts.
* If the encoding of the attached file does not match the encoding
used on the system in which the file is detached and read there can be
Converting the plain text between platforms' EOL representation is a trivial
excercise. All text-editors, that come with compilers (including vim and
emacs) are smart enough to automatically detect the proper EOL format,
while the good old `vi' can strip Windows' Ctrl-M in one short command.
Posting in-line and copy/pasting is likelier to introduce subtle problems
and is guaranteed to make code-review difficult (references to line-numbers
are off).
* If legitimate messages can contain attachments, I can't tell my
Are you REALLY willing to through MIME away, because spammers abuse it? Come
on -- have the "spammer already won"? :-)
* Allowing attachments certainly won't help encourage people to post
Uhh, place a maximum size limit, then. This is silly...
* Text only newsreaders that are aware of attachments will not
show it, but ask you for a place to store it. And that place can be
quite inconvenient, as it is possibly not in a place where you have
access to a compiler.
A MIME-aware newsreader, that does not offer to show the attachment as plain
text (especially, if the type is set to text/*) is broken...
Really and trully, all complete files (rather than illustratory segments)
should be placed on a web-site by the poster, posting just a link, IMO :-)
Soon, when everyone gets their own web-server, we'll be able to make this a
requirement. This will save space/bandwidth AND allow post-posting
corrections of the C-code.
-mi
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Should attachments be accepted in comp.lang.c?
- From: goose
- Re: Should attachments be accepted in comp.lang.c?
- From: Mark McIntyre
- Re: Should attachments be accepted in comp.lang.c?
- From: Default User
- Re: Should attachments be accepted in comp.lang.c?
- From: Robert Gamble
- Re: Should attachments be accepted in comp.lang.c?
- From: Walter Roberson
- Re: Should attachments be accepted in comp.lang.c?
- From: CBFalconer
- Re: Should attachments be accepted in comp.lang.c?
- From: Mark F. Haigh
- Re: Should attachments be accepted in comp.lang.c?
- From: Keith Thompson
- Re: Should attachments be accepted in comp.lang.c?
- From: Andrew Poelstra
- Re: Should attachments be accepted in comp.lang.c?
- References:
- Should attachments be accepted in comp.lang.c?
- From: Keith Thompson
- Should attachments be accepted in comp.lang.c?
- Prev by Date: Re: Newbie needs help with pointers/memory allocation
- Next by Date: looking for statefull snprintf
- Previous by thread: Re: Should attachments be accepted in comp.lang.c?
- Next by thread: Re: Should attachments be accepted in comp.lang.c?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
