From: kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen)
Subject: Re: GNAT discussions should be here as well.
Date: 1999/03/02
Date: 1999-03-02T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1999Mar2.095531.1@eisner> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 7bgmqm$82v@drn.newsguy.com
In article <7bgmqm$82v@drn.newsguy.com>, kvisko@ writes:
> In article <MJ3xAGKZ#GA.252@pet.hiwaay.net>, "David says...
>>
>>In your lengthy message (which might have better been submitted to
>>chat@gnat.com),
>
> Why?
I do not recall your original post, so I cannot comment on whether _it_
is more appropriate in a compiler-specific venue. Many are, however.
> In Other language newsgroups, such as C/C++/Java, people all the time
> ask questions in reference to using specific compilers such as
> VC++, Borland , gcc, etc..
And in other languages one gets equivalence between integers and pointers
without asking for it :-). Throughout the internet newsgroups, however,
there are various styles of operation.
> No one thinks of saying that each compiler users should have a separate mailing
> list. If so, then those news groups will be almost empty.
>> It is not like this news group is so busy. Even if it were, then this will
> be a good thing, not a bad thing.
>
> We should have all Ada discussions here, GNAT or none GNAT. Having separate
> mailing lists for Ada related stuff don't make sense to me given the small
> Ada community size.
The level of activity on comp.lang.ada is about right by my standards.
Padding it with information of marginal interest to some readers does
a disservice to those who have other things to do in their life.
> All public Ada discussions should be done here, on any topic, any one can
> simply ignore threads they are not interested in. Why are the Ada people
> so up-tight about these things? While on other newsgroups no one makes
> any point about these things?
Many other newsgroups have their own ways of conducting business,
but they may not be ones with which you are familiar.
> May be have some convention of subject, where if the question is on GNAT,
> it will say "GNAT: etc..", this way, people can easily not read it if they
> do not want to.
No, I want to know things about GNAT that are of general interest, but
not the details of bug discussions, etc.
Larry Kilgallen
prev parent reply other threads:[~1999-03-02 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1999-03-02 0:00 SGI GNAT Question? (Long) Paul Colvert
1999-03-02 0:00 ` Gautier
1999-03-02 0:00 ` dewar
1999-03-03 0:00 ` Paul Colvert
1999-03-03 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-03-04 0:00 ` SpamSpamSpam
1999-03-04 0:00 ` dewar
1999-03-05 0:00 ` SpamSpamSpam
1999-03-05 0:00 ` bourguet
1999-03-05 0:00 ` dennison
1999-03-05 0:00 ` dewar
1999-03-05 0:00 ` dewar
1999-03-05 0:00 ` dennison
1999-03-05 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-03-07 0:00 ` root
1999-03-07 0:00 ` dewar
1999-03-08 0:00 ` root
1999-03-09 0:00 ` Some GNAT history (was Re: SGI GNAT Question? (Long)) dewar
1999-03-09 0:00 ` Tom Moran
1999-03-09 0:00 ` dennison
1999-03-09 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-03-11 0:00 ` Arthur Evans Jr
1999-03-11 0:00 ` dennison
1999-03-09 0:00 ` SGI GNAT Question? (Long) dewar
1999-03-10 0:00 ` SpamSpamSpam
1999-03-10 0:00 ` Chris Morgan
1999-03-10 0:00 ` dewar
1999-03-10 0:00 ` Chris Morgan
1999-03-10 0:00 ` dewar
1999-03-10 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-03-07 0:00 ` David Botton
1999-03-07 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-03-05 0:00 ` dennison
1999-03-05 0:00 ` dewar
1999-03-07 0:00 ` root
1999-03-07 0:00 ` dewar
1999-03-08 0:00 ` Marin David Condic
1999-03-05 0:00 ` GNAT Field Test scope (was SGI GNAT Question) Larry Kilgallen
1999-03-04 0:00 ` SGI GNAT Question? (Long) dennison
1999-03-02 0:00 ` David C. Hoos, Sr.
1999-03-02 0:00 ` GNAT discussions should be here as well kvisko
1999-03-02 0:00 ` Samuel Mize
1999-03-02 0:00 ` Mike Silva
1999-03-02 0:00 ` robert_dewar
1999-03-02 0:00 ` dennison
1999-03-02 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen [this message]
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox