Re: When cross-posting, don't annoy the pig

["Mike Silva" <mjsilva@jps.net>]

Larry Kilgallen wrote in message <1999Dec23.140731.1@eisner>...
>In article <MOs84.22$WC4.4570@news.wenet.net>, "Mike Silva"
<mjsilva@jps.net> writes:
>> I've been thinking about this since it was posted, and I agree that
>> gratuitous (key word!) Ada references are to be avoided.  Still, in many
>> language-neutral groups that are quite relevant to Ada there seems to be
an
>> unspoken C/C++ "assumption".  I'm wondering if it would be a good idea to
>> post some form of Ada mini-FAQ to these groups, not covering the entire
>> language in detail, but focusing on those areas of the language which are
>> appropriate to the particular newsgroup.
>
>I think a FAQ in that environment comes across as too evangelistic.
>My preference is to wait until someone asks for a sample of code and
>does not indicate that only C (or only Fortran) is acceptable. Then
>giving them the solution in Ada can often get the point across but
>with somewhat of a lower degree of rant.  Of course this works best
>when what they are trying to do is a lot easier in Ada.


That's interesting, because I've always thought of FAQs as entirely
non-intrusive, which is why I suggested the possibility.  I've never seen
anybody complain about the posting of a FAQ.  While I agree that giving
Ada-specific answers to general questions is also legitimate, they *do*
often provoke people (e.g. "Oh, sure, I'm just going to toss out all my C++
code!" when no mention of the language was originally given -- the unspoken
assumption again), and they can often be "lost" in a non-intuitive or
specialized thread, meaning only a few people might notice them.  It'll be
interesting to see if there's a concensus here one way or the other.

Mike