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

[swhalen@netcom.com]

I'd vote for a combination of the two: Post the mini-FAQ you refer to
and when an opportunity arises, reply with a reference to the mini-FAQ
and a snippet of code appropriate to the topic showing how much "better"
the solution is in Ada (and reposting the mini-FAQ if it's been a 
while and might have scrolled off their news server).

Of course, I'm somewhat ambivalent about proselytizing Ada too much <g>.
To a certain degree, I consider using Ada a competitive advantage:
if "they" want to write bug riddled code in those other languages,
let them <g>!

Steve

Mike Silva <mjsilva@jps.net> wrote:

: 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






-- 
{===--------------------------------------------------------------===}
                Steve Whalen     swhalen@netcom.com
{===--------------------------------------------------------------===}