From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM, MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,a593b847b304c715 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-11-16 04:27:29 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!fu-berlin.de!newsfeed.stueberl.de!teaser.fr!enst.fr!melchior!cuivre.fr.eu.org!melchior.frmug.org!not-for-mail From: Marius Amado Alves Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada -vs- ADA (was: Re: MAC address with Win32 bindings.) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 12:26:24 +0000 Organization: Cuivre, Argent, Or Message-ID: References: <3fad244e$0$27572$626a54ce@news.free.fr> <3fad6196$0$27566$626a54ce@news.free.fr> <0wrrb.1073$Tc2.7139@newsfep4-glfd.server.ntli.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: lovelace.ada-france.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: melchior.cuivre.fr.eu.org 1068985596 94228 80.67.180.195 (16 Nov 2003 12:26:36 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@melchior.cuivre.fr.eu.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 12:26:36 +0000 (UTC) To: comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org Return-Path: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Nov 2003 12:26:15.0808 (UTC) FILETIME=[D4679800:01C3AC3C] X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p5 (Debian) at ada-france.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.3 Precedence: list List-Id: Gateway to the comp.lang.ada Usenet newsgroup List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:2540 Date: 2003-11-16T12:26:24+00:00 On Sun, 2003-11-16 at 03:07, Steve wrote: > Let's try to make the newsgroup a little more inviting. Maybe that will > help to make the language a little more inviting. Everyone's invited. But the language bar shouldn't be set as low as to let "ADA" or "MAC" pass uncommented. Rigour is a big plus of this group and of Ada. Personally I try to say something more than just "it's not ADA, it's Ada" or some such. But I find just saying that perfectly justifiable, because it is very likely that someone making the "ADA" kind of mistake is not prepared to make any technical questions either--let alone understand the answers. I really wonder what makes someone write "ADA" instead of "Ada" most of the times here. The only possible explanation is that (s)he has not looked at *any* Ada document yet, no? So, if (s)he's making a technical question, what on Earth can (s)he be expecting?