What's the charter of this group

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kai Glaesner
  • Start date Start date
K

Kai Glaesner

Hello community,

I read this group for several days now and wonder what kind of questions one
can expect to find answered here, or what the charter of this group is.

The name implies "CSharp" (the language) but looking at the postings it
seems more like "anything I encounter when using CSharp and the .Net
framework".

And if it's that general, what good are the other groups
microsoft.public.dotnet.* for?

Thanks in advance for the answer.

Kai
 
The name implies "CSharp" (the language) but looking at the postings it
seems more like "anything I encounter when using CSharp and the .Net
framework".
Click to expand...

Yes, this newsgoup is intended to discuss C# (the language) :)
Though I think this has gotten confused and postings have generally ended up
about using C# with the framework.
And if it's that general, what good are the other groups
microsoft.public.dotnet.* for?
Click to expand...

The other newsgroups would be a more preferable location to post questions
regarding specific topics regarding non C# (the language) questions, as
those forums are frequented by people more familiar with those topics (ie.
You'll find more MVP's, Microsoft developers and generally more people
familiar with a topic inside the appropriate newsgroup). Though no-one has
complained heatedly about the noise here (that I've noticed).

n!
 
I actually prefer the noise. I've seen questions about almost every
facet of Microsoft technology come down the pipe here. Personally, I don't
mind when I see questions that are not about C# (the language) or .NET in
general.

If anything, I might learn about something new as well. This isn't to
say that if the group veered so far off topic (to something like chinchilla
ranching) that I wouldn't complain. But I think that anything in the realm
of Microsoft technologies (and even non, with web services being the interop
medium, or something else) is acceptable.

What it comes down to is if I see something I can answer, I'm going to
help where I can.
 
LeeHACK said:
I understand your means. But C# is included in .NET. so we cant talking without .NET.
Click to expand...

We /can/ talk about C# without talking about .NET. For example, we can
talk about the fact that C# uses semi-colons for statement terminators
(although some might find that boring ;-).

Personally, I /like/ talking about programming language syntax, and feel
that many don't quite appreciate how much of an effect a language's
syntax has on users of the language.
 
Kai said:
I read this group for several days now and wonder what kind of questions one
can expect to find answered here, or what the charter of this group is.

The name implies "CSharp" (the language) but looking at the postings it
seems more like "anything I encounter when using CSharp and the .Net
framework".

And if it's that general, what good are the other groups
microsoft.public.dotnet.* for?
Click to expand...

Well, this is how I see it: in some groups, people get away with
off-topic posts; in others, they don't. An example of the former would
be this group; an example of the latter would be 'comp.lang.c'.

Personally, I'd prefer if people wouldn't start so many off-topic
threads here, but I certainly won't flame them for doing so (in fact, I
don't generally flame people unless flamed first :-P). However, I
wouldn't want this group to become like 'comp.lang.c' in regards to
off-topic posting, where one cannot post a message that is even slightly
off-topic without being likely to get flamed, plonked, planked, etc.
Perhaps specifying that a message is off-topic in the subject line would
prevent this; I don't know.

In any case, this is a nice community. I like the fact that people can
post here and be treated with respect.

I also appreciate the MVPs here, whom I generally find to be absolutely
irreplaceable.
 
C# Learner said:
We /can/ talk about C# without talking about .NET. For example, we can
talk about the fact that C# uses semi-colons for statement terminators
(although some might find that boring ;-).
Click to expand...

That particular one is kind of boring, yes. The answer is easy and most
people know it: To follow C conventions. The semicolon was chosen for C to
allow multiple statements per line, though I couldn't tell you why
particularly they chose the semicolon over any other symbol.
Personally, I /like/ talking about programming language syntax, and feel
that many don't quite appreciate how much of an effect a language's syntax
has on users of the language.
Click to expand...

Alot of people do, however no one is really interested in the "my opinion is
better than yours" arguments, which is where most syntax arguments start.
Not to be offensive to anyone but there is a substantial difference in
asking for reasoning behind syntax or debating the pros and cons of a given
syntax and whining about the syntax.

Feel free to start syntax and design questions(such as your switch question
earlier, Justin Rogers explination is probably one of the best I've seen on
the issue). I'd just rather not see "delphi is better so why are we using
this" stuff, its neither constructive nor informative.
 
Well, this is how I see it: in some groups, people get away with off-topic
posts; in others, they don't. An example of the former would be this
group; an example of the latter would be 'comp.lang.c'.
Click to expand...

LOL, that was an interesting discussion. comp.lang.* groups always seem
rather crabby. Speaking of which, at one point there was discussion of a
comp.lang.csharp group... Iwonder what ever happened.
Personally, I'd prefer if people wouldn't start so many off-topic threads
here, but I certainly won't flame them for doing so (in fact, I don't
generally flame people unless flamed first :-P). However, I wouldn't want
this group to become like 'comp.lang.c' in regards to off-topic posting,
where one cannot post a message that is even slightly off-topic without
being likely to get flamed, plonked, planked, etc. Perhaps specifying that
a message is off-topic in the subject line would prevent this; I don't
know.
Click to expand...

Don't know about in comp.lang.c, but I do appreciate a OT: label for
subjects that are widely off topic(stuff not having to do with the language
or a decent subset of the framework, othewise every topic would have OT:).
 
Daniel O'Connell said:
LOL, that was an interesting discussion. comp.lang.* groups always seem
rather crabby.
Click to expand...

That's not my experience - the comp.lang.java.* groups are much like
this one, IME.
Speaking of which, at one point there was discussion of a
comp.lang.csharp group... Iwonder what ever happened.
Click to expand...

I don't think it ever went as far as a vote. It would have been a
slightly odd situation, to be honest...
Don't know about in comp.lang.c, but I do appreciate a OT: label for
subjects that are widely off topic(stuff not having to do with the language
or a decent subset of the framework, othewise every topic would have OT:).
Click to expand...

Fortunately there seem to be few completely OT posts here - most are
just off the topic of C# the language, which is unfortunate (IMO) but
inevitable.
 
Daniel said:
[...]
Feel free to start syntax and design questions(such as your switch question
earlier, Justin Rogers explination is probably one of the best I've seen on
the issue). [...]
Click to expand...

I agree.
 
Daniel said:
[...] I'd just rather not see "delphi is better so why are we using
this" stuff, its neither constructive nor informative.
Click to expand...

It's caused by frustration and disbelief. I'll try not to do that any more.
 
Jon Skeet said:
That's not my experience - the comp.lang.java.* groups are much like
this one, IME.
Click to expand...

I havn't really browsed the java groups, but C++, ada, etc all seemed pretty
hostile(perhaps because I was not a fan of the given language).
I don't think it ever went as far as a vote. It would have been a
slightly odd situation, to be honest...
Click to expand...

How so? I don't think its terribly correct to consider java a proper
comp.lang sub group while C# not, since it would be strictly because C# was
produced by Microsoft.
 
Daniel O'Connell said:
I havn't really browsed the java groups, but C++, ada, etc all seemed pretty
hostile(perhaps because I was not a fan of the given language).
Click to expand...

If you ever learn Java (if you don't know it already) pop in there and
you'll find loads of helpful people. Tell them I said hi :)
How so? I don't think its terribly correct to consider java a proper
comp.lang sub group while C# not, since it would be strictly because C# was
produced by Microsoft.
Click to expand...

Absolutely - but there's be massive fragmentation. People would either
have to read both the non-MS and MS groups, or everyone would cross-
post to both groups, neither of which is an ideal situation.

The reason for the "oddness" is entirely due to there being an existing
well-used group (this one) for C#, even though it's not a comp.lang.*
group.
 
Jon said:
[...]
How so? I don't think its terribly correct to consider java a proper
comp.lang sub group while C# not, since it would be strictly because C# was
produced by Microsoft.
Click to expand...

Absolutely - but there's be massive fragmentation. People would either
have to read both the non-MS and MS groups, or everyone would cross-
post to both groups, neither of which is an ideal situation.
Click to expand...

This happened with Delphi: there're a couple of Delphi newsgroups in
USENET (in comp.lang.* and alt.comp.lang.*, IIRC) and then there're the
groups on Borland's own news server. As you might imagine, the USENET
groups aren't as popular as the Borland ones.

In this instance, people who see the ones in USENET mightn't consider
that there would be other newsgroups related to the subject, on
Borland's server; so it's probably better that they don't find any at
all in USENET, in the hope that they'll later go on to realise that
Borland have a dedicated server for these groups.
 
Jon Skeet said:
If you ever learn Java (if you don't know it already) pop in there and
you'll find loads of helpful people. Tell them I said hi :)


Absolutely - but there's be massive fragmentation. People would either
have to read both the non-MS and MS groups, or everyone would cross-
post to both groups, neither of which is an ideal situation.
Click to expand...
I can see that being a problem. However the question remains, to me anyway,
would this group be appropriate for third party implementations of C#(Mono,
dotGnu, etc? This is assuming that minor differences will creep in over
time) or should it be considered just the spec and Visual C#
implementations?

I am also curious if there is a place where variants on C# would be on
topic...I don't think they would be here(or most likely comp.lang.*) with
the exception of possible feature discussion.
 
I can see that being a problem. However the question remains, to me anyway,
would this group be appropriate for third party implementations of C#(Mono,
dotGnu, etc? This is assuming that minor differences will creep in over
time) or should it be considered just the spec and Visual C#
implementations?

I am also curious if there is a place where variants on C# would be on
topic...I don't think they would be here(or most likely comp.lang.*) with
the exception of possible feature discussion.
Click to expand...

While they might not be perfectly on-topic, I think posting them here
would be the least bad option given the situation we've already got.
 
Back
Top