RFD: comp.lang.asm.x86 
Author Message
 RFD: comp.lang.asm.x86

                  REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION

         Group Name:  comp.lang.asm.x86
             Status:  unmoderated
       Distribution:  world-wide
            Summary:  Discussions related to the direct programming of
                      the Intel 8086, 186, 286, etc . . .  processors and
                      its clones.

This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) on the subject of
creating an unmoderated Usenet newsgroup, comp.lang.asm.x86

CHARTER

The proposed unmoderated newsgroup comp.lang.asm.x86 will be
open to discussions on all topics related to assembly language
and low-level programming on IBM machines with '86 processors.
Appropriate topics would include, but not be limited to,

           Assembly language tips and tricks (code techniques)
           MASM, TASM, and other commercial assemblers
           Graphics, sound, and other hardware programming
           Assembly language code
           Assembly language related share/freeware
           Linking assembly language with other languages
           Etc . . .

Topics that are discouraged are:

           Flames about "{Language X} is {better/worse} than ASM"
           Flames like "{Assembler 1} is {better/worse} than {Assembler 2}"
           High-level language code, except when used for
               hardware programming

This is NOT a call for votes.  A Call For Votes (CFV) will be
posted about one month from now and will be conducted by an
independent third party.

The format for this RFD is taken from the RFD for comp.lang.m
(which I downloaded from the RFD in news.announce.newgroups)
and I thank Mr. Smith in advance for not protesting the use of
his RFD format, which he borrowed from somebody else anyway.

I already wrote a miniature preliminary FAQ.  Look for it in
the news.groups newsgroup.


--



Tue, 24 Dec 1996 07:43:53 GMT  
 RFD: comp.lang.asm.x86
Michael J. Averbuch appears to have written on 7 Jul 1994 23:43:53 GMT:

Quote:
>                   REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION

>          Group Name:  comp.lang.asm.x86
>              Status:  unmoderated
>        Distribution:  world-wide
>             Summary:  Discussions related to the direct programming of
>                       the Intel 8086, 186, 286, etc . . .  processors and
>                       its clones.

> This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) on the subject of
> creating an unmoderated Usenet newsgroup, comp.lang.asm.x86

> CHARTER

> The proposed unmoderated newsgroup comp.lang.asm.x86 will be
> open to discussions on all topics related to assembly language
> and low-level programming on IBM machines with '86 processors.
> Appropriate topics would include, but not be limited to,

>            Assembly language tips and tricks (code techniques)
>            MASM, TASM, and other commercial assemblers
>            Graphics, sound, and other hardware programming
>            Assembly language code
>            Assembly language related share/freeware
>            Linking assembly language with other languages
>            Etc . . .

[ snip snip ]

Quote:

> --

How does this differ from alt.lang.asm?  There is little or no discussion
on alt.lang.asm (10 posts a week at best) now.  Does a seperate platform
really constitute the need for a seperate group?   I just hate to see
another group with little or no traffic.  Any ideas?


-----------------------------------------------------------------
  \\___//
  |     |       Bryan Miller
  |_____|       Embedded Software Engineer
  || o ||       Control Systems Software
  || \\||       Powertrain Electronics Department
      \\        Ford Motor Company
       o        
      //        

            <<< I don't speak for Ford, nor they for me... >>>



Wed, 25 Dec 1996 04:00:33 GMT  
 RFD: comp.lang.asm.x86
Michael J. Averbuch:
.  >                   REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION
.  >  
.  >          Group Name:  comp.lang.asm.x86

Bryan Miller:
.  How does this differ from alt.lang.asm?  There is little or no
.  discussion on alt.lang.asm (10 posts a week at best) now.  Does a
.  seperate platform really constitute the need for a seperate group?

Perhaps it's that the newsgroup comp.lang.asm370 regularly gets
postings about x86 assembly language.  

[Also, remember that the alt groups are not distributed as well as the
comp. groups.]

Raul D. Miller             n =: p*q               NB. prime p, q, e
<rockwell&nova.umd.edu>                           NB. public e, n, y
                           y =: n&|&(*&x)^:e 1
                           x -: n&|&(*&y)^:d 1    NB. 1 < (d*e) +.&<: (p,q)



Wed, 25 Dec 1996 06:22:06 GMT  
 RFD: comp.lang.asm.x86

Quote:

>          Group Name:  comp.lang.asm.x86
>             Summary:  Discussions related to the direct programming of
>                       the Intel 8086, 186, 286, etc . . .  processors and
>                       its clones.

> Appropriate topics would include, but not be limited to,

>            Assembly language tips and tricks (code techniques)
>            MASM, TASM, and other commercial assemblers
>            Graphics, sound, and other hardware programming
>            Assembly language code
>            Assembly language related share/freeware
>            Linking assembly language with other languages

I like the idea, but I would prefer a slightly different slant. I'd like to see
a group called "comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.programmer". Let's be honest: 99% (or
make up your own number) of people coding x86 are working with "the PC". This
name makes it official, and won't scare off people writing hardware code (Linux
drivers, for example) in C. It is also much more likely to be discovered and
used, since it fills in the comp.sys.ibm.pc range of groups.

Right now most IBMPC hardware programming (including x86 assembly) is discussed
on rec.games.programmer, with a smattering in other groups. I fear that the
comp.lang.asm.x86 name is too restrictive to divert much of that flow.

If neccessary, one could go further and create a group
"comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.programmer.asm". However, I have a feeling that there
is so much overlap between "programming the IBMPC hardware" and "x86 coding"
that crossposting would be the norm, hence I wouldn't recommend this.

One objection to this approach is that there are those who are interested in
the x86 in a non-PC context, in embedded systems for example. I feel that they
will be welcomed in a ibm.pc.hardware.programmer group, but if not, they can
fall back to comp.sys.intel.

Your list of appropriate topics looks fine to me. I want to restate that I'm
not shooting down the group proposal - quite the contrary! I'm just suggesting
that it take on a slightly different slant, with a group name to match.

Dan



Wed, 25 Dec 1996 18:31:38 GMT  
 RFD: comp.lang.asm.x86

Quote:
>          Group Name:  comp.lang.asm.x86

I thought i86 would be Intel's favored name.

(I assume others have commented on n.a.newgroups by now)
--



Thu, 26 Dec 1996 10:58:38 GMT  
 
 [ 6 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. RFD: comp.lang.asm.x86

2. RFD: comp.lang.asm.x86

3. RFD: comp.lang.asm.x86.protected

4. RFD: comp.lang.asm.x86

5. RFD: comp.lang.asm.x86.numeric moderated

6. RFD: comp.lang.asm.x86.protected

7. RFD: comp.lang.asm.x86

8. RFD: alt.lang.asm.68k, alt.lang.asm.x86, alt.lang

9. RFD: moderate comp.lang.asm.x86

10. RFD: moderate comp.lang.asm.x86

11. RFD: moderate comp.lang.asm.x86

12. alt.lang.asm vs. comp.lang.asm.x86

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software