|
He means an actual chat room (IRC model chat) rather than discussion forums.
|
|
|
|
|
Have you noticed the list at the left of your window?
Just say 'NO' to evaluated arguments for diadic functions! Ash
|
|
|
|
|
Richard MacCutchan wrote: Have you noticed the list at the left of your window?
He means IRC style chatting, not discussion forums.
|
|
|
|
|
I've never used a proper chatroom (the benefit of being a dinosaur) and cannot see what it would bring to the site. Can you imagine what it would be like with [add your favourite CPian's name] given free reign in such an environment?
BTW I was not one of the univoters on the OP.
Just say 'NO' to evaluated arguments for diadic functions! Ash
|
|
|
|
|
Richard MacCutchan wrote: I've never used a proper chatroom (the benefit of being a dinosaur)
Well, IRC chatting was kinda popular in the early 90s, and maybe the late 80s (via BBSes), so if you pre-dated that you must really be one of the early dinosaurs 
And yeah, I don't support this site running a public chat room either. In my experience, it only works well for a very small group (12 or less).
|
|
|
|
|
Nishant Sivakumar wrote: you must really be one of the early dinosaurs
I wrote my first program in 1966!
Just say 'NO' to evaluated arguments for diadic functions! Ash
|
|
|
|
|
ALGOL?
------------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
CCC League Table Link
CCC Link[ ^]
|
|
|
|
|
Dalek Dave wrote: ALGOL?
Leo III machine code, keyed in manually from the mainframe front panel. I then advanced to self booting programs fed in on paper tape, and thence to the wonders of Intercode (a sort of assembler). The first high level language I worked on was Cobol some time around '68/69 on a Univac 1108.
Just say 'NO' to evaluated arguments for diadic functions! Ash
|
|
|
|
|
Richard MacCutchan wrote: I wrote my first program in 1966!
I bet you dated Lady Ada** 
** for the pedants, this is a joke, and I am aware that she had been dead for a century by then
|
|
|
|
|
Nishant Sivakumar wrote: I bet you dated Lady Ada
No, but she was one of my fantasies 
Nishant Sivakumar wrote: ** for the pedantspeasants, this is a joke
FTFY
Just say 'NO' to evaluated arguments for diadic functions! Ash
|
|
|
|
|
Nishant Sivakumar wrote: nd I am aware that she had been dead for a century by then
That does not stop Jeremy Bentham from attending Lunches.
------------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
CCC League Table Link
CCC Link[ ^]
|
|
|
|
|
Exactly. A real-time informal discussion.
|
|
|
|
|
From the two 1-votes you received, you might have guessed that this is not a popular idea here. Also a chat room is useless when there are more than a dozen participants, and if you've observed it here, we usually have 50-60 people active in a forum at any given time.
|
|
|
|
|
Also most people work, and an ambient thread is easier to respond to than a live, dynamic chat room.
------------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
CCC League Table Link
CCC Link[ ^]
|
|
|
|
|
I wouldn't mind it. It could serve as an immediate question/answer kinda thing.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
Good suggestion. Synchronous communication (chatrooms) could be an extension to the form of asynchronous communication found at CodeProject (forums, Q&A, blogs). Chatrooms should not be thought as a thread to replace the forums, some people prefer one or the other form of information exchange over the other. I guess informal communication happens usually in a chatroom. It could also help to collaborate and answer quick questions. When I was still active in Q&A some members clicked on my profile and found the link to my online chatroom... which did provide just that: answer quick questions.
/M
|
|
|
|
|
The problem I have with Chatrooms is that they can get out of control quickly, the exclude most members from the conversation (it's over and done with and won't ever come back if you were in the wrong timezone), and is very difficult to moderate in any sensible or meaninful way.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: The problem I have with Chatrooms is that they can get out of control quickly [...] difficult to moderate in any sensible or meaninful way.
Why? Moderated chatrooms have been around since the 90s. Considering a closed chatsystem for CodeProject members, you could even ban abusive members in retrospective.
|
|
|
|
|
I understand the criticism. But a real-time chat should be for informal discussion not Q&A or programming questions. It would give it a community feel where others can discuss open-topics but with like minded programmers. It should not be a place for Q&A. A forum is better suited for Q&A as it provides a recorded history.
For some, the chat room is a new idea. For others the chat room was just a fad from the 80s-90s. Regardless, it might appeal to a certain crowd on The Code Project.
Today stackoverflow.com just announced its new feature: a chat room. At present 8:30am EST "There are other rooms, with 107 users currently talking in 40 rooms." It seems fairly popular on other programming sites. It might be another option to provide users here.
Regardless I really enjoy The Code Project. Just my 2c.
modified on Monday, October 25, 2010 8:44 AM
|
|
|
|
|
I'm trying to work out the difference between SO's chatrooms and typical discussion boards. I guess the main difference is there's no thread, just a firehose of comments.
Interesting, but I (and I guess GMail) prefer threaded conversations.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Why isn't there a pick list for the Tags? We're supposed to remember all the available ones? (It complains if you guess wrong)
Or am I missing an available list?
|
|
|
|
|
Here... Defined Tags[^]
On right hand side panel, we have this Tag cloud defined.
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe it's just my browser then? (IE8) When I go to "Ask A Question", nothing there but the text boxes and such. To the right are the emoticons, and to the right of those....nothing.
|
|
|
|
|
When posting a question the "Tags" box should auto-complete the tags for you.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
![Java | [Coffee]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/coffee.gif)
![Java | [Coffee]](https://www.codeproject.com/script/Forums/Images/coffee.gif)