| ??? 07/05/06 15:27 Read: times Msg Score: +2 +2 Good Answer/Helpful |
#119683 - showing lack of discipline Responding to: ???'s previous message |
No, Joseph, Andy's not overstating the case.
This is a place that requires discipline in order to avoid the wasted of much time and bandwidth on poor practice. Questions are often underspecified, and it leads to much time-wasting. The things Andy requested are reasonable as they ask for more completeness in the O/P's question. It makes no sense to ask questions about compiler-flagged errors if one doesn't specify which compiler is involved. It is not safe to assume anything, and repeated cases of incorrect assumptions in this realm have shown that. Yes, the O/P is asking for help, but he needs to read and adhere to the instructions on how to ask before doing so. Satish is smart enough to know what's at issue here, so I imagine he'll take the necessary action. RE |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| bit variable using struct | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Which compiler? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Insuffiicient Info; Post formatted code | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Asking for help? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Observation | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| showing lack of discipline | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| compiler | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Sbit and BData | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| sbit and BData - code formatted | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| 16 bits | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| more hint | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Std C bitfields != Keil bit-addresssable | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| What this guy said | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| another example of two things | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| The problem with bitfields | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Granted | 01/01/70 00:00 |