Re^6: (OT) How can I do unless(caller) { main; } in C using GCC in Windows?

in reply to Re^5: (OT) How can I do unless(caller) { main; } in C using GCC in Windows?
in thread (OT) How can I do unless(caller) { main; } in C using GCC in Windows?

Could you please explain why some off-topic posts are still approved such as (OT) Your Dream OS, (OT) Experiences with Netbooks, (OT) Issue in chrome, and (OT) Issue in chrome while others are not? Or (OT) Listing / Inquiring on MQ Cluster Queues, which you approved. Sure seems like an inconsistently enforced policy. Or, are we maybe trying for that "editing on Wikipedia" feel that's all the rage (pun intended) these days? ;) Oh well, I guess we're back to the non-starter "we should have an Off Topic section" :(

Update: from one past discussion: Re: An OT section (again).

Elda Taluta; Sarks Sark; Ark Arks
My deviantART gallery

Comment on Re^6: (OT) How can I do unless(caller) { main; } in C using GCC in Windows?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^7: (OT) How can I do unless(caller) { main; } in C using GCC in Windows? by Corion (Patriarch) on Sep 16, 2012 at 08:50 UTC
With a long weekend between my curt reply and coming back to the topic, I think the better approach would've been to consider the node for unapproval instead of just unapproving the node myself. I think that the other off-topic posts are still approved because nobody unapproved them or discussed them. I approved (OT) Listing / Inquiring on MQ Cluster Queues becuase I thought that some interesting discussion of the API of MQSeries and its API/use might follow, which I consider in Perl-land. I don't see how asking a question about gcc can lead back to Perl, which is why that question does not belong in any section on this site IMO. Again, I think I shouldn't have unapproved it directly, but waited for the voting.	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^7: (OT) How can I do unless(caller) { main; } in C using GCC in Windows?
by Corion (Patriarch) on Sep 16, 2012 at 08:50 UTC

With a long weekend between my curt reply and coming back to the topic, I think the better approach would've been to consider the node for unapproval instead of just unapproving the node myself.

I think that the other off-topic posts are still approved because nobody unapproved them or discussed them. I approved (OT) Listing / Inquiring on MQ Cluster Queues becuase I thought that some interesting discussion of the API of MQSeries and its API/use might follow, which I consider in Perl-land. I don't see how asking a question about gcc can lead back to Perl, which is why that question does not belong in any section on this site IMO. Again, I think I shouldn't have unapproved it directly, but waited for the voting.

[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom