OSDev.org

@Brendan 's words are the most accurate.

See, everyone knows this is not a programming forum.
And you know that some questions are not OS-Dev related.

But we're only beginners, so calm down!
Also, if someone asks a question, then answer it. Not argue about it forever with nothing relating to the question for once (even though some people realized they were doing that and stopped).

Doing that also discourages the beginner. It's like you're pushing someone to "work it out" without any clear explanation on how to do a difficult thing for them. It's not correct attitude.

DixiumOS wrote:Also, if someone asks a question, then answer it.

http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

DixiumOS wrote:Also, if someone asks a question, then answer it.

That's not how it works. You can't demand answers any more than you can demand that people stop posting in a thread. People are free to use the forum in whichever way they choose, as long as they abide by the rules. That some don't abide by the rules regarding required knowledge is unfortunate.

The problem here is that different people have different ideas about the best way to educate someone. Some go for the "explain everything, together with code examples (which gives me a chance to show everyone how very clever I am)." route. Others are happier to go with the "lead people towards the solution by suggesting how they can approach and research the problem" (the old "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for life") approach. Unfortunately, some interpret this as “Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.”

Much of the approach to posters is based on their previous behaviour. If you ignore advice, state that you can't be bothered to read documentation, post disruptive nonsense, and decorate your posts with huge images then it is likely that many people will take the "warm for the rest of your life" approach. Except for those who feel it is more important to continue to demonstrate how very clever they are.

There are about 5 topics made by the new users on the same question which as to be expected got worse answers with every new topic made.
How do you expect users who had to do a lot of research to get to where they are right now, to react to the 5th topic ?

bauen1 wrote:There are about 5 topics made by the new users on the same question which as to be expected got worse answers with every new topic made.
How do you expect users who had to do a lot of research to get to where they are right now, to react to the 5th topic ?

Shut up and answer the question!

dozniak wrote:Shut up and answer the question!

Shut up and write my OS for me!

zenzizenzicube wrote:

dozniak wrote:Shut up and answer the question!

Shut up and write my OS for me!

Shut up and remake my OS in Assembly for m-

Seriously though, when newcomers ask a question, they mean a bit of code and a lot of documentation. Not a lot of arguing and a lot of arguing.

So read the documentation.

Come back when you've read the Intel programmer's manuals.

Hi,

iansjack wrote:Come back when you've read the Intel programmer's manuals.

At this point, the best advice to give him is to learn C, since he tries to use it.

Giving other advice will only cause confusion.


Regards,
glauxosdever

iansjack wrote:So read the documentation.

Come back when you've read the Intel programmer's manuals.

Now that is silly. There may be other new members reading this and take your irritation as a serious statement. I certainly have not read the whole of the Intel manuals (not even the programming parts)) - and have no intention of doing so.

I read what I need to read. I do not need to read details of the (I believe deprecated) instruction AAD, which I have never ever used and can see no possible circumstance in which I might. And if by some chance I should require BCD calculations the manual will still be there.

And if I dont understand something then I can see no reason why I can't ask about it here before carrying on with the rest of the book. Can you?

MichaelFarthing wrote:And if I dont understand something then I can see no reason why I can't ask about it here before carrying on with the rest of the book. Can you?

I don't really care what the poster in question reads as long as it keeps him occupied. But, to please you, I'll change my advice: go and read Finnegan's Wake.

As for what new members will read on these forums - I think there is a deal more dubious advice nowadays than a suggestion to read documentation relating to the hardware that you are hoping to control.

glauxosdever wrote:Hi,

iansjack wrote:Come back when you've read the Intel programmer's manuals.

At this point, the best advice to give him is to learn C, since he tries to use it.

Giving other advice will only cause confusion.


Regards,
glauxosdever

Assembler is better than C

iansjack wrote:
I don't really care what the poster in question reads as long as it keeps him occupied. But, to please you, I'll change my advice: go and read Finnegan's Wake.

You are surely not seriously suggesting that there are posters on this site that have not already read Finnegan's Wake?

Hi,

bauen1 wrote:Assembler is better than C

That's not my point at all.

If he wants to use C, then he needs to learn C.

Although algorithms and control flow have also to be learned by him.


Regards,
glauxosdever

iansjack wrote:So read the documentation.

Come back when you've read the Intel programmer's manuals.

Except you wouldn't accept that and tell I would be lying, or just don't care that much and keep arguing.