This forum's view

would be nice if some people will be isolated in a sub-forumm

Forgive me, but I don't like the sound of this. Are you seriously suggesting a sub-forum for "less well-trained" people? That violated the entire spirit of this forum, let alone the fundamental principles of free speech and deliberation. No thanks.

would be nice if some people will be isolated in a sub-forumm

Forgive me, but I don't like the sound of this. Are you seriously suggesting a sub-forum for "less well-trained" people? That violated the entire spirit of this forum, let alone the fundamental principles of free speech and deliberation. No thanks.

Well, now we're cooking.

Visitors have to solve differently hard "quests" and then we can get a rang of corporal, lieutenant, captain, ...

And the higher rank we get on this forum, the more exclusive - and narrow - VIP lounges we may visit. The elite of the elite may manage to climb to a level where no more questions are ever asked. Maybe once a year take a quick peek at the havoc of the lower echelons.

ups.. locked.. not isolated sorry.

Per wrote:
Many users gets locked into a single sub-forum

Was not me who starts with isolated.. *ups*locked users.. this were your words.

.

I just asked for a filter button in thread view for the avaliable families...not more, please.

hopeful

G.K.

No. Per meant "locked" in the sense that they will not have a chance to answer because they won't see the posts. You, on the other hand, clearly referred to physically locking out people. So let's be clear about the facts, please.

The facts, good idea!

Just an architecture filter in thread view!

I wrote
nothing with or from sub-forum
nothing with or from advanced search

So please start another thread (or 2)if you like to talk about sub-forums or advanced search ;)

hopeful

G.K.

Leave it. I think we covered the subject.

Yes, I was talking about the tunnel vision that tends to creep in when people spends too long time limiting themselves (no access-rights locking, but private choices) into a single narrow sub-forum. Especially on a forum implementation where the user really has to switch back and forth between the sub-forum to pick up any new posts. A bit less so with the option to just filter content.

Two important things tends to happen:
- The number of posts every user needs to read gets down. This may be seen as good. But that also represents a loss of invigorating influences from other areas.

- Eacy post gets read by less people, and the number of people who may answer will be fewer. And the probability that a stupid answer will be accepted without comments gets higher. This is a bit similar to emailing answers directly to a requester - no good safety guard to make sure that the blind will not start to lead the blind.

In the end, it is often quite important to pick up influences from other fields just to get everything into perspective.

I think it would be an interesting exercise to analyse a statistically-significant sample of threads, and see how many really were specific to only the stated toolset/architecture.

I suspect that the majority are not at all specific, but quite applicable to other - or all - architectures...

Actaully, you asked for "This forum's view" - and you've got plenty of views from the forum!

:-)

My own estimate - feel free to suggest other percentages:

90% of serial-port problems are probably generic.
70% of CAN questions
80% of uVision questions.
90% of "how do I ..." questions
50% of compiler problems
...

Beginners have a tendancy to start with very narrow and specific questions - but not because the question really is specific to a chip or compiler, but because they base the question on their knowledge instead of basing it on their lack of knowledge.

Instead of presenting a set of known facts and what they have done to get forward, they present a single fact with the assert: "this is wrong" and the question "why".

And most of the really processor-unique questions are so very unique that the number of people who can help may be very small. But remember: A lot of ARM developers have working knowledge of C51 chips, besides their "general" embedded knowledge.

In the end, my post about grading of people was no joke. You could give people scores and filter away noobs. That would make _your_ day nice. But only _if_ you have already spent the time gaining the required rank. You would have to "earn" your right to get a noise-free forum. But such a forum would be totally uninteresting for new Keil customers. They would get here with possibly very relevant questions but not be able to break through the "noob" filter until they have spent time helping real noobs. Obviously, a professional developer with a professional need can't afford the loss of calendar day for such a setup. And real noobs would never be able to break through the filter, so only Keil staff or very, very nice readers would spend the time helping the true noobs.

A separation on architecture on the other hand tends to put separating lines where no (or very weak) lines exists, since the synergy is so very high. The important factor is "embedded", not the marking on the processor.

Sorry, but I'm not a beginner and if I search for one architecture topics I don't waste my time reading the other threads, too less time.

And I know that the register sets from a C166 is completely different than the LPS-set.
So what kind of information is inside a thread with the other architecture?

If you have the time to read all the threads to look where you can help, it's your turn.

I just asked to add filter buttons which I can use, not must use!

.

G.K

I guess it is an issue of motivation. Some people here actually enjoy lending a helping hand, others are strictly looking for answers. I think this forum should primarily serve the first group of people.

And they can't help if there are filter buttons given to that users who like to switch off a MCU-family?

Is it too complex for that guys which think, that they can help, to handle few buttons?
Are you unable to leave buttons unpressed?

Ok, I understand you, thanks.

G.K.