Is it time for comp.lang.c.dos?

[Steve Watt]

In article <403:Apr901:26:4290 at stealth.acf.nyu.edu> brnstnd at stealth.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
>X-Original-Subject: Re: TC "system" and "setcolor" questions answered
>In article <W+Q2+T1xds13 at ficc.uu.net> peter at ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes:
>> 	this discussion no longer has any bearing on comp.lang.c.
>IMNSFHO the DOS-specific questions should be separated out in the first
>place, perhaps into comp.lang.c.dos. Anyone like this enough to start a

There already is such a beast!

It is called  COMP.SYS.IBM.PC.PROGRAMMER!!!!!!

But *why* can't we get people to use it????

Sorry about the flame, but I've gotten sick of mailing semi-rude things to
these people...

-- 
Steve Watt
...!claris!wattres!steve		wattres!steve at claris.com also works
If you torture your data long enough, it'll eventually confess.