Subj : Re: Polling - Still not a solution
To   : rick christian
From : Tony Langdon
Date : Thu Oct 27 2016 08:11 am

-=> rick christian wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

 rc> Same here.. All I want is the program. I don't care what or how its
 rc> written, in 99.99% of cases.

 rc> And in the other 0.01% I probably wrote it, so I know what it does...
 rc> ie: My program which deals with some WX info.

Yep understand.

 TL> The most I ever have to
 TL> fiddle
 TL> with normally is a Makefile,

 rc> Did you get this from documentation, or you KNEW what to change...

 rc> Well in my case I would NOT KNOW what to change.. I don't touch those
 rc> files... gawd only knows what will happen.. start spewing crap to disk
 rc> till its full, erase data, or what ever... NOPE.. J'ne touche pas!

Like you, I rely on the documentation - usually the README or INSTALL text file
that's often included. :)

 rc> Even if I found it in an echo/ml/ng/forum...nope....

 rc> Why? When you learn that mistakes can cost lives, you learn that risk
 rc> =0% in my line of work risk is at least on my end is not allowed. Those
 rc>  in the field are put at risk in a lot of situations, for which my
 rc> systems must be risk free to ensure they are safe.

In my world, risk is unavoidable.  Monitoring situations and making sound risk
assessments is the key to saving lives - knowing when to play it safe and when
you can go beyond being "safe" to achieve a better outcome, as well as having
safe fallbacks when the risk level gets high.

 TL> except for one application, where I do have to
 TL> edit one of the C header files to change a definition to suit my setup.
 TL> C/C++

 rc> Again, how did YOU know that with out:

 rc> 1) BEING TOLD

Again, it was in the docs. 

 rc> 2) Knowledge of C/C++

 rc> I don't do C/C++ I never have, and never will.. Personally I think..
 rc> never mind..

I don't have the time to start a new language from scratch these days.

 TL> was never my language. Pascal was more my thing back in the day, and is
 rc> now
 TL> the language I'm intending to relearn.

 rc> PASCAL was what I went to after BASIC, but having done so much in
 rc> assembler for a PDP8e, 6502/6510 based early PC's and then 68HC11.... I
 rc> basically got assignment from class, turned in source and compiled
 rc> program, collect my A, and go on.

 rc> I can probably still dig out the COBOL and FORTRAN stuff for the PDP
 rc> too! :)

Never touched COBOL.  I did do a little Fortran at uni, quite enjoyed that
language, and liked its depth of inbuilt mathematical/scientific operations. 
The only lanuage I never had to create a complex number type or functions and
procedures to manipulate them.  


 TL> I haven't tried compiling Husky or

 rc> I would strongly suggest that you review the thread in the husky echo
 rc> on compiling it...

Sounds like a good idea.

 rc> There are very specific libs both system and parts of husky, and steps
 rc> which need to be followed... tldr; is 2 husky parts need to be done
 rc> before doing any of the actual programs like tosser etc...which are NOT
 rc> listed in the documentation, at least for one, and the steps listed in
 rc> the documentation are out of order according to the thread too.

Sounds like someone needs to gather all that information and use it as the
basis to improve the documentation for Husky.  Someone who's been through it
all and is good with written communication would be an ideal person.


.... Elvis has left the echo.
--- MultiMail/Win32 v0.49
 * Origin: Freeway BBS - freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)

.