On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 09:05:40PM +0200, Rudolf Leitgeb wrote:
> If you document a switch, you are basically required to keep that
> functionality around forever. Given that the OpenBSD devs don't like
> these --options all that much, I don't see that happening. Submitting
> a patch won't change t
Some more self-delineation so you know this is neither anonymous, nor
privacy related. Completely formal and real outline of history,
nothing to hide, draft outline follows:
My (father's) personal, technical school, town and factory station
call signs are internationally registered and also recor
It sounds like you'd be a perfect person to submit patches for the
project to improve upon. With someone of your background, I'm
certain they would be of high quality and welcomed.
Unfortunately ideas and complaints aren't constructive, as they
lead to no real change. Ideas and complains WITH pa
Well, let me introduce myself (again). I started personally with
electronics and real computing more than 40 years ago on 6502 around
Digital and Teletype and custom made telecommunications and high power
radio transceiver equipment in an industrial electronics manufacturing
facility for computers
He's due a refund on his OS order.
Prepare the manager, this guy wants to talk to them.
--- Original Message ---
On Monday, September 25th, 2023 at 10:08 PM, Rudolf Leitgeb
wrote:
>
>
> "professional conferences and scientific education" typically
> employ a quite vigorous process
"professional conferences and scientific education" typically
employ a quite vigorous process to vet their speakers. This has
clearly not happened here ...
Regarding "Who do you think you're talking to": this has basically
devolved into a pointless dialog between the two of us, since there
is all
Every one, Every where, All ways, You too. That's what professional
conferences and scientific education is for. Who do you think you're
talking to, the mailing list archive readers of a social club for
knitting for the elderly? That is correct too. Time will and does
demonstrate it perfectly.
Are you trying to teach the OpenBSD devs how to write good software?
Unix software?
Really?
REALLY ?
On Mon, 2023-09-25 at 21:11 +, Eponymous Pseudonym wrote:
> Standardisation, specification and documentation as a starting point
> for software creation is a normal, reliable and mandate
Standardisation, specification and documentation as a starting point
for software creation is a normal, reliable and mandated (formally)
methodology used everywhere from business to scientific, industrial,
medical and military applications. It is not only normal but expected
and even required that
If you document a switch, you are basically required to keep that
functionality around forever. Given that the OpenBSD devs don't like
these --options all that much, I don't see that happening. Submitting
a patch won't change that.
IMHO there's nothing wrong, if software can do more than its
docu
Don't rant that long.
Sometimes, documentation and code get out-of-synch for a lot of reasons.
- trying out stuff and documenting later.
- plain forgetting to update the documentation.
- having some stuff for a transition period, and then killing it.
Your point that stuff that stays around, shou
Right, the obvious point overlooked is.. having to poke in the program
by chance, on hesitation.. to find out discrepancies, as a
confirmation of suspected misalignment between the manual page and the
actual program implementation. At individual user level, each time by
many system operators on t
Apart from the obvious troll, I believe there is a point.
>From time to time, I go to other projects and try to figure out how far
we are from compatibility...
Not documenting compat options means that somebody outside the project
would have to guess at stuff, instead of just reading the manpage
In 5 years, the one true {,g,m}AWK is forked (again) as OpenAWK.. from
GNU awk(1). Undocumented switches are kept for BSD consistency (at
looks). We self-cope with BSD awk(1) in a number of miss-parsed
struggled diffs and give up. Nobody cares. GNU userland is
sup-positioning the BSD. We are o
I really don't give a shit.
Eponymous Pseudonym wrote:
> There is one (old man) in each of you, but "we" see the youth (in you)
> forever.
>
> You know what this is addressing, it's not clouds, but system
> conversion principles. Since it is your project, but NOT your system,
> surprise me wi
There is one (old man) in each of you, but "we" see the youth (in you) forever.
You know what this is addressing, it's not clouds, but system
conversion principles. Since it is your project, but NOT your system,
surprise me with a solution that I or a broader consensus would
propose, on the domai
Old man yells at cloud.
> I'm aware that i'm replying to an obvious troll.
You mean undocumented switches are abuse to the system operators. So,
stop trolling and fix the documentation or remove undocumented
switches. The sooner the better, man/doc support is your skill. Not
smearing, work accordingly!
> Just clarif
I'm aware that i'm replying to an obvious troll.
Just clarifying what's going on here for bystanders
who might feel confused.
> CVSROOT:/cvs
> Module name:src
> Changes by: mill...@cvs.openbsd.org 2023/09/20 10:57:12
>
> Modified files:
> usr.bin/awk: main.c
>
> Log message:
> Su
I don't know how you can tolerate this after all these years.
>From one of the most important contributors to the project.
In one of the most important system utilities and languages.
IT IS DISGUSTING.
FIX IT.
ALL.
Outcome like this:
CVSROOT:/cvs
Module name:src
Changes by: mill...@cvs.op
20 matches
Mail list logo
