beth@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (JB) (11/11/85)
[(This file must be converted with Asbestos 4.0)] ******************** FLAME ON: From: peter@graffiti.UUCP (Peter da Silva), Message-ID: <415@graffiti.UUCP>: >> As it is now, the binhex files aren't readable by >> humans, but they *are* usable by all MacIntosh owners (unless you have >> done something funky to your Mac, of course). > >But it's useless to non-macintosh owners who get upset at net.sources.mac >because they see it as a resource drain. That was my original point. Oh my God, you mean there's stuff in net.sources.***MAC*** that are only useful to ***MAC*** users?!?! Well, I say we torch the whole damn group then. Better torch net.math too, cause it has stuff that's only useful to people interested in math. And net.micro.amiga. And net.*. Looks like we can only keep net.announce.newusers and net.general. Great idea, Peter. >> If source is posted, then it is >> usable to only a small percentage of MacIntosh owners, ie, those with that >> particular language. > >True, and the corrolory of my previous point. I'm not arguing for or against >binhexes. I'm arguing for sources. For public relations if nothing else. If >the binhex is posted, it's only usable by a small percentage of programmers >who use that particular language, those who are macintosh owners. :-> And the sources are only directly usable by an ever smaller percentage: those who are Macintosh owners who have a particular compiler. Another great idea. There is no net.binhex.mac (clearly there never should be - it would only be of interest to people with Mac's). If only source was posted, 100% of the people who now get benefit from net.sources.mac would lose benefit from a significant percentage of the postings. But ***MAC*** users should be willing to donate net.sources.***MAC*** to people who don't have ***MACs***, right? Brilliant idea, Peter. >I want the source so I can see about porting it to non-macintosh machines. >If you can't write code that can be easily ported, feel free to hide behind >BINHEX. Writing non-portable code in a high-level language is a sign of >incompetance. I wouldn't want to run code written by an incompetant programmer >under any circumstances. Unfortunately, I have to: I have a "home computer". Well excuuuuse me, you arrogant little twerp. I thought net.sources. ***MAC*** was for ***MAC*** users. I didn't know you Commodore 64 users were interested in calls to the Macintosh toolbox. Want us inconsiderate Mac owners to write every thing in Basic for you too, Peter? Competent programmers only write in Basic anyway, right Peter? BTW Peter, *I'm* not interested in reading postings by incompetAnt spellers. So what do you think we ought to do about incompetAnt spellers who show their incompetAnce in postings to net.micro.mac, especially when they clearly have nothing worthwhile to contribute to people who are interested in Macs? I have an idea: Torch 'em. If you're not interested in Mac stuff, stay the hell out of net.micro.***MAC*** and net.sources.***MAC***, and then the ***MAC*** stuff won't bother you. ******************** FLAME STILL ON, you little twerp. -- --JB (Beth Christy, U. of Chicago, ..!ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!beth) "I once heard the remainder of a colony of ants, which had been partially obliterated by a cow's foot, seriously discussing the intentions of the gods towards their civilization." -- Archy the Cockroach
henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) (11/12/85)
> And the sources are only directly usable by an ever smaller percentage: > those who are Macintosh owners who have a particular compiler. ... But indirectly usable by a much larger community, potentially at least. That was the point. Mac binaries are useless to non-Mac people. > ... I thought net.sources.***MAC*** was for ***MAC*** users... Just how many Mac users are helping to pay for it? > ...If you're not > interested in Mac stuff, stay the hell out of net.micro.***MAC*** and > net.sources.***MAC***, and then the ***MAC*** stuff won't bother you. I read neither group, but whenever I get utzoo's phone bills I am all too fully aware of their existence. Sorry, ignoring it won't make it go away. -- Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology {allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!henry
brad@gcc-milo.ARPA (Brad Parker) (11/14/85)
In article <1316@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP> beth@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (JB) writes: >From: peter@graffiti.UUCP (Peter da Silva), Message-ID: <415@graffiti.UUCP>: >>I want the source so I can see about porting it to non-macintosh machines. >>If you can't write code that can be easily ported, feel free to hide behind >>BINHEX. Writing non-portable code in a high-level language is a sign of >>incompetance.I wouldn't want to run code written by an incompetant programmer >>under any circumstances. Unfortunately, I have to: I have a "home computer". 1. Thanks for an incredible flame. You two should be on TV. 2. I can't believe you made the above statement. I thought everyone hid their non-portable code with BINHEX. Now you've let the secret out of the bag. Please don't tell John Devorak, He just figured out that software has bugs. If you tell him this, he'll start saying we use compilers to hide our bad code. There, I just had to say that. -- J Bradford Parker seismo!harvard!gcc-bill!brad "Syntactic sugar causes cancer of the semicolon." - Alan Perlis
bantz@uiucuxc.CSO.UIUC.EDU (11/19/85)
I don't understand the logic here. If every contribution is to be useful to all or even most users of UNIX, what's the point of having special interest groups at all? If contributions are suspect whenever they might possibly provide any economic benefit to the contributor, then fa.laser-lovers (because it has a lot of traffic from commercial houses and their paid consultants) and fa.arms-d (because a significant portion of the traffic here is lobbying by defense contractors - and not for any $10 voluntary contributions, either!) and net.ai (because a large portion of that groups' news is discussion of/ads for commercial applications, expensive tutorials, and special-use hardware) better go *first*. Incidently, contrary to what some have implied in discussing net.sources.mac "commercial" does not apply to anything that might possibly have (even very small) economic benefit; rather "buying and selling of goods, especially on a large scale..." and "distributed in large quantities for use by industry" according to my dictionary. If any material not directly relevant to UNIX systems per se is objectionable, why on earth aren't you objecting to net.jokes, net.origins (distinct groups for some reason), net.politics, net.suicide,...
mazlack@ernie.BERKELEY.EDU (Lawrence J. &) (11/23/85)
In article <96900019@uiucuxc> bantz@uiucuxc.CSO.UIUC.EDU writes: > >I don't understand the logic here. > >If every contribution is to be useful to all or even most users of UNIX, >what's the point of having special interest groups at all? > >If contributions are suspect whenever they might possibly provide any economic >benefit to the contributor, then fa.laser-lovers (because it has a lot of I think that you are proceding on a false assumption. You seem to believe that it is only non-Mac users who want sources instead of BinHex. You are wrong. I do quite a lot of Lisa/Mac work, and except for utilities and games, I do not want BinHex code. In fact, I rarely look at SOURCES because (a) it is so big and (b) most of it is not useful anyway (because it is in BinHex). The reasons for getting code in source form are: (1) Bug correction (2) Change in environment (memory, periphials, etc.) (3) Improvements (efficiency, friendliness, capabilities) (4) Different compiler - some compilers are better than others for the task at hand (5) To use only some parts of it (6) To learn how to do somethings (For example, multiple windows) Assuming that a program, once written, cannot or should not be improved is fantastically naive. In the real, commercial world, it turns out that most of the coding done on a program is done AFTER it has been released as a product. ...Larry Mazlack
bantz@uiucuxc.CSO.UIUC.EDU (11/26/85)
I was responding to the argument that net.sources.mac be discontinued; I do see the argument for sources in the usual sense rather than the BINHEX'd stuff usually posted. Nevertheless, the BINHEX'd stuff is some- times useful -- more so than postings in several other notesfiles/newsgroups.