[net.micro.mac] Source VS binhex ...

gwe@cbdkc1.UUCP ( George Erhart x4021 CB 3D288 WDS ) (11/13/85)

[ this line must be converted with a grain of salt! ]

I just noticed a curious thing! A Desk Accessory sampler application
was recently posted to the net on net.sources.mac. The posting contained
full source and a Binhex copy of the final application. The sizes of the 
files are as follows:

    lines words  chars filename
    193    686   4363  Sampler.R  	- source for resource compiler
    443   1706  12687  Sampler.c	- source for Megamax C
    102    105   6303  Sampler.hqx	- BINHEX of final application

The two source files total 17050 characters and the single BINHEX file
totals 6303. I believe that most of you will agree that a binary is
*usually* smaller than all of the source that it takes to produce it.
Just think, if someone had posted the Dungeons Of Doom game as full
source, the game would have taken the better portion of a meg of
bandwidth. Plus, in the case of the DA sampler above, those without
Megamax C can benefit from the posting. 

  I don't think that BINHEXing is the problem, the problem is the
volume of postings is way too high! To solve that problem, I would look
to the use of a moderated group rather than an open forum as we have now.
Personally, I like NSM the way it is now, but if the backbone sites kill
it, I would still like to see a moderated group with perhaps a volume
quota for the # of kbytes per month that could be posted by the moderator.

What do you think?
-- 
George Erhart at AT&T Bell Laboratories Columbus, Ohio 
614-860-4021 {ihnp4,cbosgd}!cbdkc1!gwe

hogan@rosevax.UUCP (Andy Hogan) (11/15/85)

> I just noticed a curious thing! A Desk Accessory sampler application
> was recently posted to the net on net.sources.mac. The posting contained
> full source and a Binhex copy of the final application.  ...
> The two source files total 17050 characters and the single BINHEX file
> totals 6303. [discusses usual relative sizes of binary & source]
> Plus, in the case of the DA sampler above, those without
> Megamax C can benefit from the posting. 
> 
>   I don't think that BINHEXing is the problem, the problem is the
> volume of postings is way too high! To solve that problem, I would look
> to the use of a moderated group rather than an open forum as we have now.
> Personally, I like NSM the way it is now, but if the backbone sites kill
> it, I would still like to see a moderated group with perhaps a volume
> quota for the # of kbytes per month that could be posted by the moderator.
> 
> What do you think?
> -- 
> George Erhart at AT&T Bell Laboratories Columbus, Ohio 

I noticed this also, but George beat me to it.  Thanks to George for the
insight and quick posting, and thanks to the poster of the DA who (a)
should shut up those who claim source is "[almost] never posted in 
sources.mac, (b) provided a useful program AND its source for instruction
and free modification, and (c) provided this illustration of the good
side of posting Binhex'd files (probably unintentionally, but that's
fine!).

That last suggestion of George's makes some sense, with one caveat: the
moderator should have some leeway. The # of kbytes/mo. should be a 
guideline, not a law.  What if he is allowed, say, 1 Mbyte/mo. and 
someone comes out with a super, freeware spreadsheet-and-graphics program
that is 1.1M to transmit?  It would be a shame to not send it because of
an arbitrary limit.  (Of course, we'll all have MegaMacs by then! :-) )

-- 
Andy Hogan   Rosemount, Inc.   Mpls MN
path: ...ihnp4!stolaf!umn-cs!mmm!rosevax!hogan
Working is not a synonym for Quality.