werner@aecom.yu.edu (Craig Werner) (07/25/89)
This is vpic version 1.4, if the header is to be beleived. Version
1.6, under the file name VPIC16.ARC, has been available in the Genie
IBM-PC Imaging and Graphics library (I think #14) for some time, and
probably elsewhere even longer.
--
Craig Werner (future MD/PhD, 4.5 years down, 2.5 to go)
werner@aecom.YU.EDU -- Albert Einstein College of Medicine
(1935-14E Eastchester Rd., Bronx NY 10461, 212-931-2517)
"Knowing you, you're probably doing twice as much as is healthy for you."dhesi@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Rahul Dhesi) (07/25/89)
In article <2361@aecom.yu.edu> werner@aecom.yu.edu (Craig Werner) writes: >This is vpic version 1.4, if the header is to be beleived. Version >1.6, under the file name VPIC16.ARC, has been available in the Genie >IBM-PC Imaging and Graphics library (I think #14) for some time, and >probably elsewhere even longer. This is a good time to address the issue of "version x is obsolete, because version x+1 is available." Some programs change more rapidly than others. However, if a program is properly written and tested, each release of it will be of lasting value to the user. It doesn't matter if vpic 1.6 is available. That does not in the least make vpic 1.4 do any less than it did before. Of course, it is possible that version x of a program had bugs, and version x+1 has had those bugs fixed. But a more realistic picture is that version x had some bugs, and those bugs are fixed in version x+1, but version x+1 has some different bugs that will be fixed in version x+2, and so on. (This is often called the Software Lifecycle :-) No program should be submitted to comp.binaries.ibm.pc that is not expected to be useful for at least several months, if not a year or two. I try to weed out the bad ones, or at least document their deficiencies, but I can only test each submission briefly. So, before you all send a program to comp.binaries.ibm.pc, ask yourself: "Will it still be useful 6 months from now?" If the answer is "no," don't send it. Wait for a release that *is* expected to last that long. I don't know where vpic falls on my scale of good versus bad. You tell me. Was vpic 1.4 so bad that it shouldn't have been posted? Or was it good enough to be still useful? -- Rahul Dhesi <dhesi@bsu-cs.bsu.edu> UUCP: ...!{iuvax,pur-ee}!bsu-cs!dhesi