Linux-Advocacy Digest #41, Volume #28 Thu, 27 Jul 00 20:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious.... ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious.... ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: I had a reality check today :( ("John W. Stevens")
Re: I had a reality check today :( ("John W. Stevens")
Re: Advocacy and Programmers... (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: I had a reality check today :( (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: I had a reality check today :( ("John W. Stevens")
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious....
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 19:48:53 -0400
Drestin Black wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
> > >
> > > Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >
> > > : abraxas wrote:
> > > : >
> > > : > In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > : >
> > > : > >
> > > : > > I NEVER claimed to be a "Soooooper" or super programmer. I claim
> and am a
> > > : > > programmer. I think a good one but not a "great" one.
> > > : >
> > > : > You're kidding yourself. You're a horrible web designer to boot,
> and ANYBODY
> > > : > can do THAT shit.
> > > : >
> > > : > -----yttrx
> > >
> > > : Drestin reminds me of the kind of guy who has changed his own oil
> > > : and air filters for the last 20 years, and fancies himself to be
> > > : an ASE Certified Master Mechanic.
> > >
> > > You remind me of the kind of guy who has used a computer for a number of
> > > years, and fancies himself to be an expert on every single system in
> > > existence. Sort of like a Derek Currie clone, with one or two
> braincells
> > > missing.
> >
> > Wrong. I've never used VMS, so I don't comment on it.
> > I used IBM-370 VM/CMS only as a novice, so I'm not very familiar
> > with it. Thus, I comment only rarely about it.
>
> yawn..
>
> >
> > >
> > > Exactly why should I beleive that you have more skill and knowhow than
> > > Drestin does?
> >
> > I majored in Computer Systems Engineering at Purdue University, one of
> > the 10 best institutions on the entire PLANET for learning this
> > discipline.
>
> so, big deal. so you are a paper student. yipee!! maybe one day you'll even
When was the last time you wrote a multi-user multi-tasking kernal?
> get an MSCE (but I doubt it) And Purdue is hardly top 10 for this
> "discipline" (unless you mean being an arrogent butthead).
Really. When I was in Saudi Arabia, the Saudi officer were quite
fascinated that I was only an enlisted man despite being a student
at world-class engineering school.
When I have travelled in Russia, engineers I met were all very well
aware of Purdue...and in England, and Norway.
> The best programmers I know never graduated college, it was too
> slow/out-dated for them.
1) unlike you, they at least attended college.
2) At world class institutions (like UC Berkely, MIT, Purdue, etc.)
you are IN THE MIDST of the cutting edge stuff.
I was desiging VLSI circuit chips as an undergrad.
Have you ever designed a circuit, let alone a chip?
>
> >
> >
> > > Drestin makes no qualms about qualifying what he says
> with
> > > evidence, or at least a reference. You just voice your own opinions,
> and
> > > present them as facts.
> >
> > Drestin's evidence usually falls far short of what he alleges.
>
> Bullshit and you know it. I document my claims, unlike you mr. 20 total at
> GM.
20 total what at GM???
>
> >
> > Witness his claim that Stratus's 99.999% uptime on HP-UX
> > somehow included W2K as well.
>
> it does, factually. Pick up the telephone and call them and ask them point
> blank and you'll have your answer. E-mail them and you'll have your answer.
> Order one and you'll have your solution.
Show me where Stratus has specifically claimed that they guarantee
99.999% uptime on Lose2K, a product that hasn't even been around long
enough to make such an evaluation.
>
> <snip> >
> > > I'd hire Drestin for development work over you in a NY minute, Aaron.
> >
> > This is why you fail.
>
> I hardly think Stephen is "failing" but it's something you would be familiar
> with, HOW many jobs in how many years? People don't like to keep you around
> very long do they?
Wrong. They can't afford to keep me around.
Supervisor: Well, the department raise is 4% this year.
Me: Well, I just got an offer for $20,000 more. BYEEEEEEEEEE!
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious....
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 19:50:58 -0400
Drestin Black wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
> > >
> > > Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >
> > > : John Hall wrote:
> > > : >
> > > : > "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > : > news:LlId5.36590$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > : >
> > > : > > > No, I mean it's a simple language, good for simple jobs. Not for
> large
> > > : > > scale
> > > : > > > complex jobs, or jobs with specific hardware interface
> requirements.
> > > : > > >
> > > : > >
> > > : > >
> > > : > > Can you be more specific? In what way is VB failing on a large
> scale that
> > > : > is
> > > : > > not revealed to us "little scale" programmers who are having no
> trouble
> > > : > > using VB for most anything.
> > > : >
> > > : > VB has very poor error handling (well certainly the versions I've
> used) -
> > > : > it makes it very difficult to write large-scale, robust
> applciations.
> > > : >
> > >
> > > : The problem is fools like DB who have a trade-school education,
> > > : yet think they're in posession of PhD level knowledge.
> > >
> > > The problem is also often people who think that simply because they are
> > > experts on one platform, assume that they are experts on others...
> >
> > You write as if you think having proficiency in Unix precludes
> > gathering substantial knowledge about windows.
> >
> > Hint fucking it: it doesn't.
>
> "Hint fucking it" - you good writes english too
>
> And, I never made that poor assumption - unlike you which wants to believe
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Yeah, right. What was it you said in your back-pedalling over your
utter failure to properly writhe the big-endian/little-endian conversion
routine...something...oh yes, "I made a bad assumption"
do you deny this.
fucking lying weasel.
> that someone who can say the words necessarily knows what they mean. Or that
> being a C programmers makes you automatically a good programmer (or a VB
> programmer makes you a bad programmer). In fact, ALL your ASSumptions you
> make only make you an ignorant ass who'll never learn... and probaly
> doesn'teven think he needs to.
The ass you should worry about is the one that currently engulfs your
head.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "John W. Stevens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I had a reality check today :(
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 17:54:59 -0600
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "John W. Stevens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > And in spite of the spin, irrelevant. The original contention was re:
> > rebooting, not temporarily freezing the kernel.
>
> freezing the kernel for minutes is no better than rebooting.
At worst, the freeze, even if the operations were performed by hand,
would be less than 30 seconds.
Even if the freeze lasted two minutes, that is still preferable to
rebooting, as processes would not need to be restarted, no work would be
lost, etc.
> The question was not about "most" production systems. It was about
> production systems. Let's see you stop the machine on a typical Oracle
> database server in a data warehousing context that gets thousands of
> transactions a second.
You can. For the (at most) thirty seconds that it takes to do this,
transactions will not occur. That's better than throwing away all
partially completed work, then spending tens of minutes rebooting.
> the actual operations will only take microseconds to complete, the majority
> of your time is spent digging around in the internals.
The time spent "digging around in the internals", does not occur while
the scheduler is stopped.
> > Ah . . . more "discussion by definition" . . . it's not "production",
> > unless it is "real time"?
>
> No, but real-time response is most certainly a constraint in many production
> systems.
"Some", not "many". And those systems do not run either Unix, or NT,
the run real time operating systems.
> > That's just pitiful, Erik.
>
> I work in real-time systems, that's why it's such an important issue for me.
In which case, you don't run either an MS operating system, or Unix, you
run a real time OS.
> And how do you automate this task?
What are you asking for: specifics? Or generalities? The simple answer
is: you write a program.
> > A few seconds, at most, by hand.
>
> Well, considering that you would have to stop the process and go into kernel
> debugging mode,
No. You don't need to stop the process, and "kernel debugging mode"
does not need to stop the process either.
> find the variables using the symbolic information
Which can be done without even firing up a debugger . . .
> and then
> reset them (you'd probably want to double check since if you make a mistake,
> you could hose something really bad).
That last step, even if done by hand, is only a few seconds . . .
thirty, on the outside.
> > PS and TOP don't require recompiling just 'cause you modify the size of
> > a process table.
>
> I didn't say they did.
Yes you did.
> I said the constants in the kernel needed to be
> changed.
If that is what you meant: then why did you bring up the subject of PS
and TOP?
--
If I spoke for HP --- there probably wouldn't BE an HP!
John Stevens
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "John W. Stevens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I had a reality check today :(
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 17:55:42 -0600
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> I said BSD, not FreeBSD.
BSD isn't Unix either, if you want to pendantic.
--
If I spoke for HP --- there probably wouldn't BE an HP!
John Stevens
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: Advocacy and Programmers...
Date: 28 Jul 2000 00:03:47 GMT
On Thu, 27 Jul 2000 14:06:24 -0600, John W. Stevens wrote:
>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>> Hmmm ... if you know awk, sed, shell script and C, you more or less know
>> perl. So how hard it is to learn depends on who you are. Perl is fine as
>> long as you understand its limitations.
>
>Umm . . . no. Perl isn't just about learning the regular expression
>syntax (which has some unique extensions above and beyond what
>grep/awk/sed supply any way). The "line-noise" syntax, while compact,
>is essentially meaningless until relearned after any reasonable (3 to 6
>month) break.
Can be learned or relearned fairly quickly. I agree that it's not
terribly pretty though.
>This "line-noise-style" syntax makes defect rates higher, peer review
>less efficient, and maintenance costs higher.
Depends on what the app does. If it's a large scale application,
probably. But if you're using it as a shell script replacement, well
it's a hell of a lot more robust and maintainable than shell script.
I largely agree withh your post though. The more I use other languages
and the more I program with perl, the more I end up convinced that perl
is OK, but there are other choices that are just better if you
need things like complex data structures, or objects.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: I had a reality check today :(
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 00:06:58 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Erik Funkenbusch
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Wed, 26 Jul 2000 20:29:26 -0500
<53Mf5.2497$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>"John W. Stevens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>> >
>> > Serial ports don't have more than a few hundred feet of distance on them
>at
>> > best.
>>
>> So . . . my telephone really *DOESN'T* connect me to people that are on
>> the other side of the planet?
>
>Of course it does, but you don't want your console hooked up to a modem.
>Anyone can call in, and hack root access then, since console does not have
>login restrictions.
Exactly; this is why Windows is so secure.
Spot The Flaw.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- hint: if it's not the front door...
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 20:04:26 -0400
Drestin Black wrote:
>
> sigh...
>
> bernie... look, forget the fucking endian flip problem.
Translation: Forget about last week where Drestin Adress demonstrated
that he can't program a simple reverse-ordering of bytes.
> I've posted some
> other code, some ASP/VBScript involving ADO on a SQL Server database. That
Plagiarized, no doubt.
> should prove I've done my time programming. I don't need to prove anything
If you've done significant time in "programming", then the simple
task of writing an "endian-flip" program would have been something
you could have accomplished with ease.
Instead...
1) you used STRING FUNCTIONS to perform MATHEMATICAL OPERATIONS
2) you FAILED TO PROPERLY DETERMINE THE WORDSIZE OF THE DATA
3) you gave lame-ass excuses for failing to solve a problem which
is TRIVIAL for any freshman college student midway through the
first semester....and one which is far simpler than problems I
was solving in 1980 when I was a high school sophomore.
And you dare sneer at my university education---fuck, you couldn't
even get into a world class university, let alone survive the
first semester.
> to anyone, I KNOW I know how to program and do it well.
Unless it's a simple task like taking an array of bytes and
reversing the order thereof. Then, he suddenly forgets how to program,
and doesn't do it well at all.
> I'm tired of this
> endless bashing because of a single stupid throwaway problem.
We're RIGHTLY criticizing your utter failure to properly write an
algorithm which (discounting variable declarations) can be
properly implemented in 5 lines.
Not only was your pollution ill-executed, you failed to even
address FUNDAMENTAL ISSUES necessary for proper implementation.
To be a good programmer, you must first ask the PROPER QUESTIONS.
You failed, because you didn't even know what questions to ask
yourself before going off half-cocked.
> In your
> scenario, I would simply have never taken a welding class while studying
> electronics. Or if I did, I'd learn how to weld right so I could just get an
> A to pad my GPA. Silly... Endian flip was a horrible example and that's all
> there is to it. sigh...
No. Endian flip was a PERFECT example of showing that you're full of
hot air.
You have no concept of proper program development....as shown
by your use of string functions to do numeric processing.
Calling yourself a programmer is like me claiming to be an astronaut.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 20:05:47 -0400
Drestin Black wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >
> > > >ASCII (0) is also known as "NULL"
> > >
> > > >Are you alleging that Visual Basic uses some other ascii value as
> > > >a string terminator?????????
> > > [...]
> > > >I can program in any of 15 different languages, whereas you are
> > > >restricted to...gag...visual basic.
> > >
> > > You'd think that someone who knows how to program in 15 programming
> > > languages would be familiar with the way Pascal (and many others)
> > > handle strings...
> >
> > Oh yeah, I forgot. Pascal is fixed-length.
>
> Oh yea, you forgot - pascal is not fixed length
Nicklaus Wirth's definition disagrees.
and since his definition is THE DEFINITION, you are wrong.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "John W. Stevens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I had a reality check today :(
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:04:31 -0600
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "John W. Stevens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > Wrong again. Ever heard of Xenix? Written by Microsoft in the early
> 80's?
> >
> > Xenix == Unix for the purposes of this discussion. MS == Windows.
> > Which you knew, of course.
>
> No. He was talking about Microsoft itself, not Windows in particular.
No, he was using MS as a short hand for Windows. Check your context.
> > > Ever heard of OS/2, written by Microsoft in the late 80's?
> >
> > OS/2 was co-written. MS did not write OS/2 all by it's self.
>
> No, but it certainly wrote most of it (pre 2.0)
References, please?
> > > Ever heard of Windows NT, released by MS in 1993 (which did both
> > > multi-processors and multitasking)?
> >
> > But didn't do multi-processing.
>
> Even by your definition it did. It had multiple processes. Hell, the DOS
> compatibility box alone would meet that definition.
But by your definition of multi-processing, NT did not do
multi-processing in 1993.
In short: in 1993, NT did not do SMP.
> Some. For instance, changing your video driver requires a reboot,
Not neccesarily. If the video driver is a module, changing it does not
require a reboot.
> > So, is that your fall back position? When you are proven wrong, you
> > simply refuse to admit it, by implying that Aaron is lying?
>
> No, I'm saying that Aaron's concept of "production" is severely limited.
And yours is over restrictive?
> > There goes your credibility . . .
>
> Aaron's credibility left in his first message, in which every statement he
> made was wrong.
Except that not every statement he made was wrong.
> > Considering what Aaron meant by "full multi-user capabilities", he was
> > correct.
>
> And, as I pointed out. Windows 2000 has full multiuser capabilities, even
> considering what he meant.
For his point of discussion, which wasn't W2K, he was correct.
>
> > > Again, no answer.
> >
> > Neither GCC nor GDB run on NT.
>
> Tell that to Cygnus.
They, themselves, point out that the GNU tools run on their POSIX
compatibility layer.
> > They run on a POSIX compatibility layer . . . in essence, they don't run
> > on NT.
>
> They most certainly do run on NT. That's like saying Windows doesn't run on
> NT because Win32 isn't the native API either.
No, it's not like that at all. If you create a gasoline powered car,
then I come along and add a refinery to it, and an oil tank . . . your
car doesn't suddenly start running on oil.
Your contention is like saying that all Windows programs run on the Mac.
> > X + WM + GUI Apps == a GUI.
>
> No, the subsystem which provides the Graphical services is the GUI.
No, a GUI means: "graphical user interface", not "graphical services".
If that was what was meant, the acronym would be GS, not GUI.
> > By definition, of *COURSE* they were doing it first! DirectX is a MS
> > product. However, the engineering pattern that DirectX is but a single
> > implementation of, was implemented in Unix X servers before Windows
> > added DirectX.
>
> Really? Since when were Unix X servers providing direct frame buffer access
> to X apps?
So, is that all you think DirectX is . . . a great, gaping hole ripped
out of the security layers surrounding the hardware?
--
If I spoke for HP --- there probably wouldn't BE an HP!
John Stevens
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 20:06:24 -0400
Drestin Black wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Drestin Black wrote:
> > >
> > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Drestin Black wrote:
> > > > > Also, let's see YOU write a BASIC function that performs endianflip
> on
> > > any
> > > > > sized number.... hmmmm? You claim to be a programmer, this should be
> > > simple,
> > > > > especially in BASIC which you seem to think is for the brain dead.
> So
> > > show
> > > > > us you are not brain dead and lets see your version of this
> function?
> > > Please
> > > > > try not to copy from the web search you are doing now...
> > > >
> > > > Hmmmmm, haven't written anything in BASIC since 1984,
> > > > but I'll give it a try:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The following code should run on ANY dialect of BASIC
> > > > Append appropriate subroutine/function header lines as needed
> > > > for modern implementations of BASIC.
> > > >
> > > > Rem I - input number
> > > > Rem F - endian-flipped number
> > > > Rem S - Size of word, in bytes
> > > > Rem assumption: bitwise operators like "AND" and bit-shifts
> > > > are unavailable
> > > > Rem Storage protocol value 0x12345678
> > > > Rem Little Endian Big Endian
> > > > Rem Example (Vax, Motorola 68x00) Example: IBM mainframes
> > > > Rem Location
> > > > REm M 1 8
> > > > Rem M+1 2 7
> > > > Rem M+2 3 6
> > > > Rem M+3 4 5
> > > > Rem M+4 5 4
> > > > Rem M+5 6 3
> > > > Rem M+6 7 2
> > > > Rem M+7 8 1
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > int I
> > > > int F
> > > > int S
> > > > int N
> >
> > Corrections:
> >
> > INTEGER I
> > INTEGER F
> > INTEGER S
> > INTEGER N ; Rem THERE, is that better?
>
> Nope. Still wrong.
Go get an Apple ][ and get back to me, asshole.
>
> >
> > > >
> > > > F=0
> > > >
> > > > for N = 1 to S) ; Rem Process 1 byte at a time
> > > > F = (F*256) + (I MODULO 256) ; Rem Get low-order 8 bits
> > > > I = I / 256 ; Rem right shift 8
> > > > next N
> > > >
> > > > return
> > > >
> > >
> > > welll guess what Aaraon - you couldn't be more wrong. I don't think
> there
> > > are barely 10 lines in that code that would eactually execute.
> >
> > CORRECT, the whole algorithm is 5 lines long.
>
> Nope, guess what - it still wont wrong. Syntax errors and logic errors
> exist. You'll never find them.
>
> >
> >
> >
> > > you dont
> know
> >
> >
> > Did I, or did I not say that I have not used BASIC in 17 years.
> > Go get a 1980's Apple ][ or ][+ and try it.
>
> and did any excuse cut it for me re: endian flip when I threw out a quick
> solutions? Think not and therefore none of yours apply either. You can't
> program worth shit.
>
> >
> >
> > > shit about basic let alone any programming at all. your application is
> not
> >
> > You didn't specify which dialect of BASIC. Therefore, I used
> > the one I know.
>
> Bullshit, it won't run on an Apple and I've got a ][ original, with "SW"
> crudely eteched on it still wrapped in a very tightly sealed half-dozen or
> so plastic bags, to prove it.
>
> again - you prove it clearly, you don't know what you are spuing about...
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
