Give up, John; just add a -EOF CLI option as requested and let the user guess which one will crash the system, or better yet a checkbox:
"Crash system after loading (Y/N)?" Most ridiculous argument I've read in a long time; why burden an inexperienced user with a choice that he/she might not understand when one of the two options will crash the system? A good program IMO does its job with as little confusion and/or risk for the user as possible, regardless of some irrelevant CS101 "principle." Maybe just mentioning in the documentation that an inappropriate CTL-Z will be stripped and the extension changed if necessary will satisfy the zealots... Sheesh! ----- Original Message ----- From: John R. Hogerhuis To: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2019 2:14 AM Subject: Re: [M100] Weird "bug" with TS-DOS 4.0 (ROM version) "That places the obligation on the wrong party." It's not a legal issue. It's just functionality. Arguing on other turf (FTP, or checksum algorithms, etc) is to totally ignore the issue. But really, you're arguing on the basis of principle that I agree with in principle, but in real life an engineer weighs the issues and can set ANY principle aside. Yes my decision will violate your assumptions in a hypothetical scenario. I guess. That's what I did here, I set a principle aside, because there is zero, or really, negative, value in inloading a character that crashes the machine. The exception to the rule serves the greater good, such as it is with our little hobby. But I make decisions just like this in work, and it is part of what makes me a good engineer. -- John.
