C to Java Byte Code

A

Alfred Z. Newmane

Programmer said:
I've been using the "paid-for" version of Agent for many months
now. It's okay, but it has a number of annoying things that have
over those months determined me to seek a better newsreader.

Any suggestions then?
The text editor has some non-Windows weirdnesses I really dislike,
and the folders section is only one level deep--no subfolders.
(That last alone is almost enough to condemn it in my mind.)

Agreed. If you are developing for a certain platform, you should take
note of how things like controls (buttons, menus, checkboxes, etc) and
arangements are commonly used in better programs.

One of the biggest problems I've seen in cross platform applications is
sticking to a certain model that works well on one platform but makes it
harder to use on another.

One of my core programing models is this:

"Keep things simple."

Knowing how to create applications that are both simple /and/ powerful
is a good trait to have in the programming world, but alas, bosses
aren't always as keen :(
It also suffers the unix disease of being to damn configurable.

True, that can be a pain sometimes, although I realy like Linux :)
Actually there is sort of a drowing trend to have an "Advanced or
Simple" mode switch, though sometimes it doesn't seem to come out quite
right.
 
D

Dik T. Winter

> Now this is /NOT/ what this is about. I have no problem with making
> improvements any any existing thing, but making unnecissary changes to
> something that has been vastly accepted for /good reason/, and not just
> merely because it is an accepted norm. It's all for the sake for sane
> news reading, not having to deal with malformed quoting and broken quote
> casscades.

Have you read what I wrote? I use this kind of quoting already about 17
years. Once upon a time it was propagated for good reasons, and so I
started with it in early 1987. So who is changing what? See:
<http://groups.google.nl/[email protected]>
and also see that Google has no problems with it; colour-coding is OK.
Google apparently knows a bit more about quoting than other systems.
The apparent requirement that quotation marks should *not* be preceded
by a space is an arbitrary change from previous practice. (To be
entirely correct, I changed it between 11 November 1986 and 25 April
1987.)
 
D

David Schwartz

Jerry Coffin said:
"Thomas G. Marshall"


This is more than a mere notion: it's a tautology, since C is defined
by the standard.

Anything not prohibited by the C standard is C. Anything not in the
standard is not the C language itself, but it does not follow that it is not
C.

To permit me an analogy, any conversation in English is English.
However, that doesn't mean that the coversation is *about* English.

To argue that anything not explicitly defined in the C standard is not C
is to argue that conversations that aren't about English aren't in English.

Of course, this has no bearing on what is or isn't topical on
comp.lang.c or comp.lang.c++ which are for dicussions of the respective
languages themselves. If we had 'lang.english' it would not follow that
because any discussion in English *is* English, it's therefore topical in
lang.english.

DS
 
T

Thomas G. Marshall

Richard Bos coughed up:
"Thomas G. Marshall"


That is not Dik's fault.

Thoughtless comment. I never said it was. What I said is fully orthogonal
to "who is right" here. Recap:


<full quote>

Well, let me put it a slightly different way:

1. OE is enormously common.
2. More and more OE folks are using OE_QuoteFix
3. OE_QuoteFix does not regard {space}{reply marker}
as part of a reply.

So you're going to be dedicatedly producing posts that are hard to reply to
for a rather large number of people.

</full quote>

This has nothing to do with who or which technique "is right".
 
T

Thomas G. Marshall

David Schwartz coughed up:
Anything not prohibited by the C standard is C. Anything not in
the standard is not the C language itself, but it does not follow
that it is not C.

Yep, IMO as well. Basically I would go further to say that non-STD C is C
by definition. But I'm trying like crazy to not make this /sound/ like a
semantic argument.
 
P

Programmer Dude

Thomas said:
1. OE is enormously common.
2. More and more OE folks are using OE_QuoteFix
3. OE_QuoteFix does not regard {space}{reply marker}
as part of a reply.

So you're going to be dedicatedly producing posts that are hard
to reply to for a rather large number of people.

TS. There is a common sense among the cognoscenti that folks who
use OE get exactly what they deserve.

An even more common sense is that it's absurd to modify ones own
behavior for arguably defective software used by others.
 
P

Programmer Dude

Alfred said:
Now this is /NOT/ what this is about.

[shrug] Smells to me like it is.
I have no problem with making improvements any any existing thing,
but making unnecissary changes to something that has been vastly
accepted for /good reason/,...

But who's to say it's really good reason and not a self-limiting,
fear-of-change, fear-of-growth thing?

Change is good.
...and not just merely because it is an accepted norm.

But I perceive that that's a lot of the real reason behind these
sorts of threads. I've seen them often. Just suggest that it
is inevitable that amUSENET will migrate to HTML and watch the
reactions!
It's all for the sake for sane news reading, not having to deal
with malformed quoting and broken quote casscades.

I think some folks take amUSENET way too seriously. When how other
people write a post starts to actually affect you, it's time to
unplug the network cable and get outside and breath some real air.

Change is good. Variety is good.
 
C

Crom

Programmer said:
Alfred said:
Now this is /NOT/ what this is about.

[shrug] Smells to me like it is.
I have no problem with making improvements any any existing thing,
but making unnecissary changes to something that has been vastly
accepted for /good reason/,...

But who's to say it's really good reason and not a self-limiting,
fear-of-change, fear-of-growth thing?

Change is good.
...and not just merely because it is an accepted norm.

But I perceive that that's a lot of the real reason behind these
sorts of threads. I've seen them often. Just suggest that it
is inevitable that amUSENET will migrate to HTML and watch the
reactions!
It's all for the sake for sane news reading, not having to deal
with malformed quoting and broken quote casscades.

I think some folks take amUSENET way too seriously. When how other
people write a post starts to actually affect you, it's time to
unplug the network cable and get outside and breath some real air.

Change is good. Variety is good.

Even if it completely breaks existing established unwritten standards?
This isn't soem dictatorship telling you what to wear or who to vote
for, or whatever, it's about news readers and something that wasnt'
broken being fixed by morons. So for crying out loud, get off this
stupid loony fringe of yours and join reality please.
 
P

Programmer Dude

Alfred said:
Any suggestions then?

No yet. So far I'm only to the point of realizing I don't like
Agent very much.
Agreed. If you are developing for a certain platform, you should take
note of how things like controls (buttons, menus, checkboxes, etc) and
arangements are commonly used in better programs.

And--as in the case of no sub-folders--the level and operation of
software in general. I mean, how lame do you have to be to fail
to recognize that, gee, sub-folders are pretty much a required
feature for organizing your email.
One of the biggest problems I've seen in cross platform applications is
sticking to a certain model that works well on one platform but makes it
harder to use on another.

Yep. Two words: Lotus Notes. In three decades I've never hated a
piece of so-called software more than I hate Lotus Notes.
One of my core programing models is this:

"Keep things simple."

Yes! And after that, "Keep them usable." I play "user" as much as
I can with my own development (and on the hobby side I *am* the
user! :)... When any feature starts to be a pain to use, it's time
to re-factor the UI.
Knowing how to create applications that are both simple /and/ powerful
is a good trait to have in the programming world, but alas, bosses
aren't always as keen :(

We live in a world where business often adopts the attitude that
unhappy, pissed off customers are fine so long as they are so
unhappy and pissed off they go elsewhere. (And then there's
cable companies who have you by the short and curlies and clearly
could care less what you think.)
True, that can be a pain sometimes, although I realy like Linux :)

Never used Linux, but I was a unix developer for years. Loved it.
Really loved it!

But I'm fine with Windows, too. MS makes some pretty cool software,
and unix really couldn't be a player in the world in which I work
right now.

Bottom line: I have no loyalties to any platform, hard or soft. I
just want stuff that does the job. Windows, unix (and many others)
do, and they're all fine with me! (-:
 
A

Alfred Z. Newmane

Programmer said:
TS. There is a common sense among the cognoscenti that folks who
use OE get exactly what they deserve.

An even more common sense is that it's absurd to modify ones own
behavior for arguably defective software used by others.

Why do I get the feeling you dislike OE more for being a Microsoft
product, than for any lack of any functionality?

I've been using OE, for yeas, OE_QuoteFix is the best thing since sliced
bread for OE. Even without it, OE wasn't /never/ a horrible news reader.
Granted, not the best, but it always got the job done.

As I've mentioned before, does some jobs better than other readers, like
being able to sort "watched" threads at the top, while at the /same
time/ be able to sort by *date*, not many news readers can do this.
Hell, few readers can even sort watched threads stay at top, let alone
also sort by date. and some readers don't even have a "watch thread"
capability.

No offense to you, Programmer Dude, but I feel as though you never
really tried OE (much), if you really had given it a chance, you may or
may not be as much against it as you are now.

It's up to the eye of the beholder, but people who use and like OE are
those who have actually given it a chance and learned to utilize it's
strengths, and minimize it's weaknesses (OE_QuoteFix.)

All in all, it's not so bad a reader as many people like to /say/ it is.

(If it's really missing something, it's the ability to send control
messages other than Cancel Message's.)
 
A

Alfred Z. Newmane

Dik said:
character > ">"

fixers."

But it makes quotations clearer for those not using quote level
color-codes.

Yes, but in helping some, you are making it harder for many others, why
is this so hard to understand?

I also have to disagree that you are helping all the non color coded
readers, in that after a few or so quote levels your text gets horribly
mis wrapped because of that extra space, so it, in fact, gets /harder/
to read in many cases. Even google groups captures this.
 
P

Programmer Dude

Alfred said:
Why do I get the feeling you dislike OE more for being a Microsoft
product, than for any lack of any functionality?

I don't know, since it's completely off the mark. I *like* MS
products quite a bit. I think they make some amazing stuff. OE
just isn't in that group (nor is VSS).
I've been using OE, for yeas, OE_QuoteFix is the best thing since
sliced bread for OE.

I can't imagine using a second piece of software to fix the first.
When I asked Forte about the lack of sub-folders they told me there
was a third party product that provided that functionality.

NO THANKS!!
If your software can't do the job, I'll find some that can.
Even without it, OE wasn't /never/ a horrible news reader.
Granted, not the best, but it always got the job done.

Among folks who know what they're doing, it's probably adequate.
But its defaults are dangerous and the way it deals with "file:"
is egregious.
No offense to you, Programmer Dude, but I feel as though you never
really tried OE (much),...

You are correct.
...if you really had given it a chance, you may or may not be as
much against it as you are now.

[shrug] Could be, but if third party software is required to make
it truly useful, it'd be off my list.

HOWEVER, keep in mind that ALL I SAID was that OE is widely regarded
in poor favor as a software product. And note that I didn't make any
claims for or against OE.

The real substance of my point was that broken behavior of a piece
of softare is a poor reason to modify ones own actions.
It's up to the eye of the beholder, but people who use and like OE
are those who have actually given it a chance and learned to
utilize it's strengths, and minimize it's weaknesses (OE_QuoteFix.)

Or at least don't mind having to take extra effort to make it useable.
I *do* mind that. If it's not useable out of the box, it can stay IN
the box, AFAIC.
All in all, it's not so bad a reader as many people like to /say/
it is.

"Not so bad" seems damning with faint praise.

<GODWIN>
Hitler supposedly liked dogs. Few things in life are ALL bad.
</GODWIN>

Here endith the thread. (-:
 
P

Programmer Dude

Crom said:
Even if it completely breaks existing established unwritten standards?

Heh. "Unwritten standard" is an oxymoron.

And, yes. Even so.
This isn't soem dictatorship telling you what to wear or who to vote
for, or whatever, it's about news readers and something that wasnt'
broken being fixed by morons. So for crying out loud, get off this
stupid loony fringe of yours and join reality please.

Question: With such kind words, how can I deny such a request?
Answer: Pretty easily.
 
A

Alfred Z. Newmane

Programmer said:
I don't know, since it's completely off the mark. I *like* MS
products quite a bit. I think they make some amazing stuff. OE
just isn't in that group (nor is VSS).

I aplogies then. I also conceeded your point about security elsethread.
I can't imagine using a second piece of software to fix the first.
When I asked Forte about the lack of sub-folders they told me there
was a third party product that provided that functionality.

Thats why I asked before if someone news of a good replacement that good
do color coding, sort-by-thread-watching-AND-date.
Among folks who know what they're doing, it's probably adequate.
But its defaults are dangerous and the way it deals with "file:"
is egregious.

Very true.
No offense to you, Programmer Dude, but I feel as though you never
really tried OE (much),...

You are correct.
...if you really had given it a chance, you may or may not be as
much against it as you are now.

[shrug] Could be, but if third party software is required to make
it truly useful, it'd be off my list.
I have to agree with you here too, if you know of a godo replacement,
I'm all ears (and eyes :)
HOWEVER, keep in mind that ALL I SAID was that OE is widely regarded
in poor favor as a software product. And note that I didn't make any
claims for or against OE.

True, I may have jumped the gun a little.
The real substance of my point was that broken behavior of a piece
of softare is a poor reason to modify ones own actions.

True, but some people had made the point that it isn't just OE that
parses quotes i nthat way.
Or at least don't mind having to take extra effort to make it useable.
I *do* mind that. If it's not useable out of the box, it can stay IN
the box, AFAIC.

True, that usually constitutes a defective product.
 
A

Alfred Z. Newmane

Programmer said:
No yet. So far I'm only to the point of realizing I don't like
Agent very much.

Well please feel free to share any solutions you may find. Hell, maybe
one of these days, if I actually get enoug htime, I'll write one!, lol
And--as in the case of no sub-folders--the level and operation of
software in general. I mean, how lame do you have to be to fail
to recognize that, gee, sub-folders are pretty much a required
feature for organizing your email.

Bingo. It's one of those vastly accepted norms that people continue to
request from such applications. It's a shame when some don't listen.
Yep. Two words: Lotus Notes. In three decades I've never hated a
piece of so-called software more than I hate Lotus Notes.

(GAG!!!) Just the thought brings back so many horrible semi-supressed
memories!
Yes! And after that, "Keep them usable." I play "user" as much as
I can with my own development (and on the hobby side I *am* the
user! :)... When any feature starts to be a pain to use, it's time
to re-factor the UI.

Somethings else we seem to share in common then :)
We live in a world where business often adopts the attitude that
unhappy, pissed off customers are fine so long as they are so
unhappy and pissed off they go elsewhere.

Sad but true.
(And then there's cable companies who have you by the short and
curlies and clearly could care less what you think.)

Thats why I switched to sat-tv a couple years ago :)
Never used Linux, but I was a unix developer for years. Loved it.
Really loved it!

Have always loved it for what it was as well. It's a very robust and
stable platform (most of the time) IMHO. trouble is a lot of users,
especially those who were brought up /only/ knowing Windows usually get
scared away at the site of a Unix/Linux console.
But I'm fine with Windows, too. MS makes some pretty cool software,
and unix really couldn't be a player in the world in which I work
right now.

Bottom line: I have no loyalties to any platform, hard or soft. I
just want stuff that does the job. Windows, unix (and many others)
do, and they're all fine with me! (-:

Seems we actually have more in common then first meets the eye (or how
ever the saying goes.)

I do most of my dev on windows, and have always been doing unix/linux
dev more for learning/hobbie sake. I also continue ot experiment in the
Win32 realm as well ,always learning some new trick with the WinAPI and
such. :) I personally love Borland C++ Builder 5. VS.Net has some
merits too, and I'm realatively new to it, but have picked up quite a
bit of the various aspects. I still however prefer BCB for my general
GUI needs.

Though I'm always willing to try new things.
 
P

Programmer Dude

Alfred said:
Thats why I asked before if someone news of a good replacement that
good do color coding, sort-by-thread-watching-AND-date.

Agent--if the little things that annoy me don't annoy you so much--
isn't horrible (yes, I AM damning with faint praise, but you may
not object to its faults as much as I do). It does color code quotes
(one level--colored or not colored) and it does allow some tailoring
of what you see in a group (has watched posts, kept posts).....

No, I take it back. Agent's crap.

Consider this: in the editor, it word wraps what I type just fine,
but completely ignores quoted material. Therefore, I have to
manually re-wrap quotes to fit my line length.

Or, if you double-click a word and then attempt to drag-highlight
other words.... nothing happens. Only the double-clicked word
remains highlighted (what idiot thought of that?!?!).

Or, it's sort of a quasi-MDI application (multiple windows in a big
window), but its behavior is annoyingly non-standard. The part I
hate most is that the "main" window is a three pane deal with your
list of groups, list of articles and current article. But I want
articles in their own window, thank you, AND I want to be able to
have multiple article windows open. But all this piece of crap
will give you is one article window. You can open a second "main"
window, but who needs that?

Or, the only reasonable way to use it (due the three-pane mistake)
is with the main window maxed. Which means getting at any other
window (your outbox, for e.g.) requires going to the Window menu
and opening it there.

And why is my outbox NOT listed with my Inbox and other folders?
Since you have to explicitly go open your outbox, it was weeks before
I noticed that I had a couple messages that never made it out (due
to Agent's "send" command being ^N (send Now)...I just can't get
used to that. ^N is almost universally New.

Or how about the fact that the folder list only provides a count of
UNREAD articles. Not the total in the folder (a far more useful
number to me, although I prefer both).

It's also braindead in its handling of column widths.

I mean, what kind of bad weed were these jokers smoking? They
might be decent programmers in some fashion, but they ain't much
in the user interface design area.

No, don't buy Agent. You'd only come to regret it.
I have to agree with you here too, if you know of a godo replacement,
I'm all ears (and eyes :)

[sigh] I really liked Netscape 3. Simple and fast. Stayed the
heck out of my way, and I like that in a piece of software (also
in other drivers :). I learned to love Netscape 4.7 and would
have stayed with it, but my company only supports IE, so I lost
the ability to get through our corporate firewall.

I think the problem is often featureitus. The idea that an app
needs to have it all. The CuteFTP product *used*to*be* one of
the best FTP apps out there until they ruined it. Each new
"upgrade" made me like it less and less until--trying to jump
through the misbegotten registration hoops--I finally said, the
hell with it and dis-installed it permanently. (And they've
lost me as a customer forever.)

I've seen a number of really decent shareware apps go down that
road. Pity.
True, but some people had made the point that it isn't just
OE that parses quotes i nthat way.

Understood. But you're "talking" to someone who doesn't even
mind top-posting (even prefer it in some circumstances--I tend
to skip posts when all I see on the first screenful is quotes).

HOW a post is formatted is trivial and way below my radar. [shrug]

Now what was it... oh, yeah,... post ^Now
 
A

Al MacHonahey

Thomas G. Marshall said:
Dik T. Winter coughed up:


Well, in any case, I've asked the creator of OE_QuoteFix about this issue.
He'll contact me with /his/ take on it, probably soon.

In any case, Dik's usual (and arguebly broken) quoting IS a problem,
eventually wrapping get horrendous, forcing others to manually repair
it if any readablity is to be restored.

Dik, once and for all, PLEASE fix you QUOTES. over 90% of readers and
parsers will NOT parse " > ..." as a line of quoted text. "> ..." is
_UNIVERSAL_, meaning any parser should not trouble with it, so why
break this universally accepted paradigm? Seems rather absurd and
selfish.
 
A

Al MacHonahey

Dik T. Winter said:
What standard?

The the UseNet univerally accepted way of quoting; Quoting with ">
...." isntead of " > ..." will allow your text to be parsed by
virtually every parser/reader without a hitch. Your quoting, however,
does NOT get parsed as quoted text on a vast majority of
readers/parsers. Why break quoting like this? Please fix them.
 
A

Al MacHonahey

Dik T. Winter said:
My newsreader is a bit more intelligent. I have instructed it to insert
" > " before quotations. But if the quoted text already starts with a
space it will only insert " >".

Thats fine and dandy, sonny, but that ain't the problem. You don't
need the space BEFORE the >, "> ..." is the universal way of quoting
on UseNet. Your quotes don't get ~parsed~AS~QUOTED~TEXT~ on most
parsers/readers. Please fix them. The uiversally accepted UseNet
quoting style is univerally accepted, and has bene for decades,
~FOR~VERY~GOOD~REASONS~. UseNet would of gone to complete insane
quoting hell long ago if not for them.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
473,995
Messages
2,570,236
Members
46,823
Latest member
Nadia88

Latest Threads

Top