Board index » cppbuilder » Re: News on C++ Open letters

2003-09-21 09:07:09 AM
cppbuilder45
This is very true Ed. The only reason I typically bottom-post now is
because my newsreader does that automatically. I don't like it though.
If that S. Hambridge fella can write a web page dictating that
bottom-posting is the "correct" way, can I write a web page dictating that
people who are too lazy to type a complete word receive electro-shock
therapy via their keyboards?
Every time I read a post from someone that says something like:
"ur not rite. u should b using the -x switch 4 creating x-pform stuff"
I have an overwhelming urge to scream.
I never knew that I was so picky about spelling until I started{*word*154}
out on various newsgroups.
On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 15:40:56 -0400, Ed Mulroy [TeamB] wrote:

Ed Mulroy [TeamB] wrote:
 

Benny Hill wrote:
Unless there are many points to address; then proximity of
statement/reply makes it easier to follow. There are mail-lists that
enforce the RFC.
 

{smallsort}

What's stopping
Ed Mulroy [TeamB] wrote:
 

David B. Held wrote:
in annoying little ways with existing software so that their own latest
version of office will always work better than the competition. And of
course they do not release enough of the details of what they do for
other vendors to keep pace.
Get at least a few large corporate users to upgrade to a new version of
office (usually by convincing them to buy a site license subscription so
they will always be using the most recent).
Make sure that the new file format cannot be opened by any previous
versions.
Now to do business with these corporations, all of their customers have
to upgrade, etc....
And of course if you upgrade one m$ app, all of the other m$ apps on
your computer will no longer get along with it, so...
Ever wonder why mr bill has all of the toys?
- Leo
 

M wrote:
downloaded at this time are a good indication of what CBX will
eventually deliver. Which doesn't mean I won't download it to play with
while waiting for CBX...
- Leo
 

M wrote:
post to which you had replied *as well as* the text it quoted from two
earlier posts.
Your quote was not from the guidelines for this newsgroup, which is not
a part of usenet, but a Borland server. From the etiquette guidelines
which are posted at info.borland.com/newsgroups/netiquette.html:
1. Keep quoted text to a minimum. When quoting a previous post, edit
out the non-relevant parts of the message. Remove salutations and
signatures. A good rule of thumb is, there should not be more
quoted text than new text.
The reason for my short reply was that when I displayed your message all
I could see of what you wrote was the first line complaining about
top-posters. Personally, I am much more bothered by the combination of
over-quoting with bottom-posting than I am by top-posting. In fact I
never read beyond the first line of your message. With this group as
active as it's been the past few days, I don't have the time to search
for the meat of each message, especially if it is below the bottom of
the screen.
Please do check out the guidelines at
info.borland.com/newsgroups/guide.html
I do wish that these were somehow posted on the news server itself as
more people might see them.
- Leo
 

Leo Siefert wrote:
I'd take it, then features) and some that cannot. Once you twiddle
around w/ it a bit you'll see just how big of a step backwards it is in
terms of usability from the perspective of the developer. OTOH tho it is
a giant step forward in terms of portability. Back when, I almost went
for it, but Windblowz owns the desktop market, so portability wasn't a
big issue for me. In the end I might waste time/money on character
encoding issues, endianess, OSisms, library bugs and the like to not
make it worthwhile to get another 2% of 'market'.
 

Why would I want to?
Anyone who has to scroll down through the 100's of lines quoted from
messages they have already read to see the reply at the end knows why the
quoting should both be trimmed and placed at the bottom. It is common
sense. Someone who cannot see that and then know on his own how things
should be and has to read an rfc learn it is probably not part of an
audience for whom one would want to write.
. Ed

You have hit on a valid reason for what here is viewed as over-quoting. Non
threaded environments demand you trim much less.
. Ed

. Ed

Leo Siefert wrote:
relevance. I follow the rules (see my other posts). My rule of thumb is
that if someone uses Google they should NOT to have to drill around in
the thread to see what my reply was to, rather, the quoted text and the
reply should be able to stand as one unit. How crummy would it be to
find the answer (supposedly), then spend 2 minutes to find out it's in
reference to a version of <insert OS/compiler/whatnot here>from 5 years
ago? I run into it all the time... that wastes much more time than
anything else.
Bottom posting makes more sense to me because it follows a
'question-answer' format. Unless you're really into Jeopardy :)
 

"Ed Mulroy [TeamB]" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
If I didn't need to re-read it to understand your followup comments,
then it should have been trimmed out. If it wasn't trimmed out, then I
want to read it before I read your response, in order to give context.
There's absolutely no point to including any of the previous post at the
end of your message. Once I'm done reading yours, if I want to go back
and read more of the original, I can go do that myself.
The purpose of quoting is to help refresh my memory, so I can think, "Oh
yeah, that's what that guy was talking about." Why would I want my
memory refreshed after you've finished with what you want to say? Do
you have conversations like this ...
FRED: Ed, can you call Sue and find out how when she needs that project
report?
[2 hours later]
ED: Thursday.
FRED: What?
ED: That's when Sue needs the project report.
I don't. It's backwards and needlessly confusing.
--
Gillmer J. Derge (TeamB)
 

comunity members. You don't know, how i hate this question.
But, David, you now give THE answer to it:
Thanx, David, for your wise words.
EH :-)
 

EH....I couldn't agree with you more, and if anyone is in the United States
or Canada, you can always contact your regional Technical Sales folks and
have them forward your concerns to their management up the chain. I did,
from Florida, it's being sent up the chain. All this "Waffling" ( I hate to
use a Doonesbury-ism here ) is frankly giving me all indication that we
SHOULD assume that Borland is in no way truly preparing a BCB7 product.
Remy and I exchanged "points of view" regarding this issue, he copying posts
by J LeBlanc VP of C++ products , and myself interpreting the phrases:
"support" chained by a "/" pretty much well says something akin to:
"We might have tools to help you move your VCL/CLX based applications to the
CBX architecture"
and
"We might continue to supply updates to C++Builder 6 Studio/Kylix 3"
There's NOTHING committal about EITHER of those two statements...nothing..
In the absence of something definitive, the reader is left to speculate the
subjective. And those first two quoted sentences are SUBJECTIVE.
I remember a few months ago when LeBlanc sent out that 'open call' for
developers to request inclusion in the "beta experience" for the forthcoming
C++ product. Now I realize why someone like myself who's invested a lot in
VCL-based tech might not have been chosen. I wasn't the TARGET AUDIENCE. I
enjoin someone from borland to publish statistics that say how many
developers that were admitted to the early experience ( prior to the
announcement of C++BuilderX, on 9/15/2003 ) were VCL-inclined developers,
how many were CLX-inclined developers, and how many were otherwise. I bet
you those number won't be published.
So what we're left is, a void. No, let me rephrase that a "void const *".
Something constant pointing to something of "kind of" nothing. Well, we can
actually be pretty sure that it's not "kind of" nothing....it's nothing.
Marcelo
"EH" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message news: XXXX@XXXXX.COM ...