Re: Luxasm news
- From: Betov <betov@xxxxxxx>
- Date: 05 May 2005 17:21:46 GMT
Johannes Kroll <j-krollNO-SPAM-BLAH-BLAH@xxxxxx> écrivait news:d5dio9$8jp
$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
> On 05 May 2005 15:35:12 GMT
> Betov <betov@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Johannes Kroll <j-krollNO-SPAM-BLAH-BLAH@xxxxxx> écrivait
>> news:d5d8it$98h$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
>>
>> > You mean if RosAsm crashes the error must be in the user's source
>> > code?
>>
>> No. I mean that, once a tool is considered "pretty
>> stable", whatever that means, when the whole thingie
>> hangs, this is much probably not with a trivial and
>> standard Source, and that, in most case, this will
>> be because of some weird and unregular use of something
>> in the users's Source.
>>
>> The fact that such events help at pointing out real
>> bugs, in the programming tool is not the problem, and
>> is another story. The real problem is that, when
>> implementing out-of-reason securities for the user
>> typings, you put the user's source in danger, because
>> the worst enemy of a source is the programmer himself,
>> and certainaly not the Tool he is using.
>
> I get what you say but the last sentence is really strange. Somehow you
> seem to be "educating" the users to believe "If RosAsm crashes I must
> have done something wrong"...
Does not the experience show that we tend to most often
suspect the Tools, the OS, or anything, more easily than
our own actions?
To make a perenthesis out of the "RosAsm case", let us
consider what happends when "we Hang the OS" with our
developements. In that case, there is no doubt that the
OS _should not hang_ and this simply shows a week point
that we can call a OS bug. There is no doubt, also, that
we are educated - hopefull - to conclude that we also did
"something wrong".
Now, for a Programming Tool like RosAsm, having "touchable
Developpers", Board, and all, the users do not hezitate
to report the occasional hangs, even if they could be
pushed to think "I must have done something wrong"...
Betov.
< http://rosasm.org >
.
- Follow-Ups:
- RosAsm Shouldn't Crash, no matter what Betov says
- From: randyhyde
- RosAsm Shouldn't Crash, no matter what Betov says
- References:
- Luxasm news
- From: \\\\o//annabee
- Re: Luxasm news
- From: Johannes Kroll
- Re: Luxasm news
- From: Betov
- Re: Luxasm news
- From: Johannes Kroll
- Re: Luxasm news
- From: Betov
- Re: Luxasm news
- From: Johannes Kroll
- Luxasm news
- Prev by Date: Re: Gratitude to MASM/FASM/HLA/etc. for doing it right
- Next by Date: Re: Luxasm news
- Previous by thread: Re: Luxasm news
- Next by thread: RosAsm Shouldn't Crash, no matter what Betov says
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|