Re: Confusing stack effects


Betov wrote:
"James Daughtry" <mordock32@xxxxxxxxxxx> écrivait
news:1139495671.654975.157650@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:

A rather small portion of software is written for an end user with a
mouse and a screen.

Oh! Yeah? Try to sell one, then.

Ever hear of Oracle? The database engine?
Sure, there are *front ends* to the database, but the database itself
is not a GUI app. And rumor has it that it has sold rather well.
Indeed, there are *lots* of server applications that do not have a user
interface that have sold rather well.


:)

Device drivers for instance.

PEs?

Last time I wrote a device driver (just last year) it was for Windows.
And the executable file was most definitely a PE. See, you learn
something every day.


:)

The end user isn't
even a human being, so a Click&Go interface is nonsensical. Then there
are command line tools that don't have a graphical interface for
flexibility purposes. I can write half a dozen simple

Hey! Just wait learning how to output a String!

IOW, *you* don't know how to write such programs. You've spent so much
time trying to figure out the Win32 API that you are insecure about
your abilities to write other kinds of software, so you make fun of
those who do different things that you do.


:)))))

filters that take
standard input and write to standard output, then pipe them together
and redirect to a file. That's trivial on the command line,

Feel free to write a Pdf about Command-lines toys.

You call this a defense of your argument?
Try explaining why these tools are *not* applications.



:)

but it's
somewhat more difficult to do with half a dozen self contained GUI
programs that are Click&Go.

Oh! "To _Do_", YES. This is exactly what i said above,
and the only real reason why incompetent programmers
mean to promote antiquities, instead of doing something
serious. Tsikkkiiii... Tsikkkiiii... Tsikkkiiii... Still
nothing to say, Annie? Do i have to throw the HLA banana
into your left eye?

What does any of this have to do with your argument that apps must have
a GUI interface? You're calling a filter program an intiquity just
because you don't even have a clue what they are? You're claiming that
filters aren't serious? Back up this assertion. What does Annie have to
do with your claim? Or HLA? You're diving heavily into non-sequitors
here. A clear sign that (1) you've lost the argument and don't what to
admit it, or (2) you don't have a clue what you're talking about.



I write back end software components as part of a larger team. We still
write mostly Click&Go software, but I have no part of that because
other developers write that code and my components simply plug into it.

Where is the Link?

Why does he need one? Do you have a link to all the houses you've
worked on in your life? Why should we believe that you are a retired
carpinter if you can't provide a link to all the work you've done?




Am I incompetent because I'm better at writing the back end than those
who are better trained for and more interested in user interfaces? My
paycheck seems to suggest otherwise. :-)

How much each?

Probably a lot more than you've ever been paid to work on a program :-)


:)

In my opinion it's not all
about Click&Go, especially when you get down to system and hardware
level programming.

This is the OS job.

But OSes aren't GUI apps. Are you saying that OSes aren't serious
programs? That they are antiquities that no serious programmer would
push on people?

Not the _Applications_ job.

Are you saying that the Oracle database is an OS?
What about compilers? Or even assemblers? Your *assembler* isn't a GUI
app. It's a backend to your editor, much like James' code is a back end
to the system he works on. Are you saying that you are incompetent for
working on such a product?

Some are mentaly diseased enough for writing their
own OS. Not me.

You mean, like ReactOS? How nice you are to the people whom you claim
will ignite the "assembly rebirth".


"Let us kill the home-made OS-writers !".

Then where would your "assembly rebirth" be when there are no more
developers for ReactOS?


:)

Betov.

< http://rosasm.org >

PS. Thanks to all for the good laugh time, but i am
really dispited with having annie silent, whereas i
really did my best. Got the flue, Annie?

Troll.
Cheers,
Randy Hyde

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Ease of use (was: Re: Idiot (I know thats redundant) spammer
    ... 'Longhorn' GUI, and while by then there clearly *was* an existing interface ... If you want to talk about editing, the more apt comparison is between ... TECO was wonderful: I ...
    (comp.os.vms)
  • Re: Windows Server Bug?
    ... settings were showing in the GUI for network interfaces, ... network interface configuration GUI. ... list and DNS suffix search order on a given interface runs successfully ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.dns)
  • Re: GUI vs: CLI (was: Shell command in VB6)
    ... >Parsing switches isn't much trouble. ... >> interface to the program and then write a GUI wrapper around it? ... the command line is the command line. ...
    (comp.programming)
  • GUI v. CLI was Re: Starting Perl
    ... the GUI v. CLI Jihaud, a brief refresher course on history. ... Windows noticed that Apple's GUI approach was ... user interface types of problems. ... One True App with a Gagillion command line options. ...
    (perl.beginners)
  • Re: Confusing stack effects
    ... programmer (a real assembly programmer will never call a DLL but only ... use the native int interface to the OS) from this point and click ... is to much damage done by assemblers like RosAsm or not-assemblers ... Well, if so, i had already killed DOS ages ago, ...
    (alt.lang.asm)