T i m  wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 15:38:23 +0000, usenet@alienrat.co.uk (Woody)
> wrote:

 
> >Its not all of the schematics, or at least not always but it is half
> > way
> >between the mechanics of what is there, and what the designer
> > intended.
> 
> So would it be closer if the code was fully commented for example?

What is this "fully commented code" of which you speak, and where might
I find some?

    -zoara-


-- 
email: nettid1 at fastmail dot fm

On 2009-11-04 01:22:54 +0000, zoara  said:

> T i m  wrote:
>> On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 15:38:23 +0000, usenet@alienrat.co.uk (Woody)
>> wrote:
> 
> 
>>> Its not all of the schematics, or at least not always but it is half
>>> way
>>> between the mechanics of what is there, and what the designer
>>> intended.
>> 
>> So would it be closer if the code was fully commented for example?
> 
> What is this "fully commented code" of which you speak, and where might
> I find some?

I've got some. It says /* NYI */ and /* Need to fix this */ and 
sometimes is just flat wrong.

-- 
Chris

On 2009-11-04 10:04:58 +0000, peter@cara.demon.co.uk (Peter Ceresole) said:

> John Hill <nemo@erewhon.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> I used to comment quite extensively when writing code, especially in
>> Pascal.
> 
> In that case you are a prince among men. I talked to a chap who worked
> for Unisys. He was once given the job of emulating a Harris system
> (they'd got out of that particular business) which ran the Chicago meat

Golly, I learned Pascal on a Harris 500. Wow, I found an ad for it: 
<http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/harris/brochures/Harris_500_brochure_Jan80.pdf>

-- 


Chris

Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig@flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote:

> I'd thank you not to make personal comments about me here, mostly
> because you're ignorant and so end up being annoyingly rude as well.

Oh, Rowly. I think we may love you really... But only some of the time.
-- 
Peter