Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Microsoft - The Evil empire -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: K. M. Strickler who wrote (605)	1/23/1998 10:54:00 AM
From: Pink Minion	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1600

You have made some very good points to be sure. Let's tak a look! I have always believed that it was the programmers job to write and document code so that it could be followed by the programmers that follow. In your world, that sounds great. I still have never found any documentation by other coders worth a hill of beans. I can't understand my own comments much less others. Any programmer can write OO code, and do it in any language they choose. Anybody can compile with an OO language. OO design, however, are two different things. My opinion is that a majority of "OO code" is really structured functions wrapped in a class with inheritence used for sending messages. What bothers me more is that I now have a multitude of people trying to tell me how to write my code! If it is so damn easy, they can do it themselves. Design should be a community thing. If I have to support your code, you should be considerate enough to make it easy for me to support. You must leave your ego at the door for code reviews. All of a sudden there is a hush in the room because many of the 'programmers' that are churned out today are not much more than 'macro-hackers' who write a few macros and paste them in a shell provided by another party, then release the software as some great inovation! Are you talking about code reuse? What a terrible innovation. As for the 2 byte date problem, where were you when 128K Ram was all ther was and storage cost $.30 a bit? I was joking with you. I know why it was done. However, if classic OO principals were applied and an interface was created, this problem would be easier to solve. It is one of the first analogies I use in class. As for the telephone problems, I have done a tour of duty there also. You want to try to write code that will tolerate some jerk knocking out a 2400 pair feeder cable, or try striking your system with lightening once or twice. See how she holds up then! My tour at Bell Northern Research in Canada allowed first hand experience with trying to 'code' around those problems! It may work on paper, but there is nothing like the real world to burn your butt! My, my. Are we talking about the same code? Protel for the DMS-100. What a bunch of bloatware. There are 24 different version of a 50K line feature (Call Fowarding), guess how many times that is cloned? Support is a nightmare. Customers call the switch "Doesn't Make Sense". But since you wrote some of the code, I'm sure you could care less about support. The code has great comments from 1979-82 and then it looks like aliens came and wiped out all comments from 83-89. You know that AT&T was the developer of UNIX, and that is used in the switches today, and you are comfortable with your 100 or maybe 1000 user complex. Try running a complex that has 100,000 on it, and during a 'snow storm' everybody wants to see if it is snowing somewhere? You haven't a clue what a 'real load' is! Are you denying that a DMS-100 load doesn't contains the OS and all the application/features? I worked on the BCS delivery and patching so I think I know. What BCS level were you on? 36 was the last one before they changed the named. Why don't you think I have a clue? I'm always willing to learn. It all comes down to 'NOTHING IS TOO TOUGH FOR THE PERSON THAT DOESN'T HAVE TO DO IT!' Agree with you there. OO is NOT EASY! Mr. B