From: Dave (dfisher_at_pophost.com)
Date: 2002-03-07 18:34:47
On Fri, 8 Mar 2002 00:42:28 +1000, John Morrison wrote:
>Hay looks good! No I don't want to reinvent the wheel. :-)
>BUT I would like to move things around a little to allow for future
>expansion/changes.
That sounds great. Tell you what--I'll send you what I have and you can tear
it apart, see where it meshes with your ideas, etc. and see what is useful or
not. I'll send you the source and diagrams today. Right now it is running
code on Linux. As I wrote earlier, I've identified the last two places I need
to change to make it Windows compatible, and will change them, if not this
weekend, then early next week.
>> John--you had started one which touched on some of these aspects in
>> your Requirement Specification document. I think we need to continue with
>work
>> on that, but rigorously add content based on all the voices from
>> this list.
>YES I agree I had planned on doing this BUT got side tracked by LIFE!!! :-(
Yeah, it can be a never ending juggling act. :-( But in my more harried
moments, I take refuge in one of Milne's Winnie-the-Pooh stories. It begins
with a tiny stream, that as it progressed, grows up into a river. And while it
does not sparkle quite as much as it used to, it knew now where it was going.
It would say "There is no hurry. We shall get there some day..."
>> However, your document was in MS Word format. A think a better
>> solution would be something that is a little bit more portable. The first
>thing
>> that comes to mind is TeX/LaTeX. This would have various benefits:
>Sorry I'm so used to interacting with Windows users I forgot. :-(
>I'd rather RTF. It leaves us with "pretty" formatting like
>"Bold/underline/etc" and I think Linux shouldn't' have any trouble with it??
>Or will it ???????
>
>I've NEVER used TeX/LaTeX does it have any advantages over RTF ???
RTF is a good enough text format for now. TeX/LaTeX is a typesetting markup
language. But let's forget I ever mentioned this subject, because it is
overkill at this point, and I think would only be a diversion.
But I do find it much easier to work from *something*, design or otherwise, and
that is what the code I'm working on is doing for me. It is also accomplishing
another thing, which is why I am stubbornly persisting in finishing it until I
can at least move the data from the device from Point A to Point B using OO
methods. Last year I decided to take back up the software development plow
that I had laid down several years before. This is important for folks to know
here since it will give everyone a better idea of where I am coming from. I
spent a lot of time making the transition from C to C++, soaking up
object-oriented methodolgies (btw, Doug, you seem to be a walking OO textbook,
based on what you wrote earlier!), pattern ideas, etc. I loved it; it made a
lot of sense and I could see how it evolved out of our functional decomposition
perspective. But my use of C++ is still fledgling -- capable now -- but
fledgling. It has not been seasoned by use and time. In some ways it has been
like starting a cold engine on a brisk winter morning. And since I am working
independently, I have missed the sharpening interaction with others. Well, I
think that, at least for the latter, that time has come to an end. And while I
am not as sparkly as I once was, I know that we shall all get there.... some
day. :)
>BTW I hate DOING documentation.................doesn't everyone!!!
It's certainly not *my* favorite, but I would be lost without a whiteboard and
drawings. That's probably what we need more than anything right now.
Well... and running code for Jim-M. (duck-and-running... :)
Dave.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 2002-07-27 12:28:39 BST