20 Dec
2005
20 Dec
'05
6:26 p.m.
It was thus said that the Great Tony Duell once stated:
Then you must be a better programmer than I, to be able to tell if a
program has such a weird bug just by visual inspection. Can I hire you do
debug some PHP code? We have tons of it ...
Now, did you *bother* to read the spec? Did you bother to write a program
that will read .IMD files? I did. Perhaps an hour or two (didn't keep
track of time) and I now have a program that will read .IMD files---at
least the ones I found on the net so far. And no surprises.
Sheesh!
So two questions Tony:
1. Do you have the source code to every operating system for every
computer you own? I also know you have PCs, so what in the world
did you do prior to Linux? Refuse to use MS|PC-DOS?
2. (might as well ask, as long as I'm asking) I know you dislike
the whole "board swap" mentality and that you prefer replacing
blown chips over replacing a whole board. But why not repair those
non-functioning chips? I mean, one blown gate and you toss the
*whole* chip? What's with that? [2]
-spc (And you actually trust chips to do what they say?)
[1] Not my footnote
[2] Or in other words---the "components" in today's computers are bigger
than yesterday's computers. Right now, the "components" are
boards/cards and I can certainly see it being whole computers
in the not so distant future.
The format is said to be HEAVILY documented.
His program was one way to access the format, the format itself was the true
value in his work!
And that format was what he readily gave away for free!
Without seeing the source code to Imagedisk, how do I know that it
actually follows that spec. I will assume Dave is not so malicious as to
XOR the sector data with pseudorandom bit stream or anything stupid [1]
but how do I know that there isn't a bug in the progrma that causes it to
fail if there are more than 27 sectors/track or something?