1. RE: Acknowledgement
francis at gmx.co.uk wrote:
[snip]
> This project is now complete, and fully operational
[snip]
> Having downloaded libraries willy nilly, and learnt a lot from them, I
> cannot STAND the fact that literally
> EVERY fucking thing has to be "acknowledged". I find this list bordering
> on the EXTREME of commentory: "-- I
> poked 2 bytes into this memory address - thanks XXXX for the poke2 code"
> or "Thanks you to David Cuny for this
> link_dll routine" or "link c_function routine" when all the routines are
> like basically one liners.
Everything doesn't HAVE to be acknowledged unless it is specified
in any license details.
If a programmer want's to document where they got 1, 2 or 3 lines of
code from I think it is great! I can't imagine that it distracts
from the understanding of the program and most certainly won't have
any detectable effect on running the program.
If you "borrow" a few lines of code from someone else you don't need to
acknowledged them, it's a personal choice. Some choose to, some
don't. I can't see it being a problem either way.
[snip]
> One more thing Euphoria needs:
> A decent socket library. I had all sorts of WSAWOULDBLOCK errors from
> TCP4U, which looked like the only decent
> choice available. But it is completely *synchronous*.
[snip]
I agree with you totally about Euphoria not having a great sockets
library.
Without the work of a few people from the Euphoria community there
would be "NO" sockets libraries available at all!
Euphoria is a real community based language. Everyone seems to enjoy
releasing lots of libraries, examples, full programs, utilities
etc without receiving any payment and often no recognition.
It's a "I'm happy to share as long as others shared" attitude.
Out of interest what have you "shared" with the community?
You will get out what you put in!
Are you planning on releasing your now finished project?
If I was working on a project and was using some freely available
resources I doubt I'd go to those you freely give away their work
and use profanities telling them what to do, how to do it, and what
they should have done or how they have done it.
Ray Smith
http://rays-web.com
2. RE: Acknowledgement
> Euphoria is a real community based language. Everyone seems to enjoy
> releasing lots of libraries, examples, full programs, utilities
> etc without receiving any payment and often no recognition.
> It's a "I'm happy to share as long as others shared" attitude.
>
That's what I was going to say, and I think that's also the reason
people give so much acknowledgement -- because this is a relatively
small community and everyone will see it -- ALL the Euphoria libraries
on in a SINGLE archive, after all. This isn't C.
It is just being polite really. I doubt anyone does it out of a sense
of legal obligation.
I don't see why on earth it would bother you...
3. RE: Acknowledgement
On 26 Sep 2002, at 14:14, Chris Bensler wrote:
>
> BTW, your lucky your post made it to the forum. Usually RDS would filter
> posts with such profanity.
>
Or just plain coarseness...
-- Euler
4. Re: RE: Acknowledgement
- Posted by francis at gmx.co.uk
Sep 26, 2002
If you cannot handle free exchanges of ideas, "courseness", disagreement or
progression, then maybe you should move to a country in which there is
dictatorship
rather than democracy?
>> BTW, your lucky your post made it to the forum. Usually RDS would filter
>> posts with such profanity.
>>
>Or just plain coarseness...
>
>-- Euler
5. Re: RE: Acknowledgement
Euler and I live in such countries.
However, Euler and I also live in countries where we are taught basic manners.
If you are
in the UK, as your email suggests, so were you. I'd suggest you remember such
manners, or
you will find yourself filtered out, either by RDS or by my email client.
Have a day.
Travis Beaty
Mason City, Iowa.
9/26/2002 9:57:03 PM, francis at gmx.co.uk wrote:
>
>If you cannot handle free exchanges of ideas, "courseness", disagreement or
>progression, then maybe you should move to a country in which there is
>dictatorship
>rather than democracy?
>
>>> BTW, your lucky your post made it to the forum. Usually RDS would filter
>>> posts with such profanity.
>>>
>>Or just plain coarseness...
>>
>>-- Euler
>
>
>
>
6. RE: Acknowledgement
Hello Francis,
It appears I have upset and/or angered you somehow for which I can only
offer you an apology.
I was trying to inject a little humour into the discussion so next time I
don't think I'll bother.
Kind regards,
Andy Cranston.
-----Original Message-----
From: francis at gmx.co.uk [mailto:francis at gmx.co.uk]
Sent: 01 October 2002 15:03
To: EUforum
Subject: Re: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Acknowledgement
I endevoured to say two things: of which, sockets libraries, is now
clarified. The only other thing I recollect
via "logs" is that I insisted various methods of acklowedgement are
"extreme". I still think they are
"extreme"; and somehow attacking my person or professional approach does not
deem my argument "invalid" Oh, I
am sorry. On a personal note to you both, check out the wider programming
community in general and you will
find it is divided over my argument. Unfortunatley, I am not a lone voice
but a voice of many. I never said any
of you could not, should not, or did not acklowedge. I only said this was
"extreme". Again, [collective] you
have failed to provide any compelling "argument" to shift my opinion at all.
Whether or not I have friends, and
how many, and how professional I am, should have no dictate on abstract
appraisal; this is ludicrous. I never
actually said I was unwilling to acklowedge others for the "contribution", I
just made point over the
definition of what a "contribution" was.
I remember a past post to this list, in which some person tried to release a
licenced library for int_to_bytes
() definition, in which he/she used allocate()/poke4() and peek4() over the
traditional mathematical method.
Yes, it was faster with that version, and yes many people had a problem with
its "licence". It is all a matter
of "perspective" is it not? The only thing shown to light here, is that my
perspective is different from yours
[plural].
Again, when it comes to "verbal skills", I have chosen my desired career in
computer programming, not an
English Professorship. I have no idea why this is at all relevant to my
point of extremism.
Attacking *me*, not my point, is *my* definition of "unprofessional" -
period. Should, at any point, I be
disallowed to quote "Petzold" for bibliography (it is my right) - Then I
again question your allegiance to your
democratic state (in calculated presumption).
Petzold has published a Book in entirety, which I would be ignorant to not
acknowledge as a source of origin.
In the land of academics you *have* to quote an *original* source - my very
question as to your [plural]
definition of "original". I hardly hold in the same category of "original" a
one line function which calls a
DLL, over a book published by Petzold as it's primary author. This is but
*arrogance* to compare. As a
statement to you both, *THINK* about it.
>Oh, we can, and do, handle such posts.
>
>The first thing I noticed was that the poster was a person with limited
>verbal skills.
>
>Furthermore, he seemed to be unwilling to credit others for their
>contributions. What possible reason could there be for this, unless the
>poster wanted to be able to claim the work as his own?
>
>Those were my first impressions, and first impressions count. Here, the
>worst that can happen is that you might be killfiled. When you
>eventually go looking for a real job, however, things will be
>different.You won't be the only person in the world with a PhD. Given a
>choice between a loud, boorish juvenile and a mature, courteous
>professional, guess which candidate is going to get the job.
>
>Think about it.
>
>Irv
There's a lot of 'you' in this post isn't there Francis? 
By all means share ideas and be thought provoking. If, during your
creative endeavours, you don't want to credit people for their help (either
because you don't have the time or you morally feel it is a bad thing to
do) then fine. No one can force you. But please please please don't
criticise other people for doing so.
Your quote:
"Work in the real world long enough and you will find not all people are
"polite". I am one of these people."
is surpassed only by a guy in a team I worked with last year:
"I don't come to work to make friends."
>He thought he was being "professional" with such an approach. Guess how
many friends he has?
>BTW I love the Petzold quote. After all your ranting about quoting and
crediting people being a waste of time you waste yours by quoting Charles
Petzold. The exact edition and page numbers is a really humourous and
ironic touch - thanks, it tickled me.
>Regards,
>Andy Cranston.
7. RE: Acknowledgement
To Mr Craig:
> and you were worried that you now have to place an
> acknowledgement in all *Euphoria* programs that
> you distribute. That's not the intention. By "programs",
> I mean here any programs that you build using the C source code.
> Programs that you or anyone else writes in Euphoria
> do not require any acknowledgement of RDS.
>
> I'll clarify that for the next release.
No clarification is needed. I read it as you intended. I think from
the replies I recieved that I have the answer I was looking for.
To Pete (with further clarification):
Having been programming as long as I have, I have used (and seen) just
about everything that can be imagined. I have tested (and created)
numerious softwares and ActiveX controls. I would say that up until
now, 90% of the controls / packages I have tested and used are the exact
opposite of what this agreement entails. Which is not a bad thing. I
am so used to using free trial software with nag screens, delays, etc
that, if you purchase the source code, may be modified freely because
you now own the rights to the code, that his agreement threw me for a
loop. I was just making sure that this was simply not a typographical
error. It is obvious from both replys that it was not. Like I said
this is not a bad thing, just wanted to get a clarification on this.
