Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #610066 > unrolled thread

Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post.

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-22 21:22 +0000
    Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-12-23 07:54 -0600
      Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post. flatfish+++ <flatfish@linuxmail.org> - 2016-12-23 09:35 -0500
        Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-23 16:21 +0000
          My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2016-12-23 08:52 -0800
            Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-23 19:12 +0000
              Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-12-23 13:27 -0600
                Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-12-23 20:56 +0100
                  Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-12-23 13:32 -0700
                    Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-12-23 22:40 +0100
                      Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-12-23 15:19 -0700
                      My C++ Coding Standards ( apologies to Bjarne Stroustrup ). Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2016-12-23 17:06 -0800
                        Re: My C++ Coding Standards ( apologies to Bjarne Stroustrup ). Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-12-24 10:40 +0100
                  Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post. jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-12-24 14:04 +0000
          I explain each of the warnings I disable, and why. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2017-01-19 03:00 -0800
            Re: I explain each of the warnings I disable, and why. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2017-01-19 12:09 +0100
            Re: I explain each of the warnings I disable, and why. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-01-20 04:29 +0000
              Re: I explain each of the warnings I disable, and why. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-20 06:48 -0600
                Re: I explain each of the warnings I disable, and why. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2017-01-20 16:52 +0100
        It's fucking email ! ! Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2017-01-19 02:53 -0800
      Someday, if you're lucky, you'll know the freedoms I enjoy. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2016-12-23 08:05 -0800
      Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post. GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-12-23 13:49 -0700
    Whitespace and (borked) comments. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2017-01-19 02:24 -0800
      Re: Whitespace and (borked) comments. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2017-01-19 11:30 +0100
        Re: Whitespace and (borked) comments. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-19 07:29 -0600
        Re: Whitespace and (borked) comments. Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-01-19 10:36 -0500
          Re: Whitespace and (borked) comments. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2017-01-19 16:48 +0100
      Re: Whitespace and (borked) comments. GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2017-01-19 11:20 -0700
        Re: Whitespace and (borked) comments. Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2017-01-19 14:49 -0500
      Re: Whitespace and (borked) comments. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-01-20 04:26 +0000
        About a hundred thousand people have used my code, last 24 years. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2017-01-19 20:57 -0800
        Re: Whitespace and (borked) comments. jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2017-01-20 13:39 +0000
          Re: Whitespace and (borked) comments. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2017-01-20 07:46 -0600
            Re: Whitespace and (borked) comments. jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2017-01-21 14:08 +0000
          Re: Whitespace and (borked) comments. Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2017-01-20 22:02 +0000
            Re: Whitespace and (borked) comments. noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2017-01-20 18:31 -0800
            Re: Whitespace and (borked) comments. jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2017-01-21 14:08 +0000
              Re: Whitespace and (borked) comments. Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2017-01-22 17:58 +0000

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#610066 — Re: My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post.

Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> writes:

>I'll tell you ( yet again ) what I told them:

>  My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post;
>  sorry, but it's _not_ like an advert, or comic strip, 
>  with lots of graphics, big fonts, color and WhiteSpace.

>I won the day; I retained control; I get paid -- They lost.

Peer code review works very well here. Sometimes a bug gets
found the original author missed.  The maintainability/
legibility get checked if necessarily, since it is
expected that someday, someone else (perhaps one of them)
may have to maintain it.

"Dense code" is for executable files, the output of compilers
and linkers.  Source code exists for humans as few humans
ever write in the machine language of the target computer,
humans use computer languages.

Again, code for your own use or one-offs that aren't part
of the product can be anything, but professional coders
write with future maintainability in mind.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#610146

Michael Moroney wrote:

> Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> writes:
>
>>I'll tell you ( yet again ) what I told them:
>
>>  My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post;
>>  sorry, but it's _not_ like an advert, or comic strip, 
>>  with lots of graphics, big fonts, color and WhiteSpace.

How ironic, from someone who posts HTML to USENET.

>>I won the day; I retained control; I get paid -- They lost.

You're a sociopath.

>Peer code review works very well here. Sometimes a bug gets
>found the original author missed.  The maintainability/
>legibility get checked if necessarily, since it is
>expected that someday, someone else (perhaps one of them)
>may have to maintain it.
>
>"Dense code" is for executable files, the output of compilers
>and linkers.  Source code exists for humans as few humans
>ever write in the machine language of the target computer,
>humans use computer languages.
>
>Again, code for your own use or one-offs that aren't part
>of the product can be anything, but professional coders
>write with future maintainability in mind.

He's had all this explained before.  You may as well be talking to a
brick wall.

-- 
"I'd estimate 95% of all kernel + GNU + enduser code was written for
free by hobbyists."  -  DumFSck

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#610149

On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 07:54:55 -0600, chrisv wrote:

> Michael Moroney wrote:
> 
>> Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> writes:
>>
>>>I'll tell you ( yet again ) what I told them:
>>
>>>  My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post;
>>>  sorry, but it's _not_ like an advert, or comic strip, 
>>>  with lots of graphics, big fonts, color and WhiteSpace.
> 
> How ironic, from someone who posts HTML to USENET.

Is that what he is posting?
40Tude displays fonts so small I need a magnifying glass to read it.
When I was playing with slrn the other day when I open his messages it
asks if I want to process a MIME article.

Weird stuff.


-- 
flatfish+++
mariana trench

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#610151

flatfish+++ <flatfish@linuxmail.org> writes:

>On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 07:54:55 -0600, chrisv wrote:

>> Michael Moroney wrote:
>> 
>>> Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> writes:
>>>
>>>>I'll tell you ( yet again ) what I told them:
>>>
>>>>  My code is dense, and hard to read, like the Washington Post;
>>>>  sorry, but it's _not_ like an advert, or comic strip, 
>>>>  with lots of graphics, big fonts, color and WhiteSpace.
>> 
>> How ironic, from someone who posts HTML to USENET.

>Is that what he is posting?
>40Tude displays fonts so small I need a magnifying glass to read it.
>When I was playing with slrn the other day when I open his messages it
>asks if I want to process a MIME article.

>Weird stuff.

yeah, that's one of his obsessions, HTML to Usenet (usually with a fugly
font).

it's amusing he has to disable a zillion compiler warnings in his code.

He'd never make the cut here.

Too bad (for him), we may be doing some UTF-8 related work in a little
while.  (UTF-8 is another of Relfie's obsessions)
I may wind up getting some of it...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#610154

You ( Michael Moroney ) said I have to:
> disable a zillion compiler warnings

I turn on _all_ warnings, then I turn off
the "level 4" warnings that are _worse_ than useless
( they get in the way ).

> He'd never make the cut here.

You don't offer me anything worth taking, sorry.
I've got two jobs and plenty of money; I don't get fired.
I've held my current programming job ever since 1993.

> We/I may be doing some UTF-8 related work in a little while.

Welcome to the 21st century.

When I address someone who uses a terminal-based newsreader,
-- like slrn, tin or nn -- I (usually) post PlainText.
Same for ForteAgent and 40tudeDialog users.

When I address GoogleGroups and/or MozillaThunderBird users;
I post simple subset of "Text/HTM" because, otherwise,
a proportional font would be used, and WhiteSpace would be altered.

The "OCR A" font ( Optical Character Recognition ) is best.
Smarter newsreaders, including slrn, use other fonts too,
depending on the glyph.

Personally, I use "OCR A", "MS Mincho", "Segoe UI Symbol", 
"DejaVu LGC Sans Mono" and "nSimSun" -- all "Console" fonts, 
MonoSpaced ( some are double wide ).  Depends on the glyph.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#610167

Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> writes:

>You ( Michael Moroney ) said I have to:
>> disable a zillion compiler warnings

>I turn on _all_ warnings, then I turn off
>the "level 4" warnings that are _worse_ than useless
>( they get in the way ).

Most of the time it means your code is mildly fsck'ed in some
way that the compiler figured out for you. You should fix or
remove the broken code.

>> He'd never make the cut here.

>You don't offer me anything worth taking, sorry.

I'm not trying to offer anything, just stating that you
simply couldn't make it here.  "Doesn't play well with others."

>When I address GoogleGroups and/or MozillaThunderBird users;
>I post simple subset of "Text/HTM" because, otherwise,
>a proportional font would be used, and WhiteSpace would be altered.

You don't know how they have their browser configured. Besides,
Google Groups is broken. The default for Usenet is fixed width
fonts, probably except for flowing text.

>The "OCR A" font ( Optical Character Recognition ) is best.

Fugly.  Why a font intended for computers instead of one for
humans?  Again, those who care configure their newsreader to
use the best font for them.  But nobody but you and the (now
quite rare) spammers use HTML on Usenet anyway.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#610171

Michael Moroney wrote:

> Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> writes:
>>
>>The "OCR A" font ( Optical Character Recognition ) is best.
>
>Fugly.  Why a font intended for computers instead of one for
>humans?

Because the kook fancies himself being "computer-like".  Like a
computer, he has no problem with code that is "dense and hard to
read".

-- 
"Peter the Klöwn and you both claimed that a 286 couldn't address more
than 1MB."  -  "Slimer", lying shamelessly

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#610172

chrisv wrote:

> Michael Moroney wrote:
> 
>> Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> writes:
>>>
>>>The "OCR A" font ( Optical Character Recognition ) is best.
>>
>>Fugly.  Why a font intended for computers instead of one for
>>humans?
> 
> Because the kook fancies himself being "computer-like".  Like a
> computer, he has no problem with code that is "dense and hard to
> read".
> 

The only dense stuff here is the years old shit residing in Relfs head.
His "code" is ridiculous. It is an example how *not* to do it, in any 
circumstances

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#610177

On 12/23/16, 12:56 PM, in article o3jveq$ll6$2@dont-email.me, "Peter
Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:

> chrisv wrote:
> 
>> Michael Moroney wrote:
>> 
>>> Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> writes:
>>>> 
>>>> The "OCR A" font ( Optical Character Recognition ) is best.
>>> 
>>> Fugly.  Why a font intended for computers instead of one for
>>> humans?
>> 
>> Because the kook fancies himself being "computer-like".  Like a
>> computer, he has no problem with code that is "dense and hard to
>> read".
>> 
> 
> The only dense stuff here is the years old shit residing in Relfs head.
> His "code" is ridiculous. It is an example how *not* to do it, in any
> circumstances

Would love for you to show how to do it right.



-- 
"When making pornography involves real abuse of real children ... that does
not excuse censorship. No matter how disgusting published works might be,
censorship is more disgusting." -- Richard Stallman

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#610193

The lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser babbled:

> On 12/23/16, 12:56 PM, in article o3jveq$ll6$2@dont-email.me, "Peter
> Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
> 
>> chrisv wrote:
>> 
>>> Michael Moroney wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> writes:
>>>>> 
>>>>> The "OCR A" font ( Optical Character Recognition ) is best.
>>>> 
>>>> Fugly.  Why a font intended for computers instead of one for
>>>> humans?
>>> 
>>> Because the kook fancies himself being "computer-like".  Like a
>>> computer, he has no problem with code that is "dense and hard to
>>> read".
>>> 
>> 
>> The only dense stuff here is the years old shit residing in Relfs head.
>> His "code" is ridiculous. It is an example how *not* to do it, in any
>> circumstances
> 
> Would love for you to show how to do it right.
> 

Actually, there are guidelines for that. Not that you would know anything 
about that, but those exist. For a reason: The code is better readable

https://isocpp.org/wiki/faq/coding-standards
https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html

Give some hints what to do and what to avoid. You should not look into it. 
You understand nothing

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#610201

On 12/23/16, 2:40 PM, in article o3k5gr$c3c$1@dont-email.me, "Peter
Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:

> The lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser babbled:
> 
>> On 12/23/16, 12:56 PM, in article o3jveq$ll6$2@dont-email.me, "Peter
>> Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>> 
>>> chrisv wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Michael Moroney wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> writes:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The "OCR A" font ( Optical Character Recognition ) is best.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Fugly.  Why a font intended for computers instead of one for
>>>>> humans?
>>>> 
>>>> Because the kook fancies himself being "computer-like".  Like a
>>>> computer, he has no problem with code that is "dense and hard to
>>>> read".
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> The only dense stuff here is the years old shit residing in Relfs head.
>>> His "code" is ridiculous. It is an example how *not* to do it, in any
>>> circumstances
>> 
>> Would love for you to show how to do it right.
>> 
> 
> Actually, there are guidelines for that. Not that you would know anything
> about that, but those exist. For a reason: The code is better readable
> 
> https://isocpp.org/wiki/faq/coding-standards
> https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html
> 
> Give some hints what to do and what to avoid. You should not look into it.
> You understand nothing

Interesting at your level of understanding you would interpret my request as
one to point to coding standards. I can see that from someone who has no
clue what coding even means. I am always amazed at how lost you are. Anyway,
the idea was to have you show some of YOUR code... but you don't have any to
show. No big deal. 


-- 
"I started Linux as a desktop operating system. And it's the only area
where Linux hasn't completely taken over. That just annoys the hell out
of me." -- Linus Torvalds

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#610246 — My C++ Coding Standards ( apologies to Bjarne Stroustrup ).

My C++ Coding Standards ( apologies to Bjarne Stroustrup ):

1. If everything ( but the top node ) were local,
   then you'd be spending all your time traversing trees,
   like an ant, instead of doing real work.

   So use Global Variables/Functions early and often.
   This, the common way, is ambiguous:

     if ( HandleEvents(1) ) ...

   Instead, use globals (below), like this:

     WaitForClick = 1, HandleEvents();  if ( Click ) ...

   Globals:

     int WaitForClick, Click ;

     void HandleEvents() { MSG  Msg ;
       GetMsg:   PeekMessage( &Msg, 0, 0, 0, PM_REMOVE );
       Click = Msg.message == WM_LBUTTONDOWN ;
       //  Handle system events, like WM_NCACTIVATE...  Blah Blah.

       //  When WaitForClick == 1, Exit if-and-only-if there's a Click:
       if ( Click || !WaitForClick  ) { WaitForClick = 0 ;  return ;   }

       //  Draw Stuff... Blah Blah.
       goto GetMsg ;  }

2. InLine Conditionals ( Bool ? True() : False() ) are nice and concise.
   For example:

     inline  int  TheSmaller( int X, int Y ) { return X < Y ? X : Y ;  }

     #define  FlagTheNym   /*  'V' is for Visitor. */  \
        Nym.Trusted ? 'T' : Nym.Dropped ? 'D' : Nym.Kid ? 'K' : Nym.Adult ? 'A' : 'V'

3. Simplify Odd system calls, like this:

     wchar  aString[999];
     Str( aString, L"A 32 bit, unsigned Random Integer: %I64d", Rand32 );

     Globals:

       typedef wchar_t  wchar ;
       unsigned int  uiRand ;  
       #define  Rand32 ( rand_s( &uiRand ), uiRand )  //  Seeding is implicit.
       #define  Str  swprintf  //  Print to a Unicode string, "printf" style.

4. A variable's declared type isn't always appropriate; so Type Cast.

     #define  szStr  (int)wcslen  //  Return the length of a Unicode string.

     #define  Zero( X )  memset( & X, 0, sizeof X )  //  Implicit cast to (void*).

     Zero( aStruct );

5. Create fewer/larger functions.
   Put everything in a single, large .CPP file -- don't create .H files.

6. Local, ShortTerm variables are nice.  Like:

     wchar _T[999], *P = _T ;

     Loop(3) { _Loop(4) P += Str( P, L"( %d, %d )%s", J, JJ, J == eJ ? L"\n" :  L" " );  }

     printf( _T );

     Globals:

       #define   Loop( N )  int         eJ = ( N ) - 1, J = -1 ; while ( ++J <= eJ )
       #define  _Loop( N )  int JJ = J, eJ = ( N ) - 1, J = -1 ; while ( ++J <= eJ )
       #define  Str  swprintf
       typedef  wchar_t  wchar ;

     Output:

       ( 0, 0 ) ( 1, 0 ) ( 2, 0 ) ( 3, 0 )
       ( 0, 1 ) ( 1, 1 ) ( 2, 1 ) ( 3, 1 )
       ( 0, 2 ) ( 1, 2 ) ( 2, 2 ) ( 3, 2 )

See X.CPP in "Jeff-Relf.Me/X.ZIP". 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#610261 — Re: My C++ Coding Standards ( apologies to Bjarne Stroustrup ).

 wrote:

> My C++ Coding Standards ( apologies to Bjarne Stroustrup ):
> 

Yes, we know. Shitty beyond belief

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#610267

Peter Köhlmann wrote:
> chrisv wrote:
>
>> Michael Moroney wrote:
>>
>>> Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> writes:
>>>>
>>>>The "OCR A" font ( Optical Character Recognition ) is best.
>>>
>>>Fugly.  Why a font intended for computers instead of one for
>>>humans?
>>
>> Because the kook fancies himself being "computer-like".  Like a
>> computer, he has no problem with code that is "dense and hard to
>> read".
>>
>
> The only dense stuff here is the years old shit residing in Relfs head.
> His "code" is ridiculous. It is an example how *not* to do it, in any
> circumstances

Has the meaning of the term "dense" changed in the computing biz?

/BAH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#614049 — I explain each of the warnings I disable, and why.

Speaking of me, Michael Moroney wrote:
> it's amusing he has to disable a zillion compiler warnings in his code.
> He'd never make the cut here.

Thank God for small favors, no ?

Here, I explain each of the warnings I disable, and why:

  http://Jeff-Relf.Me/C++CodingRules.HTM

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#614050 — Re: I explain each of the warnings I disable, and why.

 wrote:

> Speaking of me, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> it's amusing he has to disable a zillion compiler warnings in his code.
>> He'd never make the cut here.
> 
> Thank God for small favors, no ?
> 
> Here, I explain each of the warnings I disable, and why:
> 
>   http://Jeff-Relf.Me/C++CodingRules.HTM

No need to explain that you don't have any clue whatsoever about 
programming.
You don't, and it can easily be seen in the shittiest code known to mankind. 
Your code

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#614233 — Re: I explain each of the warnings I disable, and why.

Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> writes:

>Speaking of me, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> it's amusing he has to disable a zillion compiler warnings in his code.
>> He'd never make the cut here.

>Thank God for small favors, no ?

Yes. I would hate to have to maintain/improve/fix that mess of yours.
I get to modernize/improve/fix code from all kinds of people.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#614275 — Re: I explain each of the warnings I disable, and why.

Michael Moroney wrote:

> Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> writes:
>>
>> Michael Moroney wrote:
>>>
>>> it's amusing he has to disable a zillion compiler warnings in his code.
>>> He'd never make the cut here.
>>
>> Thank God for small favors, no ?
>
>Yes. I would hate to have to maintain/improve/fix that mess of yours.

I would tell the boss that there's no way.  I'd tell him that we would
have to "suck it up" and re-do it from scratch.

-- 
"What's wrong with it?"  -  "DFS", regarding Relf's use of a #pragma
to disable 17 different types of compiler warnings

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#614297 — Re: I explain each of the warnings I disable, and why.

chrisv wrote:

> Michael Moroney wrote:
> 
>> Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> writes:
>>>
>>> Michael Moroney wrote:
>>>>
>>>> it's amusing he has to disable a zillion compiler warnings in his code.
>>>> He'd never make the cut here.
>>>
>>> Thank God for small favors, no ?
>>
>>Yes. I would hate to have to maintain/improve/fix that mess of yours.
> 
> I would tell the boss that there's no way.  I'd tell him that we would
> have to "suck it up" and re-do it from scratch.
> 

Right. I would not support such shitty code even if paid good sums
I would tell them to scrap it and write it new

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#614048 — It's fucking email ! !

Speaking of my HTML, flatfish wrote:
> 40Tude displays fonts so small I need a magnifying glass to read it.
> I was playing with slrn the other day, when I open his messages it
> asks if I want to process a MIME article.  Weird stuff.

The big players, Google Groups, Outlook and Mozilla Thunderbird,
handle it just fine ( because it's fucking email ! ! ).

Variable Width Glyphs, with trashed whitespace,
are the defaults, usually, so I use <PRE> ( HTML ).

When addressing those who, like you, never left the 80's,
I use PlainText ( like this post ).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web