Why?

[George Simon]

As I said, I'll help in anyway I _can_, but that excludes sending fp support
the files.  I _can't_ do that.
I've explained why to Ken.  His response to me was to do something that
would take me days to do (if I understood him correctly) and I do not have
the time right now.
You are right, though, I've already spent so much time on this that I'd hate
to see it go to waste.

George Simon (IT Department)
American River Logistics, LTD
614 Progress St.
Elizabeth, NJ  07205
Phone:(908)354-7746      Fax:(908)354-7491
mailto:george at worldest.com
http://www.americanriverintl.com/



-----Original Message-----
From: filepro-list-bounces at lists.celestial.com
[mailto:filepro-list-bounces at lists.celestial.com]On Behalf Of Brian K. White
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2004 2:55 PM
To: filePro mailing list
Subject: Re: Why?

> From: Kenneth Brody [mailto:kenbrody at bestweb.net]
>
> And when you get 5.0.14 and the bug is still there, because fPTech
> does not have the ability to duplicate the problem, what then?


George Simon wrote:
> I'll do what I'm doing now, calling the table from elsewhere.

Beleive it or not, I think most of us would be grateful if you would help
finish tracking this down.
There may be a bug, and it may be perfectly fixable, and it just needs
someone to have uncovered it.
Obviously your process can be written to avoid the problem, and obviously
none of the rest of us _seems_ to be hitting the same problem, but then
again, maybe we _are_ but it's just been too obscure and rare for anyone to
identify the pattern as well as you already have. I hit things all the time
that I think should work, but don't, and I do it some other way and move on.
Who know how many of those are actual bugs that really should be fixed vs
how many are just me not playing by the rules?

I don't like the thought that my filepro may have hidden bugs waiting for me
to hit. That is one reason I went to the bother or trying to duplicate the
test.

You have already done what was going to be my next test, so I won't now. But
given any further info or reason I will help test some more.

It's a bother, but what the heck? We've already put this much time into it,
why not put a little more in and at least get something back out of it?
Right now, if it stops here, the time was wasted. Even if the outcome is we
establish that there is no bug because we found programming that according
to all the rules is not supposed to work exactly that way, that is almost as
productive as fixing a bug. Maybe more, because now, maybe some people are
going to be paranoid about using call tables from auto processing and make
life harder for themselves avoiding using a feature for no reason.

Brian K. White  --  brian at aljex.com  --  http://www.aljex.com/bkw/
+++++[>+++[>+++++>+++++++<<-]<-]>>+.>.+++++.+++++++.-.[>+<---]>++.
filePro BBx  Linux SCO  Prosper/FACTS AutoCAD  #callahans Satriani

_______________________________________________
Filepro-list mailing list
Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list