DOS Coders1 Message Board Tue, 31 Jan 2006 20:34:11 ______________________________________________________________________________ | ============================================================================ | | 1) Sun, Jan 01, 2006 - 12:08:57 am | | gregy> | New board... | | ============================================================================ | | 2) Sun, Jan 01, 2006 - 12:10:47 am | | gregy> | Last 11 messages: | | | ========================================================================== | | | | 571) Thu, Dec 29, 2005 - 10:08:17 pm | | | | ray> | | Yeah, let's talk this over with Joe. Certainly this buffer stuff is | | a good place to go to town with my memory but I quite honestly | | haven't | | the foggiest notion of how all those IE varaibles and defines talk | | to | | each other ... well, maybe a foggy notion but I don't trust myself | | to fool with it. Hmmm, come to think of it, the above stand on it's | | own don't it? More items in cache and history do sound good. | | | | | | ========================================================================== | | | | 572) Thu, Dec 29, 2005 - 10:09:47 pm | | | | ray> | | BTW, what would you recomend as additional items in the IE toolbar? | | | | | | ========================================================================== | | | | 573) Sat, Dec 31, 2005 - 1:17:10 pm | | | | glennmcc> | | I never use it... so I'm the wrong guy to ask. | | | | | | ========================================================================== | | | | 574) Sat, Dec 31, 2005 - 1:54:21 pm | | | | ray> | | Me neither, so I'm the last guy to know . | | | | BTW, a wee bug: have you ever noticed that if you are scrolling with | | the mouse on a scrollbar slider and keep the button down, but then | | move | | the mouse off the slider onto the toolbar, the mouse pops back to | | life and if you move the mouse up or down both the slider moves | | *and* | | the toolbar items 'pop' up and down as you move? | | | | | | ========================================================================== | | | | 575) Sat, Dec 31, 2005 - 2:58:31 pm | | | | glennmcc> | | That's not a bug... it's a feature. | | | | It does that intensionally so that we can see that we have 'strayed' | | to the right instead of moving straight up or down. | | | | The 'bug' is that we only get that indication when the pointer is | | somewhere in the vicinity of that toolbar. | | | | We need to extend the capability of this 'feature' so that an | | indicator | | of some kind will show that 'straying to side' even when we're not | | near | | the toolbar. | | | | ========================================================================== | | | | 576) Sat, Dec 31, 2005 - 5:12:00 pm | | | | ray> | | I half agree. It's cool that it pops back on, but it shouldn't | | 'work' the buttons, wouldn't you say? And, if the mouse is held | | down it continues to scroll the page even if the mouse is off the | | slider, which is very convinient. All I'm saying is that the buttons | | shouldn't work. | | | | | | | | | | ========================================================================== | | | | 577) Sat, Dec 31, 2005 - 5:25:10 pm | | | | glennmcc> | | They don't "work", all they do is get 'hightened' so to speak so | | that we | | can see that our mouse is 'off-track'. | | | | The buttons don't get activated during this process and they don't | | activate | | upon releasing the mouse button... they simply remain 'hightened' | | if our pointer is still there when we release the mouse button. | | | | As I said...... it's not a bug, it's a feature. | | | | | | | | ========================================================================== | | | | 578) Sat, Dec 31, 2005 - 6:03:08 pm | | | | gregy> | | Re: Bugs and Features....I'm not using, so I'm not noticing.. | | ... | | But (you knew this was coming), keep on experimenting...we call | | always | | use more features (as long as we don't get confuzzled and bloated | | like | | some code I know of).... | | | | | | ========================================================================== | | | | 579) Sat, Dec 31, 2005 - 6:03:35 pm | | | | gregy> | | This board will be archived about midnight, my time... | | | | | | | | ========================================================================== | | | | 580) Sat, Dec 31, 2005 - 6:07:50 pm | | | | gregy> | | Re: archived...suggest you guys save your New Years greetings until | | after the archiving... | | ... | | | | | | ========================================================================== | | | | 581) Sat, Dec 31, 2005 - 6:10:27 pm | | | | gregy> | | Glenn....Re: LINES 2048....GO FOR IT..!!!!....don't hesitate...it's | | something we NEED...and the naysayers can "fall by the wayside" it | | they | | want to.... | | ... | | FWIW...I think we also need to make ENV == 1024 setup when we | | install. | | I don't quite know the best way to do that...but it needs at least | | 1024bytes with all the use we make of it.....and maybe even | | 2048....but | | the 1024bytes, for sure... | | | | | | ========================================================================== | | | ============================================================================ | | 3) Sun, Jan 01, 2006 - 8:49:30 am | | glennmcc> | HAPPY NEW YEAR TO EVERYONE !!! | | | ============================================================================ | | 4) Sun, Jan 01, 2006 - 11:02:19 am | | ray> | Ok, I give -- it's a feature not a bug ;-) | | | ============================================================================ | | 5) Sun, Jan 01, 2006 - 5:17:47 pm | | ray> | Glenn, FYI, I was doing some speed tests. Whith smartdrv enabled there | isn't enough difference between our cores to mention, but I thought | I'd try a few tests with disk cache disabled: (averages) | | 183: 9.1 | 187: 11.2 | 3g 13.8 | | fooling with making my HTML modules static again: | | 10.6 | | I'm not sure if any of this matters much since we always use | disk cache, but just the same, you seem to have lost something | between 183 and 187. | | | ============================================================================ | | 6) Sun, Jan 01, 2006 - 5:23:03 pm | | glennmcc> | Just for the heck-of-it.... compare 1.85 to both 1.83 and 1.87 | | | ============================================================================ | | 7) Sun, Jan 01, 2006 - 6:09:53 pm | | ray> | Don't got, I went right from 183 to 187. But you can do these | yourself its easy just set an ASF as your DialPage and create that | ASF something like: | | | file://clearcache.dgi | u:\mail\051007.tra\*.* | u:\mail\trash\*.* | u:\mail\051007.tra\*.* | u:\mail\trash\*.* | u:\mail\051007.tra\*.* | u:\mail\trash\*.* | arachne:exit | | and call arachne with a batch file that has a timer: | | | timer on | rem Use next line when speed testing Glenn's core vs. mine | rem to insure both are run under command.com. | rem Also remember to set "DialPage file://spd-test.asf" in arachne.cfg | rem and comment or uncomment 'config.dat' line in arachne.bat. | rem Note when changing to or from speedtest mode, delete config.dat! | | command /e:1024 /low /c arachne.bat | rem call arachne.bat | | timer off | | 4dos has a built in timer, but I'm sure theres some little utility | that will work. | | | ============================================================================ | | 8) Sun, Jan 01, 2006 - 7:06:02 pm | | glennmcc> | Ray.... you've got mail. ;-) | | Mail:v1.85;GPL,386+....... Arachne v | file:C:\ARACHNE\MAIL\!3616731.TBS Sun, 01 Jan 2006 21:0 | ____________________________________________________________________________ | | | "Glenn McCorkle" | From: Arachne Fan Club | | To: "Ray Andrews" | | Reply-to:glennmcc@cisnet.com | | BCC: glennmcc@cisnet.com | | Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 21:01:57 -0500 | | Mailer: Arachne v1.91;UE11 | | Subject: v1.85;GPL,386+....... | | ============================================================================ | | Hi Ray, | | Now you've got it. | | -- | Glenn | http://www.delorie.com/listserv/mime/ | http://www.cisnet.com/glennmcc/ | http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.table.html | | | ============================================================================ | Attachment: a185gpll.zip | (type: application/zip; encoding: base64) | File "\arachne\cache\a185gpll.ZIP" written. | | | ============================================================================ | | Arachne Insight 4.0;ML, GNUpyright (G)1997-2000 Arachne Labs | (now being maintained by the Arachne Development team) | | | ============================================================================ | | 9) Sun, Jan 01, 2006 - 7:45:34 pm | | gregy> | Okay, guys...for the Arachne ADIAG project, I need to know the "nesting | level" in the(your) code. | .. | I don't need exact, but just a ball-park, worst(deepest) nesting figure | for ref. purposes, so I can sorta preliminary-finalize the | specification/design of the project. | ... | so....?????? | | | | ============================================================================ | | 10) Sun, Jan 01, 2006 - 7:56:58 pm | | glennmcc> | Nesting level == 57 (worst/deepest) | | ============================================================================ | | 11) Sun, Jan 01, 2006 - 7:58:06 pm | | glennmcc> | Unless you mean worst/deepest in the 'switches'. | | If so.. that's about 110. | | ============================================================================ | | 12) Sun, Jan 01, 2006 - 11:02:18 pm | | ray> | Glenn, | | Thanks for 1.85 :-) | Now, how do you get '57'? And Gregy, do you mean indentation levels in | the code? That goes about 12 IIRC, or do you mean function calls | within function calls? That I don't know except that it's too high, | but I'd be amased if it's 57. | | | | ============================================================================ | | 13) Sun, Jan 01, 2006 - 11:25:31 pm | | gregy> | Glenn...it's for style/documentation/reference in the code. "switches" | are "CASEOF" statements...or are you talking about something I haven't | ever heard of...and therefore are not "nested"... | ... | What I'm talking about, for example...: | DO-WHILE1 yada yada | DO-WHILE2 yada yada | DO-WHILE3 yada yada | endDO | endDO | endDO | ... | That example has one nested function, which has another nested function | with another nested function within it. | It has 3-levels of "nesting".... | ... | Alternate explanation/definition....: | { Function1..... | { Function2..... | { Function3.... | } | } | } | .....function nested within function nested within function... | ... | Have I thorougly confuzzled all of you.....?????..... | ... | I hope not...because this is something I need to know for planning | purposes....without having to go thru all the files and check this | out for myself.... | ... | And, Glenn...I know the "switches" (i.e. CASEOFs) are about 87, for the | keys (or sumpin, Ray said the other day) but these are not considered | nested....but....but...for actual nesting, I think more than 5-6 levels | would be more than I'd expect....and 57 would be way excessive for any | normal program of Arachne's size and complexity. | ... | Could you each give me the name of the file you consider the example | for your reply of "The maximum level of nesting is X, found in AXXXX.C." | ...and then, I can see your example, too.. | | | ============================================================================ | | 14) Sun, Jan 01, 2006 - 11:28:56 pm | | gregy> | If I have to, I'll just design it for Glenn's max, plus one digit for | safety, but...I'd rather have a better idea of this nesting level before | we start... | ... | | | ============================================================================ | | 15) Mon, Jan 02, 2006 - 10:29:25 am | | ray> | Gregy, | | Well I can say for sure that the deepest nesting *within* any function | is about 12 or 13 and that's in HTML.C as to nesting of functions | I don't know. It could be figured out from that function call | doc I sent. To tell the truth, I'd love to know. | | | | ============================================================================ | | 16) Mon, Jan 02, 2006 - 3:00:53 pm | | glennmcc> | Yep, now that I understand what you mean. | | I concure with Ray... about a dozen. | | ============================================================================ | | 17) Mon, Jan 02, 2006 - 8:26:31 pm | | gregy> | I think I understand what you guys are saying: | {funct01 yada yada | {funct011 yada yada | {funct0111 yada yada | {funct01111 yada yada | {funct011111 yada yada | {funct0111111 yada yada | {funct01111111 yada yada | {funct011111111 yada yada | {funct0111111111 yada yada | {funct01111111111 yada yada | {funct011111111111 yada yada | {funct0111111111111 yada yada | {funct01111111111111 yada yada | } | } | } | } | } | } | } | } | } | } | } | } | } | -----------------------that is "12-levels of nesting" | | | ============================================================================ | | 18) Mon, Jan 02, 2006 - 8:29:13 pm | | gregy> | and, each nested level is under the 1st "top-level function" {funct01 | ... | and, each nested function is individually number-identified with | reference to it's preceeding-level function. | ... | Therefore, I can refer to any one of those functions without any doubt | as to which one I refer to....i.e. they are all, so to speak, "indexed" | for location... | ... | | | | ============================================================================ | | 19) Mon, Jan 02, 2006 - 8:31:52 pm | | gregy> | Well, that solidifies the block-numbering scheme that I must use in the | ADIAG Project. In one way it is more complicated, but..BUT..(you knew | this was coming)...in a whole 'nother lot of ways, it simplifies the | block-numbering scheme, too... | ... | So, thanks....this discussion has been a BIG help... | .... | | | ============================================================================ | | 20) Mon, Jan 02, 2006 - 8:46:51 pm | | gregy> | Now, next question...(he he...you didn't think you were gonna get away | so easily, did you..???........) | ... | GIVEN - definition "BASE-nesting-level" is the level that starts over | at the lefthand margin (i.e. "top-level"...also i.e. no nesting) | {funct01<----------is against the lefthand margin | and GIVEN - at least one level of nesting (any level down, but we'll | consider only the first level down) | {funct01 yada yada | {funct01-01 yada yada | } | {funct01-02 yada yada | } | {funct01-03 yada yada | } | ....... | {funct01-nn yada yada | { | } | ... | Is there any function, in the our code, that has, in any SINGLE nesting | level, more than 99-each inner-functions AT THAT LEVEL | ... | NOTE - look at the example above for the pattern I'm referring to, and | you can, also, see why I'm asking the question....I mean...do I need to | allow (at any level) for more than 99 functions. | ... | ALSO....It just struck me that this also applies to the BASE-level (i.e. | no nesting)...so the question also becomes, "Has any file got more | BASE-level functions than 99.??" | .. | Because if the answer is YES, then I need to allow for 999-functions, | just to cover the max number.. | e.g..... | {funct001 yada yada | } | {funct002 yada yada | } | .... | {functnnn yada yada | } | ... | Have I confuzzzzzzzed everyone, yet....???....... | | | ============================================================================ | | 21) Mon, Jan 02, 2006 - 8:51:58 pm | | glennmcc> | 9 would not be enough. | | 99 is way more than enough. | | See ??? | | I'm not confuzzled. | | | ============================================================================ | | 22) Mon, Jan 02, 2006 - 10:13:11 pm | | ray> | Yeah, the high water mark is guievent, right Glenn? How many | cases there? maybe a bit more than 100 but that's the only | place, you could use special techniques there. | | | ============================================================================ | | 23) Mon, Jan 02, 2006 - 11:58:30 pm | | gregy> | well...CASEOF strings are not nested, just straight-out strings of | cases - i.e. | CASE001 | CASE002 | ... | CASEnnn | | No nesting involved here. | | | ============================================================================ | | 24) Tue, Jan 03, 2006 - 12:04:04 am | | gregy> | Alright, then I'll do "nesting-numbering" allowing 00 (two digits) for | the first nesting-level, and 0 (one digit) for all subsequent levels | ... | Also, as I said, some things occurred to me, as we have discussed this, | and...it appears that the "index number" will ONLY need to show those | "nest-level-numbers" if/when there actually is nesting...the rest of | the time, they will be ommitted... | ... | I was going to specify a "fixed-length" constant for the number of | characters in the "index-number"...which wouldn't even be used in most | instances...but...doing it this other way....the number will expand as | needed, and expand only to the length needed...and it will be easily | noticeable just where nesting is located, and immediately seeable as to | the level/extent of it in any one location.. | | | | ============================================================================ | | 25) Tue, Jan 03, 2006 - 12:06:27 am | | gregy> | And...L.D. and I are selecting ASCII-pr0n equivalents for standard | flowchart symbols.... | ... | You guys can get some idea of that from that post to the list, that | L.D. did yesterday... | ... | Our actual flowcharts will be much more "professional"..(g g g g)..and | will be standardized to our specifications, but you can get the flavor | from her post.. | | | ============================================================================ | | 26) Tue, Jan 03, 2006 - 4:50:58 am | | gregy> | Re:...you are not confuzzled....well, that's a relief...at least one of | us, around here, is still "in the clear".... | .. | Actually, I'm kinda feeling my way in the dark, here...so...don't be | surprise if I actually DO manage to present something in a confusing | way. | | | ============================================================================ | | 27) Wed, Jan 04, 2006 - 4:09:23 am | | gregy> | Okay...now...I'm assuming that the "CASEOF" (aka "switchs") function is | a single function: e.g. | {functSWITCHES(aka CASEOF) | CASE 01 yada yada | ... | CASE 87 yada yada | } | ...and that this function is a nesting-level 0, i.e. its {(brace) | is right over at the lefthand margin. | ... | Is this assumption true...?????? | | If this is incorrect, then, QUESTION - at what nesting-level IS the | function that contains the "switches (CASES)" for the KEYWORDs....????? | | ------------------------------------------------- | Ray mentions the KEYWORDs "switches" function as containing 87 CASEOF | switches...is this true...??? | .. | QUESTION - are there other "switches" functions...??? ...and, if so, | how many CASEs (switches) do they contain (maximum for each - estimate | is okay)....??? | | | | ============================================================================ | | 28) Wed, Jan 04, 2006 - 4:12:11 am | | gregy> | QUESTION - if the "87-cases-for-KEYWORDS" is true, is this CASEOF | set likely to expand beyond 99-CASEs.....??? | ... | If so, I should allow for 999-CASEs, otherwise we can still get by | with 99-CASEs... | | | ============================================================================ | | 29) Wed, Jan 04, 2006 - 4:38:05 am | URL | | gregy> | Okay, new board up....let's get this "Diagramming Arachne Project" | stuff off this ADEV board... | .. | http://arachne.virtualave.net/prj/prjindex.php | | | | ============================================================================ | | 30) Wed, Jan 04, 2006 - 10:15:09 am | | ray> | Gregy, | | One of the nice things about my code is that the bracing is | almost perfectly uniform: two spaces per nesting level unless there | is an outdent, but those are all flagged. And there are some short | repetitive blocks on one line: | | if(something1) { blah; blah; blah; } | Eif(something2) { blah; blah; blah; } | | We do risk and over 99 switch in guievent, but why not use | HEX for your lines? That way you've got 256 with just two digits. | | | | ============================================================================ | | 31) Wed, Jan 04, 2006 - 4:25:46 pm | | glennmcc> | HTML.C contains a switch with 106 cases. | | And we _will_ be adding more. | | The 'tag' switch handles all of the html tags which are currently recognized | | switch (tag) | | case TAG_BR | | case TAG_TR | | case TAG_TD | | etc...etc...etc... | | ============================================================================ | | 32) Wed, Jan 04, 2006 - 4:30:11 pm | | glennmcc> | Here they are....... | | case TAG_P: //

| case TAG_DIV: //

| case TAG_H1: //

| case TAG_H2: //

| case TAG_H3: //

| case TAG_H4: //

| case TAG_H5: //

| case TAG_H6: //