Hi, Paul.

PE> PE> software like your reader.  Another solution is to ask the reader

PE> FM> The solution is not to have brain-dead software designed by brain-dead
PE> FM> 'C' programmers who use NULLs to define the end of things.

PE> As opposed to your vaporware, with 0 bugs, you mean?  Is that the

*My* software is neither vapourware nor especially buggy. Let's take
PKTJOIN as an example, that's a very simple program, hard to get wrong.
My version, written in Pascal of course, has 2 fewer bugs than yours -
maybe 3, I can't work out whether 2 of the problems in yours are
actually manifestations of the same bug. I suspect it checks for more
potential error conditions than yours too, but I don't wish to delve
into arcane C syntax to find out.

Sure it's not portable, but I have no need or intention of running
PKTJOIN on a MVS-based mainframe. I value bug-free and robustness above
portability. And as well as having at least those 2 fewer bugs, it's 30%
faster than yours and both the source and executable are smaller.

PE> trick you Pascal (sorry, Turbo Pascal 7.0 patch level 2) dorks use?
PE> Don't actually write any software, so that you can slag off at C
PE> programmers, who are the only ones who are actually capable of
PE> writing useful software?  Yeah, real impressive, I don't think.
PE> If it's one thing I've noticed about people around here, they have
PE> the most absolutely bloody brilliant vaporware you've ever 
PE> seen.  I'm always getting comments like "Hey wow, I've never
PE> seen anything like it before", followed by "Come to think of it,
PE> I've never even seen it".

Wow! I think I've hit a hot-button here! :-) Let's just say I prefer the
programs I write and use to work and be robust, and easily maintainable.
I use the tools which will let me do that.

PE> PE> author to fix his software.  Another thing you were to try was to
PE> PE> vary the quote string, but you said at that stage you were just
PE> PE> going to use proper software.

PE> FM> Well I'm not. I'm using OLX because it's got a usable and useful user

PE> Which makes you send netmail to anywhere except the destination?

Yes, it's not perfect. As well as that deficiency it's also got at
least one other bug that we know about, the nulls in the forwarded
messages.

PE> FM> interface and I *still* don't know whether all that stuff you've
PE> FM> recommended looks any better than some bloody command line utility in
PE> FM> drag.

PE> It was designed to do the job of reading and writing fidonet
PE> netmail and echomail, as opposed to OLX which was designed for
PE> a different purpose, and the only thing you've been able to
PE> get it to do is send netmail all over the world that was meant
PE> to go to areafix or me etc.  If I were you I'd be hanging my

I could have sworn I'd used it to write at least 1500 messages this year
alone which got to their destination, and read countless more. It works
quite well.

PE> head in shame at being a complete dickhead and installing proper
PE> software to do the proper job.  But oh no, you're a Turbo Pascal
PE> dork, and you'd rather send empty messages to random locations.
PE> Makes you feel at home.  BFN.  Paul.

:-)

Regards, fIM.

 * * I
@EOT:

---