🚀 go-pugleaf

Lines: 85

In article <5hm4og$mjj@client2.news.psi.net>,
os2@mistik.express.net (Mustafa Soysal MS57) wrote:
>In article <lqWPz0E6Ah5c092yn@momeraths.org>,
>Sysop <MarchHare@momeraths.org> wrote:
>> <5gpddf$4ns@client2.news.psi.net>
>>Lines: 42
>>
>>In article <5gpddf$4ns@client2.news.psi.net>,
>>os2@mistik.express.net (Mustafa Soysal MS57) wrote:
>>>
>>>;) Tell us where to buy it <G>.....There is no seperate developer's
>>>toolkit available these days, it comes with the compiler.  Besides, that
>>>linker has problems, and each time I get a new compiler package, I have
>>>to replace the linker with the one in the compiler package.  If the
>>>paths get mixed up, you'll end up using the wrong linker...
>>
>>Ironic how you like to call everyone else a liar, but cannot tell the 
>>truth yourself.  Even more ironic is the fact that I just installed the 
>>latest toolkit a few days ago after resubscribing to DevCon.  It 
>
>Ironic is that it came with the DevCon beta pile, amybe even as a beta
>version, and was not available to purchase as a product toolkit of its
>own.  Who is lying?

Oh, so I get it now.  You'd rather have it _separately_ distributed so 
that it would cost more to do so.

>>definitely did not come with my compiler, Watcom 10.0b.  Maybe I'll 
>
>Watcom isn't the IBM compiler.  The IBM compiler is VAC++.  Besides, I
>thought Watcom stopped developing for OS/2.

"Watcom isn't the IBM compiler."  Gee, give that man a cigar!  And, how,
praytell, did you stumble upon this bit of enlightenment?  Make up your 
mind.  Either complain it isn't available "separately" or complain it 
doesn't come with the compiler.  As far as I'm concerned it is available
separately from the compiler, which is a good thing, IMO.  I can use any
reasonable compiler and have results that do what I want instead of 
having to be tied down to one specific compiler that may or may not do 
everything I want.

...

>>probably only would want to put out the money if you are a serious 
>>developer.  I take that back, I'm not a "professional" programmer, and I
>
>;) So, it is irrelevant.  I paid for it several years and decided that it
>was of no use.

No use to a "professional" programmer, while it is of use to a 
"hobbyist."  Very interesting statement, I'd say.  Well, this hobbyist 
of 16 years still finds some gems in there.

It's all irrelevant anyhow, especially since it is in the .apps 
newsgroup. You just don't get it, do you?  Take your advocacy bullshit 
to the .advocacy group.

>>paid for it.  Then again, I did let the subscription lapse for a few 
>>months.  After all, do I really need to update it _every_ quarter?  I 
>>suppose I would if I were getting paid for it.  However, I still find it
>
>Good point.  It doesn't pay off since it is full of beta's.

So, don't install the betas.  Or, is that too difficult for you?  I know
it is hard to locate the TOOLKIT\BETA directory :)

>>a worthwhile investment.  I'm even getting into PM programming now, and 
>>I'll probably have my first freeware PM program out in a couple of 
>>months.
>
>;) I'll laught at you when you get the bug reports that don't happen on
>your machine and when IBM asks you to pay $200 to talk to you.  :)  You
>are asking for trouble, and you will probably get it too.

I'm asking for trouble every time I type "make", "dmake" or any 
variation thereof.  Hasn't killed me or my machine yet.

John
-- 
//------------------------------------------------------------------------
// momerath@apk.net                    sevot yhtils eht dna ,gillirb sawT`
// MarchHare@momeraths.org                 ebaw eht ni elbmig dna eryg diD
//                                           ,sevogorob eht erew ysmim llA
//                                            .ebargtuo shtar emom eht dnA
                     In case of stupidity, break glass.