Article View: comp.sys.next.software
Article #688Re: Praise and gripes about 3.0
From: Don Yacktman
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 16:09
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 16:09
22 lines
1581 bytes
1581 bytes
In article <1992Sep15.170334.624@prim>, prim!dave@germany.eu.net (Dave Griffiths) writes: >In article <1992Sep14.161853.3360@wire.gwinnett.com> andrew_abernathy@wire.gwinnett.com (andrew abernathy) writes: >>In article <1992Sep14.000247.27940@cs.sfu.ca> oneill@cs.sfu.ca (Richard >>O'Neill) writes: >> >>> Well, I had to have the foresight to use the "Plan Upgrade" option and >>see >>> that it planned on removing Icon because it wasn't part of 3.0. I said >>no >>> to this, and so I still have my copy and can use it if/when I want to. >>Dream on. (As I did.) Icon, unfortunately, is pretty much totally >>broken under 3.0, at least PR2. I'm pretty upset about it. >Why is Icon worse under 3.0? I thought 3.0 offered binary compatibility? Well, Icon seems to do a lot of things behind 2.x's back. In other words, it seems to have used quite a few undocumented calls...which probably no longer exist. Judging from the poking around I've done in side the program, I think this is reasonable to say, even though I really have no idea what I'm talking about. :-> -Don Yacktman
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<79@byu.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!gatech!news.byu.edu!newsReferences:
<1992Sep14.000247.27940@cs.sfu.ca> <1992Sep14.161853.3360@wire.gwinnett.com> <1992Sep15.170334.624@prim>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Nntp-Posting-Host: utah.et.byu.edu Lines: 23 Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!gatech!news.byu.edu!news Message-ID: <79@byu.edu> Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 10:09:07 MDT From: yackd@utah.et.byu.edu (Don Yacktman) Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.software Distribution: world References: <1992Sep14.000247.27940@cs.sfu.ca> <1992Sep14.161853.3360@wire.gwinnett.com> <1992Sep15.170334.624@prim> Organization: Brigham Young University, Provo UT USA Subject: Re: Praise and gripes about 3.0