🚀 go-pugleaf

I also dislike MacTutor, though every two or three months it contains a bit
of valuable information.  My chief dislike is their use of rumor and
out-and-out falsehood.  For instance, a message was run saying that caching
doesn't work unless the "cache" bit of an application is turned on - in
fact, the cache bit has no effect at all in the current system, and is
simply reserved for further use.  The cache works as advertised without any
messing with bits in Fedit.  It is obvious that someone thought they were
very bright to discover this bit and, blinded by their brilliance, jumped to
a totally inane conclusion as a vessel for demonstrating it.  This is only
one example, but there are many others of equally dumb caliber.  This has
made me distrust anything I read in the magazine.

I also agree with Chuq (a rare enough occurrence...) concerning the
sloppiness of the layout.  Every page is ugly, without exception.  Source
code listings are frequently laid out in a style that completely ignores all
indentation.  Errors are made in tables of contents.  Columns are laid out
visibly skewed and with variable line spacing.  Gack!  Shouldn't a national
magazine have layout at least as good as a college newspaper?

Finally, it is irritating that there is no clearly-defined policy for the
use of source code in MacTutor.  If I want to write a menu definition
function and start from the one they provide, is this legal?  Can I use
their LaserWriter desk accessory as the basis for a print spooler?  Who
knows?  This renders the source code almost useless, since it is typically
of a low grade and incorporates all sorts of uncommented clever tricks.
-- 
Tim Maroney, Electronic Village Idiot
{ihnp4,sun,well,ptsfa,lll-crg,frog}!hoptoad!tim (uucp)
hoptoad!tim@lll-crg (arpa)

Bibliolatry is my bizarreness.