Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Beginnings of a patch: /etc/hosts
From: Robert Collins <rbcollins AT cygwin DOT com>
To: Randall R Schulz <rrschulz AT cris DOT com>
Cc: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020911162837.02a7c438@pop3.cris.com>
References: <Pine DOT GSO DOT 4 DOT 44 DOT 0209111845010 DOT 1269-300000 AT slinky DOT cs DOT nyu DOT edu>
	<Pine DOT GSO DOT 4 DOT 44 DOT 0209111845010 DOT 1269-300000 AT slinky DOT cs DOT nyu DOT edu> 
	<5 DOT 1 DOT 0 DOT 14 DOT 2 DOT 20020911162837 DOT 02a7c438 AT pop3 DOT cris DOT com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature";
	boundary="=-2soW5GkxVV7OD3wcFWJ9"
Date: 12 Sep 2002 15:39:20 +1000
Message-Id: <1031809161.22457.117.camel@lifelesswks>
Mime-Version: 1.0

--=-2soW5GkxVV7OD3wcFWJ9
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, 2002-09-12 at 09:35, Randall R Schulz wrote:
> Rob,
>=20
> That rule is only apt if the user knows what external state is used as=20
> input to the program they're running. If that input or dependency is made=
=20
> explicit somehow (documentation might suffice), then you're right and it'=
s=20
> a matter of user control. However, if the user must examine the program's=
=20
> source code to know why it's not behaving in the manner its authors=20
> describe, that's not cool.
>=20
> As you may know, I don't subscribe to that "Use the Source, Duke" busines=
s.=20
> If one must understand the internal workings of a thing just to use it,=20
> it's not very good technology. It virtually negates the concept of automa=
tion!

I agree completely. My point (which I think you may have missed) is that
buliding the internal workings on the basis that 'someone may override
foo and we must prevent that' is not good technology.

Rob


--=-2soW5GkxVV7OD3wcFWJ9
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQA9gCiII5+kQ8LJcoIRAuAMAJ0SrzPsgs2UWhI0FZ7lPp6WWaTfsQCfbv7M
LY5EIxRYhfkllJyOI5I9d1Q=
=67xT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-2soW5GkxVV7OD3wcFWJ9--