On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 09:28:54 -0700, Paul S. Person
Post by Paul S. Person
First, the OW documentation is known to be written for people who
already know what they are doing and only need a reminder of the
details, and not for newbies.
This is actually fairly normal: by the time someone is qualified to
write the documentation, he or she no longer remembers what it was
like to be a newbie. Newbies, by definition, don't have the technical
knowledge to write the documentation.
IOW, you made a mistake. Get over it.
Second, the news groups on openwatcom are /not/, generally speaking,
populated by people who use Jiri's version. Well, so far as I know,
So... you're insistance that the error is mine leads me to beleive you
think no fault could exist in the tools that hasn't already been rooted
out; much like everything that can be invented has already been invented.
And just because people do advanced things that push edge conditions such
that 'following the documented steps is a wrong thing to do' ... and just
because it's an isolated person who has experienced this edge condition
and; again, points to an inconsisntancy between watcom and the rest of the
So; read the documentation kid 'stop bothering me' .. well.. me and jiri.
(well I did, and that was no answer; in fact backs up that how I was doing
it was not 'in error')
From what I can tell, it's really a more general statement that
"the news groups on openwatcom are /not/, generally speaking, populated."
since it's jiri's kid, and noone else has access; even though I have an
account and could be granted shared privileges; looks like a good place
for that contact is here; and bring attention to corner conditions that
could be fixed quite simply; across all previous versions also.
I don't see that any of this was 'my' error;
1) I apparently had read the docs, and followed the docs... I was aware of
other methods from experience, but that's not how CMake was
implemented...probably because they followed the docs *I do want to thank
you for making me go look up 'wlib' in the docs and see why it was I was
doing it that way*
2) right, so following the announcement of 2.0; and testing it for
viability before recommending it as an upgrade, I can't provide feedback
here about an issue with that; and it was a new file, which my unchanged
code somehow changed because of something I did and included a new
header? No... it was auto included by the tools; which sharing the same
name, and being Jiri's and having had an announcement here... would seem
to be the place to make that note; since there are no other shared
developers on that source page (that I could see).
so the mistake was... using a public communication channel with Jiri? no
that can't be it... so... what happened?
And now I just get to think of how wonderful news groups are, because I'm
sure noone's actually pulling this message content having long since given
up on you.