Re: [Chicken-users] Re: Integrating unit tests into source code

[Brandon J. Van Every]

John Cowan wrote:

Brandon J. Van Every scripsit:

  

I've never cared about contract programming, because I'm too saddled
with performance concerns to worry about that.
    

"If it doesn't have to work, I can make it as fast as you want."
  

At DEC we always ran OpenGL Conformance suites, and other tests.  Back in the day, we had the highest Conformance in the industry.  I do believe in testing.  I just haven't had a reason to do it via the meme of contract programming.

Oops.  The problem, in my point of view, is that you Unix guys are
always setting up mailing lists to be "Reply To Sender."
    

Nothing to do with Unix; the convention much predates the use of
Unix to run the world's mailing lists.
  

That's scary.

So I have to manually type the name of the list every time I reply.
    

Use the "Reply All" button.  (The owner will get two copies, like you
are getting of this message; big deal.)
  

No no no it's against my religion.  :-)  Actually I think gmail is "clever" enough to mask the duplicates.  Which unfortunately means I never see my own posts.  I like seeing my own posts; they're usually well-written.

Windows guys set up their mailing lists to be "Reply To List."
    

Until the first time that a *highly* confidential reply to the author,
possibly libeling another list participant, goes back to the list.
  

My B.A. is in Sociocultural Anthropology.  Also I'm 36 years old.  I've learned not to go to certain emotional places, generally speaking.  There are humanistic answers to such problems.

Windozers go for what makes sense to the common man; "Reply" means
"send it back to where it came from."
    

"Reply" means "reply to one (the author)"; "Reply All" means "reply to
all (the list)".  What could be clearer?
  

No, Reply All means reply to both the author and the list, as you said above.  Windozers think "Reply" means, "reply to the 1 entity that just sent you something."  In their minds, that 1 entity is the list.  I don't interact with individual authors.  I interact with everybody on this 1 list.

But here of course we're just reiterating that people have different mental models.

I will wager, furthermore, that a default of Reply-To-Author is a relic
of a time when net curmudgeons didn't want you "wasting everyone's
time" with your idle chit-chat.  Force you to think about replying to
the entire group, the entire world community, all the resources wasted
on all those servers, oh my!
    

It isn't "all those servers", it's "all those brains".  Why should 500
or 5000 mailing-list participants have to read (even enough to delete)
your personal, private, of-no-concern-to-anybody-else response?

  

Oh no!  The Mummy rises, and chases me around the room!  Back, foul creature of the dead!


Cheers,
Brandon Van Every