On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 05:37:33PM +0100, Lourens Veen wrote: > On Thu 8 January 2004 17:07, Matthias Schniedermeyer wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 04:24:22PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > > It _is_ wrong to assume that a random program compiled for OS > > > revision A will run correctly on OS revision B > > > > Definetly NOT. > > > > e.g. "grep". > > Aaargh! > > Perhaps we should communicate in proposition logic instead af > English? J�rg is right, it is wrong to assume that any random > program compiled for OS revision A will run correctly on OS > revision B. If you disagree, you have to show that every single > possible program _will_ work, not just give one example.
If you say it this way, then you even have to say: You can't assume that a random programm compiled for OS Revision A.0.0.0.0.0 will run correctly on OS revision A.0.0.0.0.1 They MAY be a subtle bug that prevents the 10thousands program to run correctly. Bis denn -- Real Programmers consider "what you see is what you get" to be just as bad a concept in Text Editors as it is in women. No, the Real Programmer wants a "you asked for it, you got it" text editor -- complicated, cryptic, powerful, unforgiving, dangerous.
