[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Author Index (this month)][Thread Index (this month)][Top of Archive]

Re: Multiple undo (was Re: Microsoft Documentation)

Subject: Re: Multiple undo (was Re: Microsoft Documentation)
From: Dick Margulis <margulis -at- fiam -dot- net>
To: Gene Kim-Eng <techwr -at- genek -dot- com>
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2004 13:30:03 -0500

Gene Kim-Eng wrote:

If that's the case, it's an indication of a lack of competence in
both programs' designers.

That's harsh, Gene. The designers were on the bleeding edge of the technology of their respective days. They were hardly incompetent.

The fact that these programs are not rebuilt using modern programming techniques is something I addressed in my previous post. You're right about their being repainted 1985 cars, unsuited to the purpose of your single sourcing project, but that's a natural consequence of their age, nothing more.




Follow-Ups:

References:
Multiple undo (was Re: Microsoft Documentation): From: k k
Re: Multiple undo (was Re: Microsoft Documentation): From: Gene Kim-Eng

Previous by Author: Re: Microsoft Documentation
Next by Author: Re: Multiple undo (was Re: Microsoft Documentation)
Previous by Thread: Re: Multiple undo (was Re: Microsoft Documentation)
Next by Thread: Re: Multiple undo (was Re: Microsoft Documentation)

[Top of Archive] | [Author Index (this month)] | [Thread Index (this month)]

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads