• Welcome to OS2World OLD-STATIC-BACKUP Forum.
 

News:

This is an old OS2World backup forum for reference only. IT IS READ ONLY!!!

If you need help with OS/2 - eComStation visit http://www.os2world.com/forum

Main Menu
Menu

Show posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Show posts Menu

Messages - ddan

#1
The overall plan is a bit difficult to describe because I'm cloning the
antique DOS Celebrity and I believe it's unique in its macro language and many
other operations. Here's a small but crucial example of the macros:

.open 1, edit C:\posts\post3e.txt, zoom
.open 1, edit C:\posts\post3f.txt, zoom

Those lines are held in window 2. I program its alt-x and alt-z keys thusly in
a default configuration file that runs on start-up:
.~X means open 2, down, exec
.~Z means open 2, up, exec

What happens is MAGIC. Alt-x and alt-z become next and previous file keys. I
can skim through files at literally the keyboard rate. If you've never had
that, you may not believe what a big help that alone is. Don't have to wade
through a file selector. (There isn't a built-in one, anyway! Have to type.)
True, it requires writing the second file, but I've long since mostly
automated that with a helper program and another macro. It's great to be able
to QUICKLY skim to find the file I want. (I type a lot. 35 million verifiable
characters. Many more in editing.)

So, the new program revolves around a file selector that allows next and
previous file keys. Therefore I began it first, and a -- outdated somewhat
buggy -- version has been on Hobbes a while (actually that's an _application_
using the file selector with a top level that implements fairly adequate
command line file associations). But projects are opened with macros (those
are nameable and executable on Celebrity's command line), so I can call up a
project by name and change the directory, besides configure things like margin
release for programming versus prose.

Second major item is the macro language. It's a bit clumsy, but easy enough to
ACTUALLY be usable, and compose-able on the fly for one-time needs. The macro
language KNOWS TEXT; what characters, words, sentences, and paragraphs are,
and has commands to select each of those, and arbitrary blocks too, of course.
If I want to uppercase this entire paragraph (you may have noticed a penchant
for YELLING; this facilitates it), all I do is F7, alt-u, and it's done. Isn't
reversible (in the sense of restoring, though can lowercase it all), and that
operation doesn't fit into its undo buffer, but global undo is another of many
features that I just don't use much in practice. Just makes ya careless. -- If
I am, and, say, transpose two characters, the designer of Celebrity already
had the BRILLIANT innovation of a key that swaps them. Little thing like that
is incredibly handy. I've no doubt that he actually USED an editor for PROSE
rather than just sat down to grind out another version of Wordstar. Some
programs of same period, though billed as "word processors", are so primitve
that you have to manually invoke re-formatting paragraphs. Just incredible.

By the way, though I've TRIED many text editors, I blissfully forget details,
so yes, transpose and other items may not be unique. Still think Celebrity was
WAY ahead of its time in 1987. Also includes an appointment calendar, "filing
cabinet", whatever that is, calculator, spell check, and adequate thesaurus.

I've both reduced and extended the macro language. Implementing it in REXX was
a breeze compared to a Turbo Pascal version. Virtual Pascal has huge strings
and other conveniences that'd help, but it's really a toss up between it and
REXX overall, so I'm sticking with REXX.

Anyhoo, FINDING words is another big area, because I do a lot of editing,
frequently consider, re-arrange, and even substitute my words, believe it or
not. I've extended the next/previous notion to finding, of course, and I
believe invented finding the next or previous instance of the word under the
cursor with just one key press, no fooling around changing it in a dialog box.
Searches will be both simple and complex, as I show above, both always
available on dedicated keys. Also, a HISTORY of search terms will be kept.
Finding includes section markers. I usually use a ■ (254) to mark sections,
not necessarily chapters. I can't have a "previous" capability for that in
Celebrity, but do have a specific key assigned for "next".

Key definitions by macro assignment is also vital. Came up with a method that
inherently allows redefining ANY key to ANY macro. -- But I absolutely INSIST
on the dozen or so STANDARD keys being STANDARD for my purposes, so they have
built-in defaults. -- So it'd be possible to emulate any keyboard layout
(easily assigned in plain English), except that the overall operation would
have many differences.

CURSOR MOVEMENT is the third most important area, I'd say, so I can for
instance program ctrl-up to move any number of lines. I've found that moving
on a diagonal is also fun, if not handy. But those are merely repeating
standard motions: I frequently want to jump to start of next or previous
sentence and so on, so I've a bunch of position keywords too. Then there are
possibilities in whether the cursor tracks end of line or moves straight up
and down; that was programmable and actually working in the TP version, but
I'm a bit shy of more fundamental items to worry about that currently. Also
missing at present is variable amount of overlap, or previously shown text
remaining on screen, when using page-up and page-down. Turns out there are
MANY items that just plain aren't changeable in text editors (nor more
generally, in GUIs), and it's at least fun to experiment with something REALLY
flexible. -- And programmable. GUIs are always just plain MANUAL labor.

JUMPING in each file is more cursor-ing. I'll be able to program a key to jump
back and forth by 10 or whatever percent of the file, or to jump by any number
of lines. And then to know where I am -- when HATE having a scroll bar taking
away from my always too FEW character cells -- have a routine that only puts
the position indication up after the shift key has been held down a couple
seconds. -- All timing and other numbers, key assignments, will be easily
changeable, in a PLAIN LANGUAGE configuration file. -- I'm looking for similar
uses for ctrl and alt held down, perhaps dictionary lookup of word under
cursor, and... hmm, possibly to pop up the usual status line, needed but don't
like it present all the time. So.

TROUBLE is that Celebrity is just darn near good enough (I've only been using
it 16 years), so the need isn't pressing, and programming is TOUGH going (for
me, not that what I want requires advancing the science!), and I REGRET time
away from USING an adequate tool to try and write a better one. ── Because I
actually USE a computer, don't just tinker and maintain. ── I'm having the
heck of a time getting text reflow to work right. (There's some primitive
flaws that I've built in, that might, in more capable hands, not be necessary,
but I've got to stick to what I can manage.) With the file selector and the
mouse DLL probably up to being wedged in, suppose I can resume on the main.

By the way, notice the differing dashes -- v ── above? Slipped and forgot that
I was writing for a web page rather than my usual prose. My interjection marks
are programmed on a key. I consider that and other little fillips to be among
MANY items sorely lacking from ALL other text editors that I've tried.

And, NO, modern GUIs don't even come close for REAL TEXT. Those are almost
entirely TYPESETTING. That's why text has become so lousy and disjointed: it's
WORK to do on-the-fly typesetting, entirely takes away from IDEAS, in my
opinion. Typing straight through in a proportional font is okay, but any
editing makes it hop around in an entirely distracting way, and trying to
distinguish between i, l, |, !, j, and 1 causes much trouble, and sometimes
mirth. You need lots of good plain text before you even think of typesetting.
That simple fact, along with many others, is being forgotten, and so...
#2
I repeat: mere mental exercise.

But NO, I don't expect DIFFERENT treatment. I expect the same. In my view, I didn't exactly get it, but neither do I exactly complain. I say only that _someone's_ action had the same effect on ME that I complained of last year, and was the reason I left then, yes.

But I was done with that and all associated. I accept the damage I've done to myself.

Please see my completely new topic.
#3
WELL, in answer to all complaints, and as defense against BEING childish that I
regret but still did deliberately, and that I now put behind, here's what I was
ACTUALLY working on last night, as part of long time text editor project. A new
DLL to get mouse info was a crucial part the week before, by the way.

Perhaps Yet Another Text Editor -- VIO fixed columns -- seems childish, too,
but I ain't yet satisified with 'em, certainly not GUI, though the ancient DOS
Celebrity, that you haven't heard of, is still fairly pleasing.

This is outlining the text search dialog. Hope you can unscramble as seen here.

- a possibly practical way to edit fairly complex search expressions:
   -----------------------  < imagine a box made with line draw chars
   |th* wor?, ##s phr*se?|   < the basic text
   |  *_   ? _^# &   a  ^     |   < char options, auto set to dependent default
   |s                             p|   < position options, generally two...
   -----------------------  <
in the basic text, *, ?, and # are particularly useful BUT equivocal, SO:
character options tell how char above (esp those 3) is to be viewed:
  ^ the one literal character that's above the caret (my "hat" is OFF to you)
  ? means any one of any character
  * means any # of any characters
  a, A, (alpha char) specifically lowercase, uppercase, or any alpha (english + foreign)
    have a separate switch to FIRST translate foreign to english via tables
  v, V, c, C mean lower/upper vowels and consonants
  e, f, d, p, s mean english or foreign alphas, delims, punctuation, stops
  o means operators, and if are any other categories such as english or
    foreign uppers only, that'd be E or F, add them as found useful
  # means any # of any in '0'..'9'; to match specific length or less, "1"-"9"
  _ mandatory space (probably auto set as phrase is typed in)
position and other options:
  w, s, p at left match start of word, sentence, paragraph; at right, the end
    (only allow two, I suppose) -- phrase always starts left-justified
    position finding probably takes precedence, and backwards-ish
├────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  & logical and when space above, always sentence oriented (for my purposes)
  |    "    or   "    "              "     "        "
  ¸ soundex match, likely to be SLOW... put it off to version 2
  ± proximity-ish, variable by separately specified #

furthermore, provide a "clear" button, BUT keep the 3 strings in a short list for recall.
#4
I object to the use of scatology. But feel free to drop in out of the blue and
tell people here what not to do. Seems popular. I don't apologize for spamming
the board; my reasons I give elsewhere, if you're interested.

Now, I'm not an attorney and don't even watch them on television, so take what
follows as mere mental exercise. It was prompted by someone removing posts
here.

As a  practical FACT, so long as I can modify and remove posts, I own them. (I
guess unless you re-post them.) IN the case at hand, I feared action that would
curtail that ownership in the practical sense. And just because "The Forum",
that I don't know even exists as a legal entity, asserts that an "Agreement"
exists, it doesn't make it what a court might find in an action. And in light
of CHANGED PRACTICES here from my experience, which in effect BROKE any
previous "Agreement", I asserted ownership and a demand in timely fashion while
my ownership did still exist, which I maintain then makes for a NEW Agreement.

And I doubt that you wish to assert ownership of their contents. I advise
checking with an attorney before making such statements, before YOU are held
liable for their contents. I'm sure that neither of us know "The Law", because
Law is a chaotic chimera that will eat you alive just for fun and practice.
It's what lawyers do, so long as they profit.

But I definitely ain't here to argue legalisms. I'm just saying they ain't
necessarily what ya think they are.
#5
I wish to clarify a crucial point:

saijin is NOT arguing with me ABOUT Windows. -- NOR IS IT PERSONAL.

He's trying to prevent me from bashing Windows or relating unpleasant facts
about Microsoft corporation.

Those are VASTLY different.

With that in mind, take one more look at the removed post:

> None of the business are exempt from these practices. Greed crosses all
> corporate boundaries; why you choose to single out Microsoft as the worst is
> beyond me. But you don't really seem like a rational person so I take
> everything you say with a beach's load of salt.

He removed it because it reveals not only his tactics but his true goal. A
"they all do it" whitewash of corruption isn't to his advantage, either.

This isn't over mere details, nor even how, it's WHETHER I can remark about
Crimosoft at all. saijin doesn't have actual power to ban me, so all he can do
is nag and nag hoping to wear me out; I've shown that he does so.

I believe an important principle is at stake: literally WHETHER debate will
take place. That's why I've objected so strenuously and in a manner sure to
annoy anyone reasonable here. Thank you for whatever attention.

And so long as I AM here, saijin is not going to proscribe areas I discuss.

And call me fanboy all you want, if you mean OS/2 fanboy!

====================
@RobertM
I was not pleased with "moderation" that "warns" me equally with saijin,
when nothing specific I'd said was stated as cause for a warning, and I think
I'm well within reasonable discourse. I don't take that personally, either,
honest, but I DO think you were a BIT TOO PRE-EMPTIVE, okay?

And I want my views to be CLEAR of the supposed "personal" bit, because a
public hearing is my protection against what I believe is a clear pattern.
#6
Confidence games and the spy world can only work when people DON'T think they're being fooled. Me, I know I'm fallible. Someone tells me I'm smart, I immediately grab my wallet.

A bit more on my theory: the local machine would send only a few extra bytes announcing its ID and presence, at any time, and most importantly, rarely because otherwise extra traffic from millions of machines would be noted. If on a local net, a Windows server would specially interpret it, and, being a bit more compromised, either pass it on or merely note it in case a specific request came in. But because the packets are normal with a bit extra, it doesn't depend on local servers, only needs to get out somewhere. This is all distributed, and includes Windows servers monitoring net traffic, so that eventually, one of the special headers gets  home, and if there's interest, they now know where THAT machine is. If you have a portable computer, it can almost certainly be located similarly after getting onto the internet, presumably recent desktops too.

So you're at best manually looking for RARE instances of literally a few extra bytes somewhere in gigabytes, don't have an absolutely reliable tool to do it with, and probably haven't accumulated much traffic to sift through for what's unrecognizable to you. So negative results of your test are really all that I expect.

When faced with problems like that -- advantage, Crimosoft -- it's reasonable to consider motives and history. Frankly, though I still don't approve, the NSA would be a BIT careless if they DIDN'T have a way into Crimosoft machines, probably others, and it's as certain as sunrise that such capabilities exist.
#7
STILL BEGGING. So who knows whether the "core" services are all there is? ONLY CRIMOSOFT, far as the software goes.

It's not even beyond question that otherwise ordinary packets are encoded and only fully interpreted by special receivers, NOR that the real spyware only starts up in response to "back door" packets that they claim don't exist.

Anything _I_ can think, someone is already doing.

(I'm adding, because I see now that you think you covered "all". -- Er, anything that's wrapped can be unwrapped, selectively. Any service running may SEEM to own the hardware, but the OS can know that, and simply suspend the service when it wants. There's no software that could possibly cover those possibilities when Crimosoft probably knows of WireShark and can specifically handle it, somewhere in their gigabytes.

SO, only hardware can truly work, and would require lengthy monitor and test. They only have to hide a few bytes somewhere that are interpreted only by their own remote server, which then can send requests back IF desired.

They may even have other better ideas; that's truly just off the top of mine.)
#8
At least, that's my philosophy.

I've nothing more to say today, except that I'm STILL not reading messages, and now regard any such as bordering on -- well, wimpy.
#9
You or someone stated that's possible with a single click.

In that case, I withdraw from all agreement stated or implied, and maintain full legal possession of my writings. I do not consent to you gaining value from them.

If not complied with, I'll look into DMCA provisions.
#10
I'm showing that saijin's opposition to me is based not on
any given topic, but to my views about Crimosoft. Had he left the evidence --
oh, wait a sec. ...  "single out Microsoft" site:os2world.com ... Turns out
go_ogle HAS that in cache now. So here's what he admits is inflammatory:

> None of the business are exempt from these practices. Greed crosses all
> corporate boundaries; why you choose to single out Microsoft as the worst is
> beyond me. But you don't really seem like a rational person so I take
> everything you say with a beach's load of salt.

Obviously regards anyone who criticizes Microsoft as crazy and untrustworthy,
a classic Crimosoft talking point, especially in connection with OS/2. There's
a Crimosoft .pdf somewhere in which they suggest exactly that tactic. The
coincidences add up. So is saijin MERELY a fanboy? Hmm.

His deleted posts from this thread have also turned up. "fanboy saijin"
site:os2world.com. (show all results, then on 2nd page, it's currently the 4th
entry down, or the 2nd cached page, or find the Nov 23 one having two of
saijin's at bottom of page.)

NOTE the time stamps. EIGHT MINUTES AFTER EACH of my two posts, there he is
with nothing but nagging, at best repeating what he's already said and what I
had stated and attempted to thoughtfully justify with my 80 lines.

IF those posts were merely what he now claims, WHY REMOVE THEM? Even the
inflammatory one? I'd already brushed it off with an obviously over-the-top --
and laboriously explained -- witticism.

Removing the posts doesn't reduce whatever effect they had on me. The ONLY
advantage was to him, to CONCEAL it from the (easy) view of members here.

Summary: saijin made a direct connection between criticizing Microsoft and me
being a crazy and untrustworthy person, attempted CONCEALMENT of that
statement, ADMITTED that his post was inflammatory, and mysteriously removed
two posts that seem innocuous but are suspiciously timed.

People are in jail on less evidence, WITH AN ADMISSION.
#11
General Discussion / Hmm, my post removed.
2009.11.27, 13:35:01
When I said keep a lid on the trolls, I didn't mean me!

So here's a repeat of what was removed.

NOPE. Sorry, RobertM.

NOT AFTER saijin "sanitized" the record by removing his posts from here!
Unfortunately, go_ogle hadn't cached it, and of course bing is worthless.

So here we go again, diverted from all else to arguing whether a troll with
one line of mere contradiction has equal standing with 80 lines of substance.

I thought my lengthy post was a bit thought-provoking on why documentation is
so uniformly lacking, and rather like the idea of a "programming etiquette"
that establishes a few conventions, put in an amusing pseudo-pontification,
BUT all that's now going to be overlooked due to this simple trolling tactic.

I'm not trying to get my way here, unless that means free to comment on
Windows. Because that's definitely what draws out saijin. Just look at since I
resumed posting.

---------------- NO, YOU CAN'T BECAUSE HE REMOVED 3 POSTS. ----------------

EVERY TIME I bait a trap with "Windows", he bites. Don't have to mention him
at all, only Windows. Look at my last long post on WDBasic (that has two quite
deliberate little jibes at Windows): he dropped a one liner within 8 minutes,
and responded quickly to my complaint about that.

That's NOT coincidence. That's NOT argument. That's simply trolling.

His one-liners have the practical effect of erasing my name as the last
poster, denying me my brief interval of attention, and since his are mere
empty contradiction, I conclude his intent is to suppress and offend me.

I'm more vividly aware of the direct linkage between my Windows remarks and
his sniping than you can be, but now that I've suggested what to look for, you
should see it clearly too. Kind of obvious. Possible causes and implications
would be speculation, but I won't let you deny the facts in the record.

saijin's pattern is clear and prolonged. Bash OS/2, defend XP. Brag of
expertise, but when pressed for details, dodge, accuse, then go silent.
http://www.os2world.com/component/option,com_smf/Itemid,63/topic,1235.0/

**** All I need is that trivially jumping onto my posts STOP. To prevent that,
I propose a simple mechanical rule: unless he has a 100 words or more, saijin
doesn't reply to ANY of my posts within less than 8 hours. *****

I ain't takin' NO degree of blame. My actions are entirely defensive, as
informed from last year. Consider his first remarks to me after that absence:

>> I've missed you too.

>> Not really.

A lie and a trick. I think it HIGHLY indicative of his true nature. -- Now
totally confirmed by his CONCEALING it. I'm not falling for "make nice".

Yes, let's not have any more drama. I'm here to support OS/2 and bash Windows.
saijin is AGAIN actively attempting to prevent me from doing either of those.

By the way, I'm not even reading other messages. All I have to say is right
out in the open, and won't be removed by me.
#12
Programming / Re: WDBASIC IS A BAD JOKE
2009.11.27, 13:28:27
Sorry, Pete. Don't care.

THIS IS A REPOST OF WHAT MODERATOR REMOVED.

NOPE. Sorry, RobertM.

NOT AFTER saijin "sanitized" the record by removing his posts from here!
Unfortunately, go_ogle hadn't cached it, and of course bing is worthless.

So here we go again, diverted from all else to arguing whether a troll with
one line of mere contradiction has equal standing with 80 lines of substance.

I thought my lengthy post was a bit thought-provoking on why documentation is
so uniformly lacking, and rather like the idea of a "programming etiquette"
that establishes a few conventions, put in an amusing pseudo-pontification,
BUT all that's now going to be overlooked due to this simple trolling tactic.

I'm not trying to get my way here, unless that means free to comment on
Windows. Because that's definitely what draws out saijin. Just look at since I
resumed posting.

---------------- NO, YOU CAN'T BECAUSE HE REMOVED 3 POSTS. ----------------

EVERY TIME I bait a trap with "Windows", he bites. Don't have to mention him
at all, only Windows. Look at my last long post on WDBasic (that has two quite
deliberate little jibes at Windows): he dropped a one liner within 8 minutes,
and responded quickly to my complaint about that.

That's NOT coincidence. That's NOT argument. That's simply trolling.

His one-liners have the practical effect of erasing my name as the last
poster, denying me my brief interval of attention, and since his are mere
empty contradiction, I conclude his intent is to suppress and offend me.

I'm more vividly aware of the direct linkage between my Windows remarks and
his sniping than you can be, but now that I've suggested what to look for, you
should see it clearly too. Kind of obvious. Possible causes and implications
would be speculation, but I won't let you deny the facts in the record.

saijin's pattern is clear and prolonged. Bash OS/2, defend XP. Brag of
expertise, but when pressed for details, dodge, accuse, then go silent.
http://www.os2world.com/component/option,com_smf/Itemid,63/topic,1235.0/

**** All I need is that trivially jumping onto my posts STOP. To prevent that,
I propose a simple mechanical rule: unless he has a 100 words or more, saijin
doesn't reply to ANY of my posts within less than 8 hours. *****

I ain't takin' NO degree of blame. My actions are entirely defensive, as
informed from last year. Consider his first remarks to me after that absence:

>> I've missed you too.

>> Not really.

A lie and a trick. I think it HIGHLY indicative of his true nature. -- Now
totally confirmed by his CONCEALING it. I'm not falling for "make nice".

Yes, let's not have any more drama. I'm here to support OS/2 and bash Windows.
saijin is AGAIN actively attempting to prevent me from doing either of those.

By the way, I'm not even reading other messages. All I have to say is right
out in the open, and won't be removed by me.
#13
If my grasp of your procedure and WireShark is correct, you're "begging the question".

Since Windows itself is being tested, you can't believe what a mere program running on it tells you of its network traffic. It's well established that it hides certain files from mere apps (when Sony uses that built-in feature, it's called a rootkit);  reasonable suspicion that it's hiding whatever it wants to most certainly applies equally to network traffic. You need external hardware to check this.
#14
Programming / Re: WDBASIC IS A BAD JOKE
2009.11.25, 22:05:08
@RobertM

NOPE. -- Good. Already to where I dare you to un-register me.

I require you to decide: who started the topic, who jumped in with a mere one-liner, and who wrote the first direct personal insult (see the OS/2 v Windows thread).

I want a warning to saijin to NOT drop one line bombs on my posts. The record is clear, he's done it over and over, as if compulsively. I've complained of it previously.

There's NO equivalency between my eighty or so thoughtful lines and his one line bomb. The latter has the effect of pushing my name off the top post, and I don't care for that unless there's substance behind it.

#15
Programming / Re: WDBASIC IS A BAD JOKE
2009.11.25, 21:19:52
You having a personal vendetta does not justify jumping on my posts without having read it or having of anything of substance for comment. At least save up your one-liners until you have TWO. Geez.