On Tue, 25 Nov 1997, Jean Vezina wrote:
> Van Snyder wrote:
> >
> > Observing that the best documentation for code is code, it's most
> > convenient for users to have the _text_ of the specification at hand,
> > not the binary data base written by the compiler + separate documentation
> > of questionable authenticity. I don't know any library vendors that
> > take the trouble to strip out their trade secrets and then publish just
> > the interface parts of the modules.
>
> But, when Fortran 77 was the standard, we have worked a long time
> by relying only to documentation to call commercial library routines the
> proper way. For example, IMSL and various graphic libraries such as
> GKS implementations. The proper calling convention to be used was
> specified only in the manuals, since only the object files were
> distributed.
This is, of course, a religious war that has been going on for some time.
See, for example,
Mark Weiser
Source Code
IEEE Computer, Nov 1987 20(11):66-73
--Stu Anderson
___________________________________________________________________
[log in to unmask] | Boeing Applied Research & Technology
[log in to unmask] | Who speaks for Boeing? Not me!
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|