Re: NetSurf 1.0 released



In article <l2y4i.108$rQ4.97@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Hodgkinson
<ahodgkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
David wrote:

After all, all other comments about NS (except possibly one) have
shewn just how perfect it is.

So you load a module which pokes values into selected locations in
RAM, modifying otherwise-standard OS software. This bodge breaks
NetSurf. You seem to think this is still NetSurf's fault though -
fair enough, but perhaps you could explain why?

(You snipped the bit before which might explain why I wrote the bit you
quoted - which really doesn't make much sense on its own and out of
context.)

I don't know how the module works but it's probably better to select
the locations for poking than just use random ones.

Okay, it's unofficial. Please point me to an official patch to give the
same improvements. This little module vastly improved my computing
experience.

That it modifies the original OS doesn't necessarily mean that it is a
'bodge'. I think that is resorting to emotive terminology.

Isn't it presumptive to claim that the module 'breaks NetSurf'? In a
previous post I offered the possibility that the code of NetSurf might
fail under some conditions not previously encountered, that those
conditions might be met in the modifications introduced by the patch
which, though unofficial, might not necessarily in themselves be in any
way illegal. You can only know that by investigating thoroughly and not
simply dismissing the patch as a 'bodge' which 'breaks NetSurf'. Maybe
NetSurf breaks 3D Patch. Maybe both are not as correctly coded as they
could be; maybe both are but just don't work together.

If either code is shewn to be in error then obviously the fault has
been found and blame may be laid, if it must.

No other application I've come across seems to suffer in the same way
as NetSurf from this 'bodge'. I don't have the other applications
mentioned by Rob as using the NWM in the same way as NS so I can't tell
whether it is simply that or is, in fact, solely due to some specific
coding in NS.

With no official patch to do what 3D Patch does (or is there?), it must
be considered if not official then at least a sort of standard
improvement of the RO 3.7 window display code. I should think quite a
few users had it installed in order to get rid of those excruciatingly
ugly menus. And it has been around performing a useful job for nine
years.

One last question. I know RO 3.7 users are now few and far between but
were there many more, and did many of them have the patch, would you be
inclined to try and work round it or tell them to stuff it - you either
get a usable NS and 'orrible menus or you have more pleasing menus but
you'll never get NS -?

--
New Marmite(TM): Not as thick! Not as dark! Not as te!

David - toro-danyo atcost uku fullstop co fullstop uk
http://www.toro-danyo.uku.co.uk/
.