Greenonline

After re-reading my original messages above, I realise that what I had meant to say (but ran out of space), was... IMHO, the super abridged version is best. However, if a compromise is required then the TLDR/Background might be a solution to break that impasse.

@Raffzahn - Yes, good point about the difference between questions and answers - the historical rambling (from those who were there at the time) is (usually) more useful in answers, than questions. I had confounded the two.

Hence why I feel that a separation of the text (i.e. into a TL;DR) and the preamble (i.e. into a Background Info) would be helpful in this case - as it should keep both camps happy (the OP and the editor(s)) - a happy compromise..?

For example, maybe a "### TL;DR" section containing the edited part, and a "### Background info" section for the preamble that the post mostly consists of... I agree that it is rare, on RC.SE, to so severely trim a post - however, the "additional" (non-essential) info/rambling in most posts is a reminiscing about historical events, which often prove insightful or contextually relevant. However, in this post, the additional info/text seems to just muddy the waters and confuse things.

@wizzwizz4 TBH, I can't really understand the question in its original state, the text is rather confusing (plus the thing about the "egg cracking" seems to throw the "information gathering" of the reader). I only (rapidly) understood what was being asked, once I saw the shortened edited version. In it's original format, the question could do with re-ordering/re-formatting...

Down voted within 4 minutes, that's impressive work V****O..!

FWIW, Code Warrior is amazing - I still use it today for PalmPilot applications (there is a repo on MacRepository for CW for Palm Pilot). ThinkC was a nice tool too, that's what I first used - copied 6 floppies from a friend (not sure if I still have them though) - There was a big yellow book called Symantec C++ Programming for Macintosh (2nd Ed), SAMS Publishing, by Neil Rhodes and Julie McKeenhan, that helped me get started. I still have a very tattered and moldy copy. Fantastic book!

I have drastically revamped my previously messy answer (and updated the blog) to reflect this. Thanks for asking the question btw, it really helped me get to grips with MPW. Nice one! :-)

@gorgo - BTW, and you have probably figured this out yourself already by now, but the command line from that thread will work in MPW 3.5. You just have to change Runtime.o to MacRuntime.o (as already discussed) but you also just need to add IntEnv.o, and it compiles just fine. All of the other options -mf -model near and all the others, really aren't required for a simple app like hello world. You can even keep the creator and type the same (MPS/MPST).

@gorgo Only just seen this, as the comment with the link to this chat got deleted (for some weird reason). More user friendly than MPW? Yes, definitely, especially, if just getting started (everything was menu driven) - although it was always handy to have a book to hand. That is why I never really got to grips with MPW (until now, as I have finally seemed to have broken the back in my gap in knowledge) However, MPW is much more powerful - I can see that now.

@gorgo - I have updated my answer

@gorgo - I can confirm that link -d -c 'MPS ' -t MPST hello.c.o "{CLibraries}"StdClib.o "{Libraries}"Stubs.o "{Libraries}"Runtime.o "{Libraries}"Interface.o -o helloapp works perfectly in MPW3.2.3 and I can even get the app to work and output "hello world" - from within MPW! :-)

Ok, fixed the compiler issue. It was an installer issue. Need to rename C 3.2 to C, in the Tools folder.

It is strange that neither SC nor C (as described in the book) cause a compile to occur (in MPW3.2.3). However, I'm not particularly familiar with MPW. We used to use Code Warrior at work, and I used ThinkC (later renamed Symnatec C++) at home. So, your question has finally prompted me to get to grips with MPW.

@gorgo - Yes, chat is fine. We shouldn't have been conversing in the comments anyway, and someone would have probably deleted the comments after a while.

Ok, I've got to go now, but I'll probably comment more later tonight. Thanks again. :-)

@gorgo Excellent, already done. I am a bit busy doing some gardening now, but when it gets dark I will continue with the MPW3.2.3 stuff. As you may have already seen, I can't find a compile command (yet). But I was very tired last night and needed to stop. I actually have a hard copy of the 1990 book. Had it for twenty years, but never got around to reading it. So, I have been flicking throught that as well.

Excellent! Thanks! :-) I'll make a copy and add it to my blog notes, if that's ok.

@gorgo - yes, I have started using version 3.2.3 (which was the latest version when the 1990 version of the book was written, from where all of the commands actually come) and it makes much more sense. See the bottom of my linked blog. I haven't got around to updating my answer yet, because I haven't managed to get a compile working (yet), but I determined to do so... Ah, it is good that you have provided the commands generated by the Create Build - I was wondering what they were. :-)

Interesting, I have reproduced your errors, and yes Runtime.o seems to be missing. The linked thread in my answer also states that the MPW collection from macintosh garden is also missing Runtime.o, so maybe both macintoshrepository.org and Mac garden have a bad version MPW that has been uploaded.

lol, I think I'll pass on that one... :-)

@NoelWhitemore - So... the next question that could be posted is, "From which program does this code pertain?" :-)

The 9 was intentionally removed by the OP in this edit. There are other variants of this code over on SO, where the OP has also asked questions.

Yes, but ignoring your code for one moment, what speed is your serial port actually set to?

Is the serial port really 9600? Mismatched Baud rates often caused unprintable characters. What is the character code of the square characters? Please edit and update your question with any additional information. Please do not put additional info in the comments, that is not what they are for.

What does shine mean in this context: whenever I shine something through to my other colleagues..? The clause seems a bit confused. Do you mean whenever I show (or describe) something to my other colleagues...?

FWIW, "Why not" questions are interesting, if (capable of being) answered by someone who was "in the know" at the time... otherwise they tend to get opinion-based answers.

Thanks again.

Case in point, last night, I tried to helpfully suggest that a non-native speaker move their question from robotics to mathematics, where unfortunately their question got brutally shot down (due to language difficulties)... whereas, if it had remained on robotics, it would have been treated a bit more gently and an answer would probably have been provided. Can't win them all I guess...

@goldilocks Thanks for the follow-up. Yeah, point taken, that this could be seen as not nice to the question asker. Looking back I seem to have gone overboard on the adjectives... I think that I just got carried away after a day of reviews across the sites - and the sites do differ greatly in their handling of questions.

Sorry for any misunderstanding

@goldilocks I certainly didn't mean to cause any upset or offense. i was just trying to save ExquisitE effort from writing posts that will serve little or no purpose. I certainy didn't mean it to sound as if I was berating them, although maybe I should have included a "Hi and welcome" and a "Thanks" at the end - however, I ran out of characters, and didn't want to add many additional "Hi" and "Thanks" comments as I knew that it would then spew into a "extended comments... moved to chat" scenario.

That may be the case, however, they have probably solved the problem on their own by now and will never return to edit and fix their question. Most of the time, these are questions posted by new users hoping to get a quick answer within a few minutes and when one fails to materialise they end up doing some research and finding the answer elsewhere, or in an already posted question. As noted above, this question has been asked many times before, and is likely to be closed as a duplicate or as "needs more info" and answers to vague questions also end up getting downvoted. Don't waste your time.

You really should refrain from answering these types of lazy, unclear, vague and unbounded questions. In addition to wasting your own time, you also end up encouraging these types of questions. Invariably, your answer will turn into a "catch-all", where you are trying to guess what the issue is and end up suggesting multiple solutions to issues that probably don't exist. Besides, they will probably end up being closed and automatically deleted eventually.

I must be honest and say that in these cases, I don't understand why we have "no recommendations allowed" rules... I see many times on other sites, questions for recommended books, documents, software. There is even a site dedicated to "Hardware recommendations", so I do get a bit confused sometimes. So, if a question is a wiki, is it ok to have it ask for recommendations? Is that the dividing line (wiki or non wiki)?

It is in danger of being closed as opinionated, so, one question is, if converted to a wiki, then is that question no longer opinionated? I edited it, to remove "good" from the "good scanners" to make it less opinionated, so it is now just asking for recommended scanner software.

@Criggie HI, sorry for late response. Yeah, I think knowledge base probably covers it already. WRT to that question, on good scanners, I was tempted to convert to wiki and add knowledge base tag, but then I realised if I did so, then the OP would lose their reputation. So what to do? Should I convert to wiki regardless, (and the OP seems to imply in the comments that was OK)? Or should the OP do it themselves..?

@Vanny Hi Vanny. Welcome on board :-)

So Drylin seems to use a custom polymer, not POM/Delrin. From this: " They are made entirely out of wear resistant iglidur® J materials and can offer technical advantages in addition to the clear price advantage."

@AdminBee You too. All the best :-)

I can come across as a bit gung-ho sometimes, and I must admit I can get a bit grumpy with my comments, especially after wading through a load of poorly formatted posts in the reviews. lol.

@AdminBee No, don't worry, none taken. :-)

Maybe I am being a little too enthusiastic. On SE.3DP we have quite a high standard of post quality which we try to maintain and fortunately we have a number of skilled documentation geeks (like myself), so we tend to go overboard on editing.. :-)

@AdminBee As you yourself have just stated, for new users it can be difficult. Maybe they don't know how to code format, or migrate data from one post to another, so I often think that one or two edits may be a nudge and/or help show how to manage their edits. Obviously after a couple of attempts, and then if there is no response then one might as well give up on a lost cause... :-)

Hmm, yeah I can see what you mean. However, it is sometimes difficult to know where to draw the line, or how low the bar should go. .

Do you mean that very very low quality posts, such as the one in question should be left as is - i.e. there isn't much point in trying to fix them? If so, I would tend to agree...

:-)

HI

See 3dprinting.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/236/…, and point 3 of meta.stackexchange.com/questions/291741/…

@Trish - Do you contribute to the SE.WorldBuilding blog over on medium.com? I am asking because I was wondering whether we should start a 3DP blog on medium (or WP)...