[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On 12/01/14 18:39, Simon Waters wrote:
I think its important that a computer should assume that if the user doesn’t know what’s going on any attempt to second guess them will just make things worse. As for why the app doesn’t use the Gnu build tools - I'd say any app with less than 100 or so files in the build process is better off being built with a simple makefile - the gnu toolchain is not the easiest thing to use and adds another layer of complexity that, for smaller apps, makes it not worth the effort. I've only been programming for 35 years and I still find it a serious pain to fix when it goes wrong.On 12 Jan 2014, at 16:18, Philip Hudson <phil.hudson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: There's enormous scope for fuzzy/AI-ish improvement beyond that.Yes but you'd end up with even more confusing messages. In this case someone tried to run an executable script called configure when it was the wrong thing to do. Ubuntu might have suggested a package with a file named configure - wrong. Some other app might have found another file called configure and offered to run that. I remember at the met office I wrote a script with a typo. It was suppose to run gplot but assumed my invalid typo was g3dplot, and instead of returning me online output with lots of graphs printed a great wad of graphs in 3d from the default colour printer eating up the allocated use of that resource for my department. In the original case the user is confused and the computer has no context. You don't want AI second guessing our behaviour when we make these kind of mistakes. I do agree with the idea we should take all reports seriously. Perhaps ask what was the reason for not using the GNU build tools for this app, but they may be good reasons.
Tom te tom te tom -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/listfaq