Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uflorida!haven!mimsy!fe2o3!rusty From: rusty@fe2o3.UUCP (Rusty Haddock) Newsgroups: comp.mail.elm Subject: Re: Save Tagged Mail _Fast_! Keywords: calm <<--- take note... Message-ID: <215@fe2o3.UUCP> Date: 27 Aug 89 16:47:34 GMT References: <1989Aug23.121938.2967@DRD.Com> <2969@mace.cc.purdue.edu> <1989Aug23.225206.538@DSI.COM> <214@fe2o3.UUCP> <1989Aug25.014846.16421@DSI.COM> Reply-To: rusty@fe2o3.UUCP (Rusty Haddock) Organization: sort +3nr Lines: 83 In article <1989Aug25.014846.16421@DSI.COM> you write: >rusty@fe2o3.UUCP (Rusty Haddock) writes: >>Actions like >>this, when taken by a program, can upset the program's users (knowledgable or >>not) and that's not one of the basic ideas behind the design of a user >>interface. > >I think I should defend the original author of Elm in this case. >The error message you have received, and under discussion here, >is that Elm thinks that the editor did not even get started. Sorry, I guess I kinda get excited about this sort of thing. Don't get me wrong -- I wasn't trying to cut anyone in particular down. If anything, I was ``trying'' to extoll the virtues of a non-hostile program. I've had at least one former department head and two former supervisors that would have grilled me silly for a program that would die (for any reason) after typing in a long message without an escape or some sort of recovery. I've also worked with a number of good human factors people and a smaller number of psychologists. Because of this I'm a little sensitive to the human factors side of the issue and I don't like IT to be ignored even if I am an engineer. (I, on the other hand, am used to being ignored but I s'pose you have figured that out by now :-) >My point is, that Elm's original author thought that this message >was all the work that was necessary for a catastrophic error that >probably meant that something was drasticly misconfigured. (IE Unable >to start the editor at all). It was never envisioned that the editor >would start and then appear to have an error. In three years this Well, now that we know there's a problem let's work to remedying the situation. And yes, I will and can help now (summer finals were just about to start when I wrote the message). Gimme a chance to go through the sources and I'll see what would be appropriate. Maybe it won't be 4 or 5 lines -- maybe it will be. >is the first discussion on this (I still don't know why vi has broken >all of a sudden, why not three years ago). I don't believe that `vi' has broken all of a sudden, well, at least mine hasn't. I'm running Version 3.7, 6/10/83 and the binary hasn't been modified in the past 2.5-years. I don't have source either. Still, just because we don't see it doesn't mean it's not there, right? >All I ask, as coordinator, is to take the tone down one level, and >to submit as a patch, to me, the change to do what you wish, make >it friendler. Just remember to check for no editor, no processes, >cannot fork, out of disk space, editor returned spurious error, editor >actually did die, (Gee, its not so simple after all, is it? :-)) I really didn't think that the tone was up but, like I said before, I can excited over thses issues. Heck, the flame thrower hasn't even been broken out of its shipping crate yet and the napalm is still on backorder. :-) If I've got to do all that you suggest then *everyone* working on Elm has to! OK? This isn't s'pose to be a punishment assignment for getting excited. And is all that information really there without taking the smaller machines a minute to figure it out? Still, at this stage, I don't believe that the user really has a need to know the reason things crapped out (although the programmers WILL!) just that it did die and the program is trying to save them from itself until Elm can be fixed even better in the next version. It may not be the bravest rescue but it is trying for now. OK, I've had most of my say and it's time to finish breakfast and git to reading Elm. Syd, I'll bounce you a patch as soon as I can get a reasonable solution, OK? BTW folks, if you've had this editor problem happen to you PLEASE let me know about it via Email. It would particularly help if you tell me which version of Unix you're using as well as which editor (and version) bombed and the shell you're using. Anything else that you can REMEMBER about the session that was `different' would be helpful too. Thanks! -Rusty- P.S. The version of `vi' can be found by typing :vers followed by a carriage return or linefeed character. -- Rusty Haddock o {uunet,att,rutgers}!mimsy.umd.edu!fe2o3!rusty Laurel, Maryland o "IBM sucks silicon!" -- PC Banana Jr, "Bloom County"