Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site caip.RUTGERS.EDU
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!gatech!seismo!caip!wpd
From: wpd@ATHENA.MIT.EDU
Newsgroups: net.micro.amiga
Subject: Source Vs. Binaries
Message-ID: <458@caip.RUTGERS.EDU>
Date: Sat, 16-Nov-85 15:51:53 EST
Article-I.D.: caip.458
Posted: Sat Nov 16 15:51:53 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 18-Nov-85 06:57:35 EST
Sender: daemon@caip.RUTGERS.EDU
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.
Lines: 15

From: wpd@ATHENA.MIT.EDU

I do not have an amiga yet, and, since I am a student, probably cannot afford
much more than the basic setup when I do get one.  I am interested in
software for it, though.  I agree with all of you who say that one can learn
more from the source of a program than from the binary, but what about those
of us who do not have, (or will not have) compliers for that source?  I vote
that both the source AND the binary be posted.  Perhaps this is the case for
net.sources.mac, I don't know.  I do know that it would be terribly frustrating
to see some wonderful programs that I would not be able to use go by.  Don't
get me wrong.  I will eventually get a compiler, but at first, I won't have
one.  My ballot is cast for BOTH.

					Patrick Doyle
					wpd@mit-athena