Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!decwrl!crltrx!athabasca.crl.dec.com!jg
From: jg@athabasca.crl.dec.com (Jim Gettys)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: Does anyone have a fix for R4/PL1 XGetDefault?
Message-ID: <4582@crltrx.crl.dec.com>
Date: 19 Feb 90 22:06:30 GMT
References: <49225@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> <47970@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> <9002191921.AA01528@expire.lcs.mit.edu>
Sender: news@crltrx.crl.dec.com
Reply-To: jg@athabasca.crl.dec.com (Jim Gettys)
Organization: DEC Cambridge Research Lab
Lines: 57

In article <49225@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV>, casey@gauss.llnl.gov (Casey
Leedom) writes:
> 
>   Well piss me off!  Why the hell didn't someone answer this way
> sooner?!  I thought I wasn't seeing a response from someone in authority
> because they didn't have the time for the fix.  How long would it have
> taken you to write this response a month ago when I first asked?  (Note
> that you're responding to my second posting.)

Maybe they were a bit busy a month ago.  I seem to remember a release
around then, and an X conference around then; not to mention the fact
that the message rate on the newsgroup was around 75 or more a day a
month ago.  And some of us are involved in other things than answering
each and every news posting.  At that message rate, it is a bit hard to
deal with figuring out which ones should or shouldn't be answered.  As
someone whose job is supposed to be things other than answering
questions on Usenet, I know that I ignored a whole pile of postings
around then.

> 
>   As for Proper Behavior: DOCUMENT IT DAMN IT!!!  There is no explicit
> mention of this ``Proper Behavior'' in the XGetDefault manual page.  And
> it should be pointed out that this is a particularly non-useful
> definition of Proper Behavior.  It sure as hell isn't consistent with the
> other resource routines which do break up multi-level name
> specifications.  What is the rationale for not supporting multi-level
> resource names in XGetDefault??  Are you simply trying to discourage its
> use?  If so, mark it as deprecated in the manual page!
> 
>   I don't know what the hell I'm going to do for awm now.  I'll probably
> have to do some weird-ass dynamic building of XtResourceList's ...  What
> a pain.
> 
> Pissed off,
> Casey

Changes to the specifications are not made lightly.  I can (and will)
agree that the specification is not clear on this point.  I suspect that
well-meaning people can and will disagree on the correct interpretation
on what XGetDefault should do.  My intent was that it be mostly for the
convienience of people moving X10 programs to X11; it should have been
moved to the compatibility library some time ago (probably
should have been there on day one).  There has been some discussion on
this point in recent mailing list messages.  But such a move does not
get made without public comment and review.

I have, however, seen few messages on this news group with the tone of
your message. I hope I don't see many more, for they surely discourage
people from bothering with answering peoples questions, if they get
flamed at in public.  I hope not to see
any more.

I believe you owe Bob an apology.  If anyone deserved flaming at, it
might be me, for not having written the spec better.  But I don't think
public flames serve
anyone for anything.
				- Jim Gettys