home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky comp.unix.wizards:4735 comp.unix.shell:4742 comp.unix.misc:4205
- Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!decwrl!sun-barr!cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!fdurt1.fdu.edu!wisdom.bubble.org!sugra!ken
- From: ken@sugra.uucp (Kenneth Ng)
- Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards,comp.unix.shell,comp.unix.misc
- Subject: Re: The Problem with UNIX
- Message-ID: <1992Nov17.011906.8220@sugra.uucp>
- Date: 17 Nov 92 01:19:06 GMT
- References: <1992Nov11.194557.16258@yarc.uucp: <1992Nov12.204710.5808@reed.edu> <1992Nov14.145943.1288@global.hacktic.nl>
- Organization: Private Computer, Totowa, NJ
- Lines: 22
-
- In article <1992Nov14.145943.1288@global.hacktic.nl: peter@global.hacktic.nl (Peter Busser) writes:
- :kanderso@reed.edu (Karl Anderson) writes:
- :>Is there any reason why there can't be another stream for more
- :>user-friendly messages?
- :Yes! Feeping creaturism. I'm pro user friendly messages, but, IMHO, consistency
- :and clarity are much more important than verboseness. Furthermore, it would
- :require existing programs to be extended with the verbose message.
- :A better approach would be, IMHO, to leave the messages what they are and make
- :every program return a meaningful error number. A seperate program could
- :figure out which verbose message belongs to that number.
-
- I would like to see two things: one, have the program that generates the
- error message put *ITS* *NAME* as the first part of the error message.
- Second, print something meaningful like perror(). I do not know how many
- times I've seen "can not open file" in a script that calls other scripts
- that calls a few dozen routines. So then I have to find out WHAT program
- could not open WHAT file.
-
- --
- Kenneth Ng
- Please reply to ken@eies2.njit.edu for now.
- Apple and AT&T lawsuits: Just say NO!
-