DOS ain't dead

Separate UIDE-M Driver Might Be Better! (Announce)

posted by Jack , Fresno, California USA, 07.05.2010, 22:02

> Would it be complex/add too much bloat to implement both methods in UIDE?
> e.g. /P and /P2 with a similar watch out like you did with the /H options
> in the documentation? Let the end user decide which was appropriate?
> Note: I am just thinking about flexibility rather than saying please do
> this.

The initialization logic for UIDE is already quite complex, and it took ME
a few hours (being 5 months "cold" on it!) to remember what I had done.

However a separate UIDE-M driver with "memory only" caching might be a lot
easier for users to understand, since it could eliminate much unneeded and
confusing logic and would be used only in special cases, not as the "main"
UIDE.

As you seem to see value in such a driver, I will look into writing UIDE-M
and my Thanks for this thought, as well!

---
(Account disabled on user's request.)

Complete thread:

• Need User Comment Re: Possible UIDE /P Changes! - Jack, 05.05.2010, 21:34 (Announce)
  • Need User Comment Re: Possible UIDE /P Changes! - Arjay, 05.05.2010, 23:12
    • My Thanks, Arjay! - Jack, 06.05.2010, 01:00
      • My Thanks, Arjay! - Arjay, 06.05.2010, 01:50
  • Need User Comment Re: Possible UIDE /P Changes! - Zyzzle, 05.05.2010, 23:17
    • My Thanks, Zyzzle! - Jack, 06.05.2010, 01:09
  • With Regret, Shall Not Update UIDE /P! - Jack, 07.05.2010, 04:55
    • With Regret, Shall Not Update UIDE /P! - Arjay, 07.05.2010, 21:38
      • Separate UIDE-M Driver Might Be Better! - Jack, 07.05.2010, 22:02
        • Separate UIDE-M Driver Might Be Better! - Arjay, 07.05.2010, 22:31
        • See also private message - Arjay, 07.05.2010, 23:07