QNX bug database?

bridged with qnx.cafe
Chris Herborth

Re: QNX bug database?

Post by Chris Herborth » Thu Jul 29, 2004 5:02 pm

Adam Mallory wrote:
[...]
Even further, the concept of a simple appliance is changing. I doubt
this mantra of 'applience status' (sic) holds true for the 'Internet
connected fridge' (http://www.electricnews.net/news.html?code=8631787).

I can't wait for the toaster and microwave to follow suite. ;)
CHerborth@qnxws7083 [501]: ping toaster
error: no route to toast

--
Chris Herborth (cherborth@qnx.com)
Never send a monster to do the work of an evil scientist.

Lisa Scanlan

Re: QNX bug database?

Post by Lisa Scanlan » Thu Jul 29, 2004 6:27 pm

http://www.cnn.com/TECH/computing/9809/ ... owave.idg/

-Lisa

"Chris Herborth" <cherborth@qnx.com> wrote in message
news:ceb87d$shm$1@inn.qnx.com...
Adam Mallory wrote:
[...]
Even further, the concept of a simple appliance is changing. I doubt
this mantra of 'applience status' (sic) holds true for the 'Internet
connected fridge' (http://www.electricnews.net/news.html?code=8631787).

I can't wait for the toaster and microwave to follow suite. ;)

CHerborth@qnxws7083 [501]: ping toaster
error: no route to toast

--
Chris Herborth (cherborth@qnx.com)
Never send a monster to do the work of an evil scientist.

Miguel Simon

Re: QNX bug database?

Post by Miguel Simon » Sun Aug 01, 2004 4:55 am

Hi Bill...

I agree with you (we also post here more often than in the private
group). Thanks for posting here; I get a lot of mileage from your
questions (and I suspect that others do too). :)


Question to you Bill (over a cup of coffee of course):

You have mentioned before -elsewhere- that you do not use the IDE. Do
you get the PE edition that comes with the full IDE + debugger
utilities, and if so, how come you do not use the IDE? I am only curious.

I must tell you, the current debugger + debugging utilities that come
with the Momentics IDE 3.0 are really much more useful, stable, improved
and powerful! You can actually see the trace of your program, see
interaction of several programs that you may have in the debugger at the
same time, etc. I am quite impressed with them. You could or perhaps
would be much more efficient if you use them, I am sure. If you have the
tools, I encourage you to try them someday.

Regards...

Miguel.



Bill Caroselli wrote:
Garry <asdf34sdg@sdfasdf3.com> wrote:
G > Bill Caroselli wrote:


QSSL is like anyone else. The squeeky week gets the grease. But if the
wheel squeeks in the forest and no one else is there to read about it,
does it make any noise? (Or is that a mixed metaphore?)


G > Maybe, but as a non-paying user (believe me, I'd *LOVE* to give QSS say
G > $200 for a desktop package, with the right to develop commercial desktop
G > apps) I don't think my opinions carry much weight compared to a
G > commercial client.


You'd be surprised. I AM a paying client. We paid for the commercial
package and the support plan. I have access to the Paying Customer News
Groups but I post here much more often. Things posted here get much more
visibility. Even if someone else can't solve my problem, then can often
raise their hand and say "Me Too"!

John Nagle

Re: QNX bug database?

Post by John Nagle » Sun Aug 01, 2004 5:34 pm

We have PE, but I tend to avoid the IDE. My home system
runs NC, and it's convenient to be able to work on programs
on both.

PhAB, though, is very useful.

John Nagle
Team Overbot


Miguel Simon wrote:
Hi Bill...

I agree with you (we also post here more often than in the private
group). Thanks for posting here; I get a lot of mileage from your
questions (and I suspect that others do too). :)


Question to you Bill (over a cup of coffee of course):

You have mentioned before -elsewhere- that you do not use the IDE. Do
you get the PE edition that comes with the full IDE + debugger
utilities, and if so, how come you do not use the IDE? I am only curious.

I must tell you, the current debugger + debugging utilities that come
with the Momentics IDE 3.0 are really much more useful, stable, improved
and powerful! You can actually see the trace of your program, see
interaction of several programs that you may have in the debugger at the
same time, etc. I am quite impressed with them. You could or perhaps
would be much more efficient if you use them, I am sure. If you have the
tools, I encourage you to try them someday.

Regards...

Miguel.



Bill Caroselli wrote:

Garry <asdf34sdg@sdfasdf3.com> wrote:
G > Bill Caroselli wrote:


QSSL is like anyone else. The squeeky week gets the grease. But if
the wheel squeeks in the forest and no one else is there to read
about it, does it make any noise? (Or is that a mixed metaphore?)



G > Maybe, but as a non-paying user (believe me, I'd *LOVE* to give
QSS say G > $200 for a desktop package, with the right to develop
commercial desktop G > apps) I don't think my opinions carry much
weight compared to a G > commercial client.


You'd be surprised. I AM a paying client. We paid for the commercial
package and the support plan. I have access to the Paying Customer News
Groups but I post here much more often. Things posted here get much
more visibility. Even if someone else can't solve my problem, then
can often raise their hand and say "Me Too"!

Bill Caroselli

Re: QNX bug database?

Post by Bill Caroselli » Mon Aug 02, 2004 12:14 pm

Miguel Simon <simon@ou.edu> wrote:
MS > Hi Bill...

MS > I agree with you (we also post here more often than in the private
MS > group). Thanks for posting here; I get a lot of mileage from your
MS > questions (and I suspect that others do too). :)


MS > Question to you Bill (over a cup of coffee of course):

MS > You have mentioned before -elsewhere- that you do not use the IDE. Do
MS > you get the PE edition that comes with the full IDE + debugger
MS > utilities, and if so, how come you do not use the IDE? I am only curious.

MS > I must tell you, the current debugger + debugging utilities that come
MS > with the Momentics IDE 3.0 are really much more useful, stable, improved
MS > and powerful! You can actually see the trace of your program, see
MS > interaction of several programs that you may have in the debugger at the
MS > same time, etc. I am quite impressed with them. You could or perhaps
MS > would be much more efficient if you use them, I am sure. If you have the
MS > tools, I encourage you to try them someday.

MS > Regards...

MS > Miguel.

Gee, I happen to be drinking my coffee right now. First thing I do in
the morning is get coffee and read these news groups.

More to the point, I have never tried the IDE with 6.3. I did try it
with 6.2. I found the learning curve incredibly difficult. And it litterally
wouldn't let me do *ANYTHING* the way I wanted to do it.

Most of what I need to work on is real-time software. Using a typical
debugger makes that software not-real-time. So I've developed a whole
set of my own diagnostic techniques and utilities. I can use these without
interfering with the real-timeliness of the executing software.

So I really don't have a need to try the IDE again. On top of that I found
the IDE to be extreamly FAT and SLOW. I'm developing on a 2.4 GHz HP
system with 1 GB of RAM and I still found the IDE fat and slow compared to
my own development techniques.

I can remember when I first started working on QNX 6, after having worked
with QNX 4 for almost 15 years. I used to be able to develop and test on a
single 166 MHz Pentium with 32 MB of RAM. QSSL said that I needed 256 MB
to do development work on QNX6. Quite frankly I was insulted.
Furthermore, it simply is NOT REQUIRED as long as you use the command line
utilities.

Anyway, where I am working now they have a nice fat wallet. So I get all
the computing horsepower I want and we sprung for the Professional version.
They requested it. I'm sure it was a status symbol to them.

Miguel Simon

Re: QNX bug database?

Post by Miguel Simon » Tue Aug 03, 2004 4:35 am

Hi Bill...

Bill Caroselli wrote:
Anyway, where I am working now they have a nice fat wallet. So I get all
the computing horsepower I want and we sprung for the Professional version.
They requested it. I'm sure it was a status symbol to them.
This is always nice, a 'fat wallet' that is! :)

Your points are valid. Some real-time runs + things cannot be debugged
with an IDE + debugger. The 'printf' solution is useful in these cases.

With the IDE I can put some conditions, run in RT, and then see what is
the state of everything (memory blocks included) when the condition
comes up. In my case (I do not have your fancy tools!), it would be very
difficult to get this functionality other than through the IDE.

Any way, *when* you have some time, you may want to explore.

Are you working in the bay area now (San Jose, Oakland)?

Regards...

Miguel.

Miguel Simon

Re: QNX bug database?

Post by Miguel Simon » Tue Aug 03, 2004 4:42 am

Hi John...

You will know this perhaps, but when you create a workspace with the
IDE, and you have your different projects and so on, you can still
'make' via command line! You could create your workspace, and make else
where with no IDE. We actually do this too (some people with whom I
work do not have the IDE).

You mentioned before that you have worked in the aerospace industry. I
wonder when and with which company (if you can tell)? I am curious
because I have met many people from the Apollo era (both from the
academic and from the trenches areas), and it is fascinating to talk to
them. (Pardon me if this does not apply to you of course).

Regards...

Miguel.


John Nagle wrote:
We have PE, but I tend to avoid the IDE. My home system
runs NC, and it's convenient to be able to work on programs
on both.

PhAB, though, is very useful.

John Nagle
Team Overbot

John Nagle

Re: QNX bug database?

Post by John Nagle » Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:40 am

Miguel Simon wrote:
Hi John...

You will know this perhaps, but when you create a workspace with the
IDE, and you have your different projects and so on, you can still
'make' via command line! You could create your workspace, and make else
where with no IDE. We actually do this too (some people with whom I
work do not have the IDE).
I actually do that. We had one person who liked the IDE, and I
have to maintain their code.
You mentioned before that you have worked in the aerospace industry. I
wonder when and with which company (if you can tell)? I am curious
because I have met many people from the Apollo era
I'm not that old.

John Nagle

Bill Caroselli

Re: QNX bug database?

Post by Bill Caroselli » Tue Aug 03, 2004 11:58 am

Miguel Simon <simon@ou.edu> wrote:
MS > Hi Bill...

MS > Bill Caroselli wrote:
Anyway, where I am working now they have a nice fat wallet. So I get all
the computing horsepower I want and we sprung for the Professional version.
They requested it. I'm sure it was a status symbol to them.
MS > This is always nice, a 'fat wallet' that is! :)

Don't tell them I said that.

MS > Your points are valid. Some real-time runs + things cannot be debugged
MS > with an IDE + debugger. The 'printf' solution is useful in these cases.

MS > With the IDE I can put some conditions, run in RT, and then see what is
MS > the state of everything (memory blocks included) when the condition
MS > comes up. In my case (I do not have your fancy tools!), it would be very
MS > difficult to get this functionality other than through the IDE.

MS > Any way, *when* you have some time, you may want to explore.

MS > Are you working in the bay area now (San Jose, Oakland)?

MS > Regards...

MS > Miguel.

I used to live in San Leandro but I now living in the Chicago southland.

Miguel Simon

Re: QNX bug database?

Post by Miguel Simon » Tue Aug 03, 2004 7:20 pm

Hi John...

John Nagle wrote:
Miguel Simon wrote:


You mentioned before that you have worked in the aerospace industry. I
wonder when and with which company (if you can tell)? I am curious
because I have met many people from the Apollo era


I'm not that old.
I figured that you were not.

Regards...

Miguel.

John Nagle

Post Reply

Return to “qnx.cafe”