14 Dec
2024
14 Dec
'24
12:20 p.m.
That was a joke, Dan.
I've been programming for 58 years, and nobody has put in more bugs than
me, I'm sure.
Marc
On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 6:28 PM Dan Cross <crossd(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 8:12 PM Marc Rochkind
<mrochkind(a)gmail.com> wrote:
--
*My new email address is mrochkind(a)gmail.com <mrochkind(a)gmail.com>*
On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 2:10 PM Dan Cross
<crossd(a)gmail.com> wrote:
bug
things.
Oh dear, I do hope no offense was taken. As I said, I firmly believe
the story was apocryphal.
The identity of the person from whom I heard it is probably known to
at least some of the USENIX old school crew; I rather thought at the
time they were under the impression that SCCS was the result of a
large team, or perhaps some kind of fork.
Anyway, I don't mean to belabor the point. Please accept my apologies
if the story rubbed you the wrong way.
- Dan C.
I had heard a story once, that based on what you
wrote today, I now
think is apocryphal and never actually happened.
The story was that there was a bug in early SCCS where a source file
had to be checked in twice before it could be (successfully) checked
out. The bug was such that if one only checked it in once and tried to
check it out, it would truncate the file. "Programmers using it just
learned to check in twice."
I never used SCCS extensively, and certainly never observed that
behavior, so chucked it up to the bug having been long fixed. As I
mentioned above, I doubt it was ever there to begin with. A fun story,
though.
This is completely ridiculous. No program I wrote ever had one of those