JMich: Just so I understand a bit better, are you using this older one or not?
Ah, you were.
Yep, as the tool clicking isn't even relevant to the discussion. My original point is that your average schmuck with the basic skills to google can figure out how to insert random PHP code (or such) and maybe figure out a variable name to change. It's ugly and patchy, but so is the rest of the site, anyway, so it's well within their current quality standards.
Same way as the request "It's chilly in this apartment, can you make it warmer" is fulfilled with the "I knocked down a few walls, installed a library and a fireplace, so you have a place that's warm". Converting an internal combustion engine to an electrical one to provide start-stop functionality may cause more issues than it solves (namely of refueling the vehicle).
Of course, but you're asking if it can be done in a practical way. Non-professionals do unprofessional work. Odds are, though, i'd tell you before i started knocking down walls, and even suggest that if you wanted it done right that professionals might be cheaper in the long run. If i'm doing it for myself, I know what i'm willing to go through to accomplish the task.
So, same as trying to change a forum you don't know how it actually works? Lots of work for little to no gain, especially when you're already considering axing the forum?
Mind you, we're talking about worst-case scenarios, here, assuming that gog doesn't have competent coders and the site is as messy as it appears to be. A slightly competent person is going to have less trouble, a semi-competent person, less, and so forth.
Yes. And as the car (or structure in whole) increases in complexity, the things you need to change to affect one thing also increase in number. If your ignition has failed in an older car and you want to replace it, you only needed to replace the cylinder. As cars advanced in complexity, replacing the cylinder was no longer enough. You needed to change a couple more things as well.
A couple of months back we needed to have an extra key made for our car. The car by itself (and its paperwork) weren't enough, all the other keys for it were required too, because otherwise the other keys would no longer function.
That's why you want to be careful where you stick your fix. The more you look into it, the closer to competent you become. If i'm straight up lazy, i'll even compromise some of my goals to reach the big picture, such as having the car literally turn off when it reaches 0mph, then having it turn back on when i hit the gas, using something as a middle-man to keep from flooding the engine.
Question, are there any functions that expect printf to use only \n instead of \r\n, and may add the \r themselves? Will using a modified printf still allow the program to work as it should, or will the extra return character mess it up somehow?
Odds are, i'd be modifying the header for one particular project, and that it ends up producing the specified result. Maybe, for example, the program in question outputs HTML and it's getting piped into a file, and I just didn't feel like changing everything to fprintf and all that, but I wanted to manually edit the file then. In real life, i'd get a text editor like notepad++ that can handle \n, or just write a whole program that goes through the file and selectively looks for \n and replaces it with \r\n, or use some other existing tool to do that for me. But, hey, who knows what kind of situation i'm in. Maybe i'm devving a website for the mafia on an airgrapped machine and they want me to get the output of some website generator that comes with source code, but doesn't allow text or something, at the potential expense of my life. Who knows? Who cares? It's a hypothetical scenario on how to handle less than ideal situations.
One would start with the assumption that A is currently true. Assuming A will be perpetually true is what I object. So one does the transaction at that point, if they think it's advantageous for them, then proceeds from there.
Right, and as continued transactions show profitable, trust is developed. Even enemies have trust for each other in war under the geneva convention.
Thank you for the history of the formats. Didn't know all that, so it was an interesting read.
Still, even if a format was created to be read by a specific application, does using that file format means you use that specific application?
No, but you can't assume purpose outside of original intent. If my pdf file isn't being read by something other than adobe's programs, do i blame the pdf file or the program for failing to read what the adobe program was able to read 5 minutes ago?
And what happens the first time the words and/or actions don't match your expectations? You continue trusting them? You stop trusting them? You give them time to explain?
Depends on the nature of the betrayal. If my girlfriend promises never to hurt me, and she punches me in the face while she's asleep, i can't really call that a betrayal, just an inaccuracy or a reaonably implied exception to the promise. If i'm chasing her with a knife, i think she's given leeway there, too. If I catch her making out with my twin brother (whom doesn't actually exist), then you give time to explain, to see if she actually failed to recognize the difference in the birthmark, cologne choice, etc or not. If i catch her making out with her female best friend, then I loose trust with her, even if she thought i was into lesbians or something (because that doesn't imply consent with an affair). If i know she's bi, and her female best friend is french, and it was just a peck on the cheek, maybe nothing was implied by it (but, frankly, we really don't know), but a terse warning is clearly in order (with questioned trust remaining), which is essentially what some of us are doing with gog. There's also reasonable fear, with the sneaking, that galaxy could retroactively be thrown into older products either via installers or some kind of activation timer (like with some viruses).
And remember, GOG is a store. They are trying to sell stuff to people in such a way as to maximize their profits. Said profits may be more than monetary (good reputation for example, or people endorsing them so their user base increases), but their goal is not to be a museum of games, nor to cater to everyone's wishes.
Absolutely, which is understandable: you can't please everyone. The big fear is, say they wish to completely alienate me (and others like me), they can do so without reasonably adequate warning (which they've shown they are willing to do), and not only are new deals bunked, but old deals could be retroactively get bunked and i'm just straight up tricked out of my money. Obviously, the smart thing to do would be to have already cut all ties with gog if i reasonably fear this to be the case (which i do). However, there are those of us who actually want gog (as we see it) to succeed, so we're giving them that little bit of faith that maybe they mean their words, and wish to re-establish that level of trust that they had before. I agree, it's not smart, but I think it'd be a waste not to continue giving them some sort of a chance, just incase my reasonable assumtpion actually is wrong.
Why?
Due to lack of solution. If i offer you a unicorn in exchange for a drawing of a unicorn, unless we're living in the middle ages where you don't know better, it's implied that, since we all know that unicorns don't exist, you might be getting a similar drawing, a stuffed unicorn toy, a unicorn keychange, or something to that effect (maybe even a weird favor that's referred to as "a unicorn"). It's understood that DOS games whose code is not ported (offered as originals) will not run on modern operating systems (part of the contract with gog), thus we can reasonably assume a compatibility layer is employed (dosbox). A modern made game, that is compilable for a modern system, does not come with this implication, because it is quite reasonable to assume the layer is not necessary.
Yeah, almost sounds like asking gamers what's DRM.
Correct, which is why we're having this discussion.
