[hylafax-devel] Re: config/usr-xon & usr-rts

[Dmitry Bely <dbely@mail.ru>]

Tim Rice <tim@trr.metro.net> writes:

> > > > I should be really stupid, but I fail to understand why the files,
> > > > mentioned in the subject, contain the following:
> > > > 
> > > > #
> > > > # The remainder of this configuration is included so that the
> > > > # modem "idles" in Class 0 while not sending or receiving facsimile.
> > > > #
> > > > ModemSetupAACmd:	AT+FCLASS=0	# leave modem idling in class 0
> > > > ModemAnswerCmd:		AT+FCLASS=1A	# answer in Class 1
> > > > 
> > > > and
> > > > 
> > > > #
> > > > # The remainder of this configuration is included so that the
> > > > # modem "idles" in Class 0 while not sending or receiving facsimile.
> > > > #
> > > > ModemSetupAACmd:	AT+FCLASS=0&H1&I0&R2	# leave modem in class 0
> > > > ModemAnswerCmd:	AT+FCLASS=1&H1&I0&R2A	# force RTS/CTS after change
> > > > 
> > > > Why "to idle in Class 0"??? 
> > > > I am going to remove this. Any objection?
> > > 
> > > I think it's only acceptable to remove things from the config files
> > > if you have tested on ALL models the config file relates to.
> > > 
> > > If that's not the case then assuming you your proposed change has been
> > > tested on "current models" it would probably be acceptable to comment out
> > > the entries and add a note saying they appear to not be needed anymore.
> > 
> > Thinking so we cannot fix *any* bug (not only in config templates, but also
> > in the sources itself), because bugfix cannot be tested on any modem (and
> > also any computer/OS combination) in the world :-)
> 
> Let's see if I can clearify.
> The message starts out with a "I fail to understand".

I just add that *nobody* has explained the purpose of the above parameters
yet.

> I'm suggesting that just because we don't understand why the original
> author made those paticular config entries, is no reason to remove them.

... if the original author really worked around some firmware bugs and had
enough skills/experience to do that right :-) This is not the case here (as
well as in many other config templates). 

> It may be apropriate to comment them out if they are no longer
> needed on current models.

Basing on all my programming experiece, I don't agree completely. All
non-obvious code, not commented well, should be removed/rewritten as soon
as possible. Support of such code costs much more than writing properly
designed new one, believe me :-)

> What I am trying to avoid is removing altogether entries from the
> config files that MAY still be necessary for some older models.

... only if it is clear why they are/were necessary.

If somebody claims that 2*2=5, but does not explain why, also just leave it 
there in hope that it's really so with some older CPUs? :-)))

> If they are left in as comments then the knowledge is not lost.

There is no *knowledge* is such comments, just a frustration for the
reader, because nobody will understand why it's commented out.

Hope to hear from you soon,
Dmitry




____________________ HylaFAX(tm) Developers Mailing List ____________________
 To unsub: mail -s unsubscribe hylafax-devel-request@hylafax.org < /dev/null