Documentation boggle of the day
-
From the TCP/IP interface specification for some hardware I have to talk to: A command is always sent from the CT to the WS and a response is always sent from the WS to the CT. The term command and response no longer dictate the order that the messages are sent, that is, the WS may send a response first and the CT will respond by sending a command. And people wonder why I don't have any hair left...
Software Zen:
delete this; -
From the TCP/IP interface specification for some hardware I have to talk to: A command is always sent from the CT to the WS and a response is always sent from the WS to the CT. The term command and response no longer dictate the order that the messages are sent, that is, the WS may send a response first and the CT will respond by sending a command. And people wonder why I don't have any hair left...
Software Zen:
delete this;But only psychic sites use that feature. Or the amazing Carnack.
-
From the TCP/IP interface specification for some hardware I have to talk to: A command is always sent from the CT to the WS and a response is always sent from the WS to the CT. The term command and response no longer dictate the order that the messages are sent, that is, the WS may send a response first and the CT will respond by sending a command. And people wonder why I don't have any hair left...
Software Zen:
delete this;:-D :thumbsup:
-
From the TCP/IP interface specification for some hardware I have to talk to: A command is always sent from the CT to the WS and a response is always sent from the WS to the CT. The term command and response no longer dictate the order that the messages are sent, that is, the WS may send a response first and the CT will respond by sending a command. And people wonder why I don't have any hair left...
Software Zen:
delete this; -
From the TCP/IP interface specification for some hardware I have to talk to: A command is always sent from the CT to the WS and a response is always sent from the WS to the CT. The term command and response no longer dictate the order that the messages are sent, that is, the WS may send a response first and the CT will respond by sending a command. And people wonder why I don't have any hair left...
Software Zen:
delete this;Gary Wheeler wrote:
...the WS may send a response first...
The only appropriate command for that is a middle finger, which happens to now be an emoji that I won't embed here...
-
Describes my life.
Peter Wasser "The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell
Your sig is somehow very fitting to this thread.
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello
-
Your sig is somehow very fitting to this thread.
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello
-
Quote:
this thread
Are you letting the rest of the world off the hook?
Peter Wasser "The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." - Bertrand Russell
Nah, I'm just making a point of judging everyone on their own merits. So I don't consider people to be fools until they prove me wrong. The fact that I anyway end up with the same conclusion in 98% of the cases, tend to make me seem a bit naive at times. I guess that makes me kind of a fool, even if I'm not according to the quote. :-\
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello
-
Gary Wheeler wrote:
...the WS may send a response first...
The only appropriate command for that is a middle finger, which happens to now be an emoji that I won't embed here...
You don't need an emoji .i.. ;P :laugh: :laugh:
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
From the TCP/IP interface specification for some hardware I have to talk to: A command is always sent from the CT to the WS and a response is always sent from the WS to the CT. The term command and response no longer dictate the order that the messages are sent, that is, the WS may send a response first and the CT will respond by sending a command. And people wonder why I don't have any hair left...
Software Zen:
delete this;Just wait until they add request into the mix. If you're not cross-eyed by Friday, it'll be because you've gone blind.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
From the TCP/IP interface specification for some hardware I have to talk to: A command is always sent from the CT to the WS and a response is always sent from the WS to the CT. The term command and response no longer dictate the order that the messages are sent, that is, the WS may send a response first and the CT will respond by sending a command. And people wonder why I don't have any hair left...
Software Zen:
delete this;quantum communication :omg:
-
Just wait until they add request into the mix. If you're not cross-eyed by Friday, it'll be because you've gone blind.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
Oh, it's in there. Their command descriptions use the words 'get', 'report', and 'request' arbitrarily for retrieving information.
Software Zen:
delete this; -
From the TCP/IP interface specification for some hardware I have to talk to: A command is always sent from the CT to the WS and a response is always sent from the WS to the CT. The term command and response no longer dictate the order that the messages are sent, that is, the WS may send a response first and the CT will respond by sending a command. And people wonder why I don't have any hair left...
Software Zen:
delete this;That's what you get for reading the documentation :laugh:
"Well, Thanks To The Internet, I'm Now Bored With Sex." - Fry
-
That's what you get for reading the documentation :laugh:
"Well, Thanks To The Internet, I'm Now Bored With Sex." - Fry
Well, I only do it in self-defense...
Software Zen:
delete this; -
Oh, it's in there. Their command descriptions use the words 'get', 'report', and 'request' arbitrarily for retrieving information.
Software Zen:
delete this;Ah, the joys of reading text by people who've heard that you shouldn't use the same word too often. Look on the bright side: at least you've got something to complain about.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
Ah, the joys of reading text by people who've heard that you shouldn't use the same word too often. Look on the bright side: at least you've got something to complain about.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
Mark_Wallace wrote:
at least you've got something to complain about
To quote a line: don't get me started ;P.
Software Zen:
delete this; -
Your sig is somehow very fitting to this thread.
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello
The Typo "to" instead of "too", or the essence of the message? :)
-
From the TCP/IP interface specification for some hardware I have to talk to: A command is always sent from the CT to the WS and a response is always sent from the WS to the CT. The term command and response no longer dictate the order that the messages are sent, that is, the WS may send a response first and the CT will respond by sending a command. And people wonder why I don't have any hair left...
Software Zen:
delete this;We had a "problem" with the elevator in the new wing of our office building: It goes from floor 4 to 3 to 2 to 1 to -1. Most of my colleagues have an engineering/math background, and it hurt our brains to see a discontinous number line to describe a physically continous world. So we ended up with declaring that the elevator shaft does have a virtual floor zero, where the elevator won't stop (because the floor is virtual). That eased our minds: The number line is again continous. You could try a similar approach for peace of mind: You may assume that there was a request, but it was virtual, so no real bits crossed the interface. The command provokes a virtual response, with no real bits transmitted. That way you can maintain a command/response model without breaking any sort of logic thinking.
-
From the TCP/IP interface specification for some hardware I have to talk to: A command is always sent from the CT to the WS and a response is always sent from the WS to the CT. The term command and response no longer dictate the order that the messages are sent, that is, the WS may send a response first and the CT will respond by sending a command. And people wonder why I don't have any hair left...
Software Zen:
delete this; -
Apparently a rhetorical answer is just as powerful as a rhetorical ques... Wait, that won't work, either. :confused:
-Bob
You're actually close to my solution. When I'm reading the spec, I mentally substitute the word 'message' for both 'command' and 'response'. It makes the whole thing much more readable, because you don't have that constant hitch figuring out which direction the traffic is going.
Software Zen:
delete this;