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; -
I really need to hire you in as a consultant to work with this guy. Unfortunately we haven't had consultant money in years, so... :|
Software Zen:
delete this;You should try saying the money hum: Om money padme hum :)
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows. -- 6079 Smith W.
-
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;Methinks they might have been physicists writing the documentation. They must've been struggling with the relativity / causality issues and trying to come to grips with the implications. I.e. in their mind effect may in fact precede cause. Thus the command may follow the result, which may all have happened weeks before the request!
-
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:
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.
I think it's just the software engineer being stuck on the English language rather than focusing on the logical aspect of the documentation. Gratuitous network responses are very common in the networking world. [Gratuitous ARP Response](https://wiki.wireshark.org/Gratuitous\_ARP) There are also gratuitous RIP and eBGP responses. Probably a dozen other network protocols supporting gratuitous response messages. That's all I can think of at the moment. Best Wishes, -David Delaune
-
Gary Wheeler wrote:
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.
I think it's just the software engineer being stuck on the English language rather than focusing on the logical aspect of the documentation. Gratuitous network responses are very common in the networking world. [Gratuitous ARP Response](https://wiki.wireshark.org/Gratuitous\_ARP) There are also gratuitous RIP and eBGP responses. Probably a dozen other network protocols supporting gratuitous response messages. That's all I can think of at the moment. Best Wishes, -David Delaune
Randor wrote:
think it's just the software engineer being stuck on the English language rather than focusing on the logical aspect of the documentation
Got it in one. He was stuck on the notion that incoming messages to him were called 'commands', even when they were responses to something he sent, and vice versa.
Software Zen:
delete this; -
quantum communication :omg:
-
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;yes but … this creates mind blowing possibilities: consider that "command" is not a command and "response" is not a response, like in The Matrix "spoon" is not a spoon (or something like that), perhaps this way we will get somewhere with deciphering this stuff … :-)
-
Well, I only do it in self-defense...
Software Zen:
delete this; -
Is that the kind of self-defence where you attack first and then get a response?
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
Or, as we say in soccer, "getting your retaliation in first"
-
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;If only we mre humand could give answers before we get the questions!
CQ de W5ALT
Walt Fair, Jr., P. E. Comport Computing Specializing in Technical Engineering Software
