RussellMc wrote:
> you do *seem* (ie it may not be the case) often enough to wade into
> conversations in the middle without showing signs of having skimmed
> down the prior thread.

There is no easy mechanism for skimming the prior thread.  Things don't sho=
w
up in the archives in a timely fashion, and that's a pain to go chase down
anyway.  And no, I don't keep a copy of list messages locally.

The point however is, that no matter how easy or hard it may be to skim
prior context, it shouldn't be necessary except perhaps to get some fine
level details.  I'm sure I'm not the only one with lots of things going on
(while this dicussion has been going on this morning I've added a inline
function to PREPIC, written part of a SPI A/D handler, tried to solder a 64
pin TQPF on a board, tried to clean up the resulting mess, and it's barely
lunchtime).  We can't be expected to remember all the details of every
thread, or even to have read them in the first place.  Posts need to stand
on their to some extent else their audience becomes limited.  That is part
of the point of quoting prior context.

The problem with Peter's post is that he quoted absolutely none at all,
providing not even a hint of what it was about other than the thread title.

> If one can lean on the side of advising rather than
> whacking, more mileage may happen.

History shows that doesn't work.  A polite request only works if the
original infraction was due to ignorance.  Otherwise people don't change
unless there is a force pushing them (and then usually not anyway).

> The XOR analog solution was indeed a "kluge". But, he knew that. He
> clearly understood what he was proposing, what it's limitations were
> and how it could be done better. His subsequent email proposed a
> "proper" digital solution.

Then there should be no problem in pointing out its a kludge.  If a bit mor=
e
context had been provided, perhaps that could have been accompanied with a
suggestion of how to do it better.  That's difficult when it's not clear
what "it" is.


********************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
(978) 742-9014.  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000.
--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.