Re: `power' v wp xyW (long!)

[LESLIE319@xxxxxxxx]

 > Leslie: Thanks for getting beyond the lead. > > "I often
quote what George Vallasi used to say (George: do you lurk here?)
> `XyWrite isn't a word processor. It's a kit from which one can assemble a
> word processor.' Truer words were never expressed. [ ... ]
> > "Annie, I don't think there's any such thing as a typical XyWrite user."
> --Leslie Bialler
> > "Truer words were never written." --K.
> > I agree in both instances. Wow! Who is this George dude?

He is the Vice President of Chernow Editorial Services and he
used to preside over a XyWrite Sig. He was a Beta tester and
more for the old regime and is majorly miffed because the Tech
Group does not call him.

I also told that sales rep to contact him immediatement.

Holmgren's epigram is to the point.

 > XyWrite's construction deep down inside is something I'd only inferred
> before
> reading that. As high level languages go, xpl's problem is that it's
> unstructured. Even GW-BASIC can be structured de facto (I did so
> instinctively before I learned C); not so, xpl. I suppose SU is intended for
> the purpose and v4 memory manipulation must ease the situation, but SUs are
> weak and I'm conditioned by v3 to go to extremes to avoid sacrificing memory
> to variables that aren't absolutely required. The high level language I know
> best, C, has a goto statement that programmers learn early *never* to use.
> It's only to break out of a situation so uncommon as to be nigh unthinkable.
> Structuring eliminates the need, and xpl is immensely untidy because GL
...
> LBs are so vital. But, like xpl, C is very compact--enhanced by libraries of
> functions, and I guess the same is true of xpl as regards both EDITOR and
> user-definable functions. Being able to manipulate xyWrite with C is an
> exciting fantasy, but Robert makes a powerful argument for beefing up xpl
> instead of turning to an alternative. Flow control would surely be the place
> to start, so structure can be imposed.
> George used to run Pascal routines under and over XyWrite, as I remember

> "... that insulting XyQuest xpl pamphlet." --me
> "Which pamphlet do you mean, Annie?" --Leslie
> > I think you've mentioned it--actually a booklet. When it was published I was
> still a xyPirate, and compounding the felony I photocopied it, but never used
> it. With Sladek (the rough equivalent of early v3 documentation) plus
> experimentation, I was already ahead of it. I'd worked out on my own stuff like the
>     {sv86,foo bar}{sx86,{is00}e{is86}}
> counterpart to C strchr (my proudest xpl moment--*before* I learned C). The
> only place I ever read that and a bunch of stuff I never *ever* could have
> worked out on my own was "XyWrite Revealed"--none of it in the XyQuest
> booklet. > > "XyQuest was as delinquent with configuration info as TTG." --me
> "At least they tried, with the app notes, etc. etc." --Leslie
> > Pirates do pay. I never saw them. And now ...? Guess we really can thank IBM
> and XyQuest marketing jointly for the present dearth. > Yup.
I usually just write programs on an ad hoc basis. I have a whole
file of little routines that I forget what I wrote them for.

> "If this was the recording industry, the reporters would be the musicians and
> the editors the sound engineers." > > My experience is that
the people behind the scenes in that business are as
> creative as and more interesting than the musicians. On the business side
> especially, rogues and scoundrels who'd defy fictionalization, great fun to
> watch in action.

Ah yes. When Columbia University Press promoted me to what we
laughingly call middle management, which entitles me to a place
above the salt, if not on the dias, I found myself looking back
longingly at the jugglers and the clowns at the table in the back
where I used to sit, which at least had the advantage of being
closer to the exits . . . and the bathrooms.

%%Leslie%%