Re: [tuning] Digest Number 967

on 11/30/00 12:40 PM, tuning@egroups.com at tuning@egroups.com wrote:

Jacky,

Sorry to mispell your name in my last post. I usually try to be very careful
about this. My last name has rarely been spelled right, in years of
performances, etc.

Anyway, I'm, enjoying your composition Blue on mp3 site.

Thanks,

Seth
--
Seth Austen

http://www.sethausten.com
email; seth@sethausten.com

Hi Joseph,

> Absolutely. I swear to you, though, that before you put in the debug
> code the beta crashed EVERY TIME! And with TWO DIFFERENT
> installations from scratch!!

I can believe that. Adding code can change the way the stack is organised,
and so affect the program, especially in the c programming language. Certain
types of bug get switched on / off depending on how the stack is organised.

I could even have accidentally fixed the bug while putting in the debug code
(needed a little bit of editing), can happen, and then we'll never know what it was.

> Is that really worth it?? With the box unchecked it really doesn't
> affect much, as you say... Except now it doesn't crash!

Well, perhaps I'm a bit of a perfectionist as regards crashes - I don't
want it to do it ever!

But if I get no more reports of it happening, reckon can call it fixed.

So reckon, I can leave it like that. Plus won't do any harm to go through
that section of the code thoroughly again - the more polished it is the better.

(unless of course you do have to tick the debug box to get it to run -
that isn't a workable solution because it slows it down a _lot_)

If anyone can get FTS to crash at all, I will very much appreciate a
report, whether it is reproducible or not, - see the download page.

I've added a new section on reporting crashes, with the new debug
tick box explained.

Just done new upload of the beta with a few extras, including the option
to make the new candidate hyper-MOS scales.

Robert