CScape, legacy code

[Osiris]

Back in the 1990's there was a library on the market for building
'forms' in the MSDOS environment. With theis toolset, you could build
userfriendly I/O routines with input/output fiields with validation ,
choice-lists etc.
Does it still exist ? anyone has it out there ? I would like to
compile some legacy code again, and need this product, named CSCAPE

[Charlton Wilbur]

>>>>"O" == Osiris <no**@hotmail.comwrites:

ODoes it still exist ? anyone has it out there ? I would like to
Ocompile some legacy code again, and need this product, named
OCSCAPE

This is a newsgroup, not a search engine. Google knows the answers to
your question.

Charlton
--
Charlton Wilbur
cw*****@chromatico.net

[Osiris]

On 17 May 2007 17:13:52 -0400, Charlton Wilbur
<cw*****@chromatico.netwrote:

>>>>>"O" == Osiris <no**@hotmail.comwrites:

ODoes it still exist ? anyone has it out there ? I would like to
Ocompile some legacy code again, and need this product, named
OCSCAPE

This is a newsgroup, not a search engine. Google knows the answers to
your question.

Charlton

Google probably does know, only it cannot tell me: 'cscape' is a name
that is used for a lot of products, services, companies etc. So it is
not an easy task to weed out the google responses.

Using this group of C-programmers for my question might narrow my
search domain considerably.

A search ENGINE is not enough, sometimes I need access not only to
information and data, sometimes I need access to filtered and
condensed and lived-through KNOWLEDGE.

[Richard Heathfield]

Osiris said:

On 17 May 2007 17:13:52 -0400, Charlton Wilbur

>>
This is a newsgroup, not a search engine. Google knows the answers to
your question.

(No, Charlton, it doesn't.)

<snip>

A search ENGINE is not enough, sometimes I need access not only to
information and data, sometimes I need access to filtered and
condensed and lived-through KNOWLEDGE.

Hear hear. Google can tell you what's there, but it can't tell you how
good it is, how relevant to you, how important, how broken, etc. For
that, you need people, not programs.

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at the above domain, - www.

[Charlton Wilbur]

>>>>"RH" == Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.invalidwrites:

RHOsiris said:

>On 17 May 2007 17:13:52 -0400, Charlton Wilbur

>> This is a newsgroup, not a search engine. Google knows the
answers to your question.

RH(No, Charlton, it doesn't.)

Oddly enough, when I searched for 'cscape text window library' I found
the name of the company that produced C-Scape, and when I searched for
the name of the company, I found out the current status of the company
and the current availability of the library. Thus, from his original
post:

>>>>"O" == Osiris <no**@hotmail.comwrites:

ODoes it still exist ? anyone has it out there ? I would like to
Ocompile some legacy code again, and need this product, named
OCSCAPE

The answers are, well, easy enough for him to figure out, now that
I've outlined the keywords to search for and the method to use.

RHHear hear. Google can tell you what's there, but it can't tell
RHyou how good it is, how relevant to you, how important, how
RHbroken, etc. For that, you need people, not programs.

But the information indexed by Google is more than sufficient to
answer the questions he actually asked. If he had meant to ask
different questions, he ought to have done so.

Charlton
--
Charlton Wilbur
cw*****@chromatico.net

[Richard Heathfield]

Charlton Wilbur said:

>>>>>"RH" == Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.invalidwrites:

RHOsiris said:

>On 17 May 2007 17:13:52 -0400, Charlton Wilbur

>> This is a newsgroup, not a search engine. Google knows the
>>answers to your question.

RH(No, Charlton, it doesn't.)

Oddly enough, when I searched for 'cscape text window library' I found
the name of the company that produced C-Scape, and when I searched for
the name of the company, I found out the current status of the company
and the current availability of the library.

Nevertheless, Google didn't know this. All it knew is that a Web page
existed that matched your search requirements. It didn't know what you
hoped to gain by your search. As it turns out, you struck lucky.

To send people to Google is generally a bad idea, even though it can
work out all right on occasion.

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at the above domain, - www.

[Osiris]

On 18 May 2007 10:35:16 -0400, Charlton Wilbur
<cw*****@chromatico.netwrote:

>>>>>"RH" == Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.invalidwrites:

RHOsiris said:

>On 17 May 2007 17:13:52 -0400, Charlton Wilbur

>> This is a newsgroup, not a search engine. Google knows the
>>answers to your question.

RH(No, Charlton, it doesn't.)

Oddly enough, when I searched for 'cscape text window library' I found
the name of the company that produced C-Scape, and when I searched for
the name of the company, I found out the current status of the company
and the current availability of the library. Thus, from his original
post:

brilliant ! those search terms give the company indeed: Liant. I
totally forgot that name.

Shows that one limitation with Google search engine: you *must* have
the right search terms. If not: no go.
thnx

[Barry]

"Osiris" <no**@hotmail.comwrote in message
news:c9********************************@4ax.com...

On 18 May 2007 10:35:16 -0400, Charlton Wilbur
<cw*****@chromatico.netwrote:

>>>>>>"RH" == Richard Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.invalidwrites:

RHOsiris said:

> >On 17 May 2007 17:13:52 -0400, Charlton Wilbur

> >> This is a newsgroup, not a search engine. Google knows the
>>answers to your question.

RH(No, Charlton, it doesn't.)

Oddly enough, when I searched for 'cscape text window library' I found
the name of the company that produced C-Scape, and when I searched for
the name of the company, I found out the current status of the company
and the current availability of the library. Thus, from his original
post:

brilliant ! those search terms give the company indeed: Liant. I
totally forgot that name.

Shows that one limitation with Google search engine: you *must* have
the right search terms. If not: no go.
thnx

And thus, why the answer is 42.

[Mark McIntyre]

On Fri, 18 May 2007 15:27:27 +0000, in comp.lang.c , Richard
Heathfield <rj*@see.sig.invalidwrote:

>Charlton Wilbur said:

>Oddly enough, when I searched for 'cscape text window library' I found
the name of the company that produced C-Scape, and when I searched for
the name of the company, I found out the current status of the company
and the current availability of the library.

Nevertheless, Google didn't know this.

Clearly google, being just a bunch of computers, doesn't /know/
anything. It just returns results. Just as clearly, the PP wasn't
implying that google's computers had crossed the threshold into
conciousness, merely that a google search would turn up some useful
looking hits. Why RJH feels this necessitates a series of sarcastic
responses is unknown however.

>To send people to Google is generally a bad idea, even though it can
work out all right on occasion.

To tell people to search for knowledge is *never* a bad idea, even
though they need assistance on occasion.


--
Mark McIntyre

"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it."
--Brian Kernighan