@ship this can't be Brian. Who are you really?Sorry if my past posts were too many words, too many points I was replying to and a point to make about education and training good but sometimes certain parts fall thru the training in key points. (Why I normally post long messages.) I'll try harder in the future to have less words about important stuff to convey ideas.
Sorry if my past posts were too many words, too many points I was replying to and a point to make about education and training good but sometimes certain parts fall thru the training in key points. (Why I normally post long messages.) I'll try harder in the future to have less words about important stuff to convey ideas.
Agreed, and as it's 3 degrees below zero here in Vermont right now, very relevant.SJT is known to not like winter back of truck transport by way of bending and even un-locking.
I think Ship's goal there was "if we say we're not going to use it, then it doesn't matter if it's 'legal' or not."
@BillConnerFASTC Some days translating "Ship-ese" in to North American English requires effort, appreciably more than Spell-check's capable of.Yeah, I can see that, but did spell checker change some illegals to legal? "If your City building code specify's something is not to be used, it's now Legal." Not to be used so its legal? And OK to "overrides what is legal" - sure if override only surpasses and not exempt someone from the law.
If the point is that an institution or a client or other entity have standards more restrictive than what laws, I get that. After all, code is just passing - a grade of D - and not necessarily good design by any means.
It wasn't clear to me it said that.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.