, X-NEWS: spcvxb alt.folklore.computers: 10102I Relay-Version: VMS News - V6.0 13.10.90 VAX/VMS V5.4; site spcvxb.spc.edu v Path: spcvxb.spc.edu!njin!uupsi!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!lll-winken!uunet!sli!composite!news" Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers% Subject: The infamous Gary Barnes SPR - Message-ID: <gate.H0BH21w164w@composite.UUCP>  From: composite!ed@sli.com Date: 5 May 91 15:16:04 GMT 
 Lines: 142  A Due to requests from Joe Newcomer and others here is the infamous  Gary Barnes SPR.  C The SPR was submitted by Gary in 1980.  The SPR was read at a DECUS ? in 1984.  The session in which it was read was part of the 20th D anniversary of 36 bit computers. The story told at the time was that? DEC never responded or published this SPR, but the response was 9 posted on the wall at the Large Systems Group for a year.   A I talked the speaker with a copy and explained that I was working 0 with Gary. He let me take a copy back to Gary.    = ------------------------------------------------------------- / TOPS-20 4(3247)      MOUNTR 4(64)      Dec/1/80     + Problem: MOUNTR was obviously never tested.   B MOUNTR is basicly a mound of decayed, worm eaten, and fly besotten fecal matter.   D Diagnosis: There is code in there that literally must be executed in@ order for it to run properly and DDT break-points and STOP codesC placed in that code never occur.  ie There literally exist no Jrsts  or Calls to that code.  @ The account (Usage) records that it writes are almost completelyC wrong.  There are more fields which are wrong than fields which are E correct. There are even more fields left erroneously blank than there  are fields which are correct.   E There are half word fields used as accumulators for things that could @ easily exceed 256K,  ie. number of records read and written on a tape.   A It keeps around fake "mount request" blocks after the instigating D dismount request is gone,  ie. mount a structure,  dismount it,  andB you (sometimes) cannot mount it again due to the extraneous blocks hanging around.   B The person who wrote it was obviously not an Ace Macro Hacker even? though his user name was R.ACE.  He obviously had never seen or @ written Macro before.  The comments are often misleading and notE uncommonly wrong, ie the code without the comments would be easier to  understand.   @ It is easily confused if the operator does something strange (ieA wrong order of commands with tape initializes  and setting drives D off-line and such) or if the drives go a little flakey due to device< errors.  This usually results in its having to be killed and5 restarted.  Someimes INFO has to be restarted also.     C The VOLID in the Usage record is usually set to be the logical tape E name that the user happened to use.  The Read/Write counts are either @ zero or they are astronomically incorrect.  The error counts areC truly creative acts of fiction.  The label type is incorrect and is C quite often the label type of a tape mounted by another user in the ' recent past,  usually on another drive.   B MOUNTR was obviously tested by the learn-to-swim method.  Ie.  YouC throw the customers into MOUNTR infested water and see how many get D eaten alive before they learn to swim.  I have it from our local DEC@ office that the Field Test sites complained of grossly incorrectC Usage records to which DEC responded with an "it will be fixed".  I E was also told that the final release has the same errors in the Usage  records.  C The programmer involved should be sent to school to learn how to do D things or he should be promoted to a position where he cannot damage future software.  C Cure: Wem are currently rewriting large portions of MOUNTR.  We fix D an average of 10 bugs a day for each day that we can stomach working
 on this code.   C PS:  As I was writing this, rather vitrolic,  SPR I was informed by B our local DEC'ee that R.ACE,  the author of this abomination,  hasE left DEC for other places.  To this I respond,  HURRAH HURRAH HURRAH.   9 ---------------------------------------------------------  reply from DEC" ---------------------------------- MOUNTR IS A PIECE OF SHIT.    = Thank you for your SPR on MOUNTR.  Your diagnosis is entirely E correct.  MOUNTR was never tested and was intentienally coded poorly. D MOUNTR is part of a test to see just how bad a product can be.  ThusA far the test has been highly successful and it will enter phase 2 A with the release of GALAXY 4.1 and the mountable device allocator  code in QUASAP.   B Now dealing with your SPR in detail we shall address each problem.  E 1.  MOUNTR was never tested,  not even once,  that it loads at all is E     a surprise to all of us here at DEC.  You are lucky it assembles.   D 2.  MOUNTR is a mound of fly besotten fecal matter,  the flies won't
     touch it.   F 3.  There is code in MOUNTR which must not be executed for anything toE     work at all.  This code4 will totally destroy the validity of any E     accurate information which happens to be around.  Breakpoints and B     stop codes placed in these locations will be hit continuously.  A 4.  The accounting records are completly wrong.  There is code in F     MOUNTR to check the correctness of each field before it is writtenD     and change the field if it happens to contain valid information.  C 5.  There are 2 bit fields which are supposed to contain numbers in      the range 4-10.   B 6.  It not only keeps fake mount request blocks but it changes theF     real ones using a complex formula involving the phase of the moon,D     number of federal judges in Wyoming and the price of OPEC oil in     pesos.    D 7.  You are correct the person who wrote MOUNTR had never seen MACROC     before,  as a matter of fact none of us here at DEC can read or ?     write at all. This answer is being typed by a monkey who is      hitting the keys at random.   F 8.  It is easily confused if the operator does something strange.  ForA     example,  if the operator picks his nose with a shark's tooth 1     MOUNTR will die with an illegal memory write.   A 9.  Thank you for your compilment on the error counts being truly E     creative acts of fiction.  We are rather proud of our-error count      determination formula:  H       ERROR=PI/2*(numbers of users on system)/(processor serial number)+>   	    (milliseconds since the hostages were taken in Iran)**2  D 10. The final release had totally different and much worse errors inC     the usage records than those errors reported during field test.   @ 11. No school in the country would take any of us.  We are grade=     school dropouts who program to support our alcoholism and      debauchery.   A 12. Good luck rewriting MOUNTR.  If you can make it work at all I      will be amazed