info/why-linux-is-better
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/nbeaver/why-linux-is-better.git synced 2025-08-26 23:34:34 +02:00
Code Issues Releases Wiki Activity

Strip trailing whitespace.

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Nathaniel Beaver
2015-09-02 21:34:43 -05:00
parent 625ad9d9e8
commit d8849d9be3
1 changed files with 10 additions and 10 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

20
README.rst
View File

@@ -463,15 +463,15 @@ For example, the Linux port of the `Unity engine`_ has `issues with case-sensiti
.. [#CPM_case_insensitive] CP/M did this conversion internally. .. [#CPM_case_insensitive] CP/M did this conversion internally.
It should also be noted that all alphabetic lower case letters in file It should also be noted that all alphabetic lower case letters in file
and drive names are always translated to upper case when they are processed by and drive names are always translated to upper case when they are processed by
the CCP [Console Command Processor]. the CCP [Console Command Processor].
[ . . . ] [ . . . ]
Further, recall that the CCP always translates lower case characters to upper Further, recall that the CCP always translates lower case characters to upper
case characters internally. Thus, lower case alphabetics are treated as if case characters internally. Thus, lower case alphabetics are treated as if
they are upper case in command names and file references. they are upper case in command names and file references
https://archive.org/stream/Intro_to_CPM_Feat_and_Facilities/Intro_to_CPM_Feat_and_Facilities_djvu.txt https://archive.org/stream/Intro_to_CPM_Feat_and_Facilities/Intro_to_CPM_Feat_and_Facilities_djvu.txt
@@ -832,9 +832,9 @@ so here are some of the salient parts::
============================================================================================= =============================================================================================
Why was it written? Why was it written?
============================================================================================= =============================================================================================
It was written following a request from a friend. He runs his PC at a screen resolution above It was written following a request from a friend. He runs his PC at a screen resolution above
1280x1024, and was fed up with having to pick items from a list that could only display three 1280x1024, and was fed up with having to pick items from a list that could only display three
items because the window didn't take into account the screen resolution, hence only occupying items because the window didn't take into account the screen resolution, hence only occupying
about 20% of the desktop 'real-estate'. about 20% of the desktop 'real-estate'.
@@ -857,7 +857,7 @@ There are some drawbacks to this approach::
============================================================================================= =============================================================================================
Known problems Known problems
============================================================================================= =============================================================================================
1) Most applications will respond to having their windows resized ok. Well, applications that 1) Most applications will respond to having their windows resized ok. Well, applications that
have followed the guidelines will. <grin> have followed the guidelines will. <grin>
2) Some applications have, shall we say, problems, when their window has been resized and all 2) Some applications have, shall we say, problems, when their window has been resized and all
sort of visual chaos will be revealed. sort of visual chaos will be revealed.
@@ -865,7 +865,7 @@ There are some drawbacks to this approach::
4) Certain windows will 'jiggle' as you attempt to resize them, seemingly resizing and then 4) Certain windows will 'jiggle' as you attempt to resize them, seemingly resizing and then
snapping back to their original size. This is annoying, but we're not sure what is snapping back to their original size. This is annoying, but we're not sure what is
causing it. causing it.
5) Some versions of Internet Explorer, coupled with certain version of Windows98/NT seemed to 5) Some versions of Internet Explorer, coupled with certain version of Windows98/NT seemed to
crash with v1.0 of ResizeEnable. We don't have that setup on any of our test machines crash with v1.0 of ResizeEnable. We don't have that setup on any of our test machines
so we can't test it. But, we have done a little bit more work so ResizeEnable is a so we can't test it. But, we have done a little bit more work so ResizeEnable is a
bit more choosy as to which windows it can work with. So it -might- not crash anymore. bit more choosy as to which windows it can work with. So it -might- not crash anymore.
@@ -873,7 +873,7 @@ There are some drawbacks to this approach::
Internet Explorer 6. We're not Microsoft pushers, but Internet Explorer 6 has better Internet Explorer 6. We're not Microsoft pushers, but Internet Explorer 6 has better
error reporting and shouldn't just explode without warning. error reporting and shouldn't just explode without warning.
6) Some Microsoft applications have dialogs that can be resized, but none of their contents 6) Some Microsoft applications have dialogs that can be resized, but none of their contents
move. This is down to the fact that the contents of the dialog ARE NOT STANDARD move. This is down to the fact that the contents of the dialog ARE NOT STANDARD
MICROSOFT CONTROLS! They are some bastardisation written specially for the application. MICROSOFT CONTROLS! They are some bastardisation written specially for the application.
They may look like normal buttons/drop downs, but they sure as heck aren't! Hence, They may look like normal buttons/drop downs, but they sure as heck aren't! Hence,
ResizeEnable can't tell them to move or resize. Yet again, Microsoft ignore their own ResizeEnable can't tell them to move or resize. Yet again, Microsoft ignore their own