PDP-10 Archive: 43,50314/dec204.rno from decuslib10-03

Trailing-Edge - PDP-10 Archives - decuslib10-03 - 43,50314/dec204.rno
There are no other files named dec204.rno in the archive.
.PS 58,65;.FLAG CAP;.LC
^^DECREV.FOR VERSION 1 \\
.S 2;.TITLE <DECUS ^LIBRARY ^PROGRAM ^REVIEW
.CENTER; <DECUS ^LIBRARY ^PROGRAM ^REVIEW
.S 3;.LM 45
.I -34
<DECUS ^LIBRARY ^PROGRAM ^BEING ^REVIEWED: 10-204
.I -24
<DECUS ^LIBRARY ^PROGRAM ^NAME: ^^OPR \\
.I -29
^SOURCE ^VERSION OR ^CREATION ^DATE: ^^VERSION 4 \\
.S 2;.LM 25;.I -18
^REVIEWER'S ^NAME: ^^ J. M. MCFARLANE \\
.I -19
^REVIEWER'S ^TITLE: ^^ SYSTEMS DESIGNER \\
.I -21
^REVIEWER'S ^ADDRESS: ^^COMPUTING CENTER \\
.I 0
^^WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY \\
.I 0
^^MIDDLETOWN, CT 06457 \\
.I 0
^^USA \\
.I 0
.S 2;.I -17
^DATE OF ^REVIEW: ^^ 8-May-75 \\
.S 2
.LM 0;.S 2; ^^^&DISTRIBUTION PROCEDURE REVIEW \\\&
.S 1;.UC;.LS
.LM 10;.LE
Were all files present and complete? If not, which files or 
parts thereof were missing? 
.S 1
<RESPONSE:
NOT COMPLETE. TWO PAGES OF CODING WERE MISSING, BEGINNING IN ROUTINE 
'DOLOG' AND CONTINUING UNTIL ROUTINE 'PTYRUN'. 
.S 1
.LM 10;.LE
Were all files readable in the format you requested? 
If not, indicate the format requested for the programs and 
describe the problems you had. 
.S 1
<RESPONSE:
YES. 
.S 1
.ELS
.LM 0;.S 2; ^^^&DOCUMENTATION REVIEW \\\&
.S 1;.UC;.LS
.LM 10;.LE
Does the documentation accompanying the program meet or 
exceed the standard? If not, what improvements are required?
.S 1
<RESPONSE:
YES. 
.S 1
.LM 10;.LE
Is the documentation complete? (Are there unstated 
restrictions or features? If so, please indicate them.) 
.S 1
<RESPONSE:
YES. 
.S 1
.LM 10;.LE
Is the documentation easy to use? Suggest reasonable 
reorganization if possible. 
.S 1
<RESPONSE:
YES. 
.S 1
.LM 10;.LE
Is the program abstract in the catalog accurate in its 
description of the program? What amendments would you 
suggest? 
.S 1
<RESPONSE:
YES. 
.S 1
.LM 10;.LE
Are there "dangerous" features which installation management
might want to disable before putting the program onto 
a system? 
.S 1
<RESPONSE:
YES. USERS OF THIS PROGRAM MIGHT WISH (AS WE DID) TO REMOVE THE 
ABILITY OF THE PROGRAM TO CRASH THE SYSTEM (THE BOMB COMMAND). 
.S 1
.ELS
.LM 0;.S 2; ^^^&PROGRAM REVIEW \\\&
.S 1;.UC;.LS
.LM 10;.LE
Did the program files all compile without errors? If not, 
list the names of files which did not compile or attach 
listings of the compilations. Also include the name and 
version of the compiler. 
.S 1
<RESPONSE:
YES, EXCEPT FOR THE MISSING CODE WHICH INCLUDED 5 ROUTINES USED BY 
VARIOUS COMMANDS. 
.S 1
.LM 10;.LE
Did the program files load correctly? List names of 
missing global references. Include the name and version of 
the compiler. 
.S 1
<RESPONSE:
CAN LOAD AND RUN AS LONG AS COMMANDS ARE NOT USED WHICH REFERENCE 
THE MISSING ROUTINES: CHKJOB, GETJOB, PUTJOB, RETJOB,RTMJOB. 
.S 1
.LM 10;.LE
Can the loading process be revised to take advantage 
of the LINK overlay feature to produce programs 
which run more efficiently? 
.S 1
<RESPONSE:
NO. 
.S 1
.LM 10;.LE
If you loaded the ".REL" files you created, did the ".SAV" 
OR ".SHR" files distributed match the file you created? 
.S 1
<RESPONSE:
NO. THE ".SAV" FILE DISTRIBUTED WAS COMPLETE. THE ONE WE GENERATED 
LACKED THE MISSING ROUTINES. 
.S 1
.LM 10;.LE
Does the program perform as documented? List any 
undocumented program error messages or monitor error 
messages you discovered. 
.S 1
<RESPONSE:
YES. 
.S 1
.LM 10;.LE
List deficiencies which might be easily remedied or any 
error-detecting which should be implemented within the 
program. 
.S 1
<RESPONSE:
MAJOR: (1) ALLOW BLANK AS A VALID SIXBIT CHARACTER IN THE OUTPUT ROUTINE OUTSIX. 
MINOR: (1) DON'T ALLOW OPR OR SPIRIT TO RUN IN HPQ1. (2) DISABLE 
ANY USELESS COMMAND SUCH AS LITE. 
.S 1
.LM 10;.LE
Is the program easy to use? Are the commands or input 
data formats ambiguous? 
.S 1
<RESPONSE:
YES. NO PROBLEM. 
.S 1
.LM 10;.LE
Is the program documented internally well enough for a user 
to make minor changes easily if necessary? 
.S 1
<RESPONSE:
VERY LITTLE INTERNAL DOCUMENTATION. 
.S 1
.LM 10;.LE
If you have made improvements to the programs (or 
(documentation if it is machine-readable) which might be 
of general use, please attach the changed files as you now 
have them and a FILCOM between your version and the 
distributed version. 
.S 1
<RESPONSE:
FILCOM ENCLOSED. 
.S 1
.ELS
.LM 0;.S 2; ^^^&GENERAL COMMENTS \\\&
.S 1;.UC;.LS
.LM 10;.LE
Does the program provide the same service as programs 
already available on the DECsystem-10? Which ones? 
.S 1
<RESPONSE:
NOT REALLY. WITH PERSONAL MODIFICATIONS, IT GIVES A SYSTEM ADMINISTRATOR 
CERTAIN CAPABILITIES HE EITHER DOES NOT NOW HAVE OR ELSE SIMPLIFIES THEM. 
.S 1
.LM 10;.LE
Please enter below any general comments you have about 
the program or its documentation. 
.S 1
<RESPONSE:
.S 1
.ELS
.S 2;.LM 0;[END OF REVIEW OF OPR]
.PG