in reply to Re: Re: Revised: Storable data retrieval
in thread Revised: Storable data retrieval
In otherwords, when I read your question the second time around, the overwhelming temptation was to move on as soon as I determined it was a.) a continuation of a previous question, and b.) lacking a link to said question.
The other option was for me to track down the link you should have provided and politely point out its absence. This helps keep others from skipping the node simply because following the thread is too much work.
That said... perhaps the reason CGI was such a focus in your initial node was because you hadn't narrowed your code down to a base case. If you want an answer about X, winnow your code down to a tiny snippet that illistrates the X issue. You'll get far more focused answers that way, and it keeps us from wasting our time offering you advice you don't seem to want.
Finally, complaning in your own thread does nothing but divert time and energy away from helping you find the answer you want. You have now successfully used up the time I would have spent seeking an answer for you.
Time spent framing good questions is time very well spent.
-Blake
|
|---|
| Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
|---|---|
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Revised: Storable data retrieval
by david.jackson (Novice) on Oct 17, 2001 at 18:14 UTC |