What happened to the Messenger Plus! forums on msghelp.net?
Shoutbox » MsgHelp Archive » Messenger Plus! for Live Messenger » WLM Plus! General » [split] Version numbers: 4.5 vs. 4.50

Pages: (3): « First « 1 [ 2 ] 3 » Last »
[split] Version numbers: 4.5 vs. 4.50
Author: Message:
Spunky
Former Super Mod
*****

Avatar

Posts: 3658
Reputation: 61
31 / Male / Flag
Joined: Aug 2006
RE: [split] Version numbers: 4.5 vs. 4.50
quote:
Originally posted by ahmetgns
By the way, I just checked the one of the first Plus! Live's version number, which is 4.01.0.240, you know "0" is not needed in the number "1" in fact like "01" as well :P, so it may be intended to have two digits all the time in that area, so 4.50 is more true imho :P (agreed with Cookie)

* ahmetgns checks the website for seeing what the current case is :)

I've got to say that that kinda make sense, although it'd different due to the fact that a leading 0 may not be a significant figure. However, the 0 in 4.50 is also, not a significant figure. 4.50 suggests to me that it's the fourth major release, the 50th minor, meaning a lot of updates and bug fixes
<Eljay> "Problems encountered: shit blew up" :zippy:
12-15-2007 05:26 PM
Profile PM Find Quote Report
riahc4
Veteran Member
*****


Posts: 1073
Reputation: -18
– / Male / Flag
Joined: Aug 2004
Status: Away
RE: [split] Version numbers: 4.5 vs. 4.50
Um...


4.5 = 4.50 = 4.500000000000000000000000000000000000000

I dont understand what the big hassle is over this. 4.5 is 4.50, doesnt matter how you look at it. Of course seeing as Patchou has always used a 2 digit after the mayor build (3.00, 4.25, etc) the correct for Plus! right now would be 4.50
12-17-2007 02:13 AM
Profile PM Find Quote Report
Voldemort
Veteran Member
*****

Avatar

Posts: 3505
Reputation: 49
– / – / Flag
Joined: Jul 2005
Status: Away
RE: [split] Version numbers: 4.5 vs. 4.50
quote:
Originally posted by riahc4
Um...


4.5 = 4.50 = 4.500000000000000000000000000000000000000

I dont understand what the big hassle is over this. 4.5 is 4.50, doesnt matter how you look at it. Of course seeing as Patchou has always used a 2 digit after the mayor build (3.00, 4.25, etc) the correct for Plus! right now would be 4.50

it's different.. it is not a decimal number
*All posts are a purely speculative hypothesis based on abstract reasoning.
Not my daughter, you bitch!
[Image: ico-mollytrix16.gif]
12-17-2007 02:37 AM
Profile E-Mail PM Find Quote Report
riahc4
Veteran Member
*****


Posts: 1073
Reputation: -18
– / Male / Flag
Joined: Aug 2004
Status: Away
RE: [split] Version numbers: 4.5 vs. 4.50
quote:
Originally posted by Voldemort
quote:
Originally posted by riahc4
Um...


4.5 = 4.50 = 4.500000000000000000000000000000000000000

I dont understand what the big hassle is over this. 4.5 is 4.50, doesnt matter how you look at it. Of course seeing as Patchou has always used a 2 digit after the mayor build (3.00, 4.25, etc) the correct for Plus! right now would be 4.50

it's different.. it is not a decimal number
I agree and different devs use different systems.

But if Patchou really wanted to make a difference he would have problably released
4.50.0
then
4.50.1

Since he obviously hasnt (he has to those that know about build numbers; RTW was 310 and now it is 312) So 4.50 is 4.5
12-17-2007 02:43 AM
Profile PM Find Quote Report
markee
Veteran Member
*****

Avatar

Posts: 1622
Reputation: 50
31 / Male / Flag
Joined: Jan 2006
RE: [split] Version numbers: 4.5 vs. 4.50
Have a read through my previous post before posting such rubbish.  I explained the numbering system that Patchou uses.

The latest build was just a few minor bug fixes that were overlooked in 310 and hence only requiring a build number change as it didnt add functionality.  A revision number is used when he needs to add something small and a minor when it has been a while and there are a few new things.  The minor gets bumped from 2 or 3 to 5 when there are significant changes, but not enough for a major build, and then that brings us to a major build.  Please look listen and understand the other posts in a thread before making a post yourself.  Furthermore, VERSION numbering is NOT DECIMAL.
[Image: markee.png]
12-17-2007 04:03 AM
Profile PM Find Quote Report
riahc4
Veteran Member
*****


Posts: 1073
Reputation: -18
– / Male / Flag
Joined: Aug 2004
Status: Away
RE: [split] Version numbers: 4.5 vs. 4.50
quote:
Originally posted by markee
Furthermore, VERSION numbering is NOT DECIMAL.
But most programmers consider and display it decimal.

12-17-2007 12:51 PM
Profile PM Find Quote Report
andrewdodd13
Senior Member
****

Avatar
Oh so retro

Posts: 870
Reputation: 16
29 / Male / Flag
Joined: Jan 2005
RE: RE: [split] Version numbers: 4.5 vs. 4.50
quote:
Originally posted by riahc4
quote:
Originally posted by markee
Furthermore, VERSION numbering is NOT DECIMAL.
But most programmers consider and display it decimal.


Which is wrong.

(And further to the previous posts, I think you were right about me contradicting myself Cookie, it was quite late at night, and I wasn't thinking straight).

Of course, what we've overlooked is.. what happened to 4.3 and 4.4? :)
[Image: AndrewsStyle.png]
12-17-2007 01:02 PM
Profile E-Mail PM Web Find Quote Report
markee
Veteran Member
*****

Avatar

Posts: 1622
Reputation: 50
31 / Male / Flag
Joined: Jan 2006
RE: [split] Version numbers: 4.5 vs. 4.50
quote:
Originally posted by andrewdodd13
quote:
Originally posted by riahc4
quote:
Originally posted by markee
Furthermore, VERSION numbering is NOT DECIMAL.
But most programmers consider and display it decimal.


Which is wrong.

(And further to the previous posts, I think you were right about me contradicting myself Cookie, it was quite late at night, and I wasn't thinking straight).

Of course, what we've overlooked is.. what happened to 4.3 and 4.4? :)
As I explained, the x.5y version numbering is used when there i a significant enough changes to disassociate it from other minor builds, however not enough for a major build (just like what WLM/MSN uses/d).
[Image: markee.png]
12-20-2007 09:43 AM
Profile PM Find Quote Report
Guido
Elite Member
*****

Avatar
Design is Safety

Posts: 4570
Reputation: 50
32 / Male / Flag
Joined: Dec 2002
O.P. RE: [split] Version numbers: 4.5 vs. 4.50
Hey guys, I think most of us have agreed that version numbering conventions in the development world don't use decimal numbers and by *those* conventions 4.5.xxx != 4.50.xxx, but I think we're making too much of a fuss over something that should just be focused on what most people will understand or not. 4.5 (in mathematics not in version numbering, and remember it's not a version number) means 4 and a half, with or without trailing zeros, and that's what the 4.5 means in the website: the 4th and a half revolution in Messenger Plus history.

(I know most in this thread agreed that 4.5 could be seen as 4.05, i.e. 45 minor revisions before 4.50, but consider the potential thoughts of the thousands of people who couldn't care less about participating in a forum thread about version numbering and are quite used to the mathematical view of a number with one single dot acting as a decimal separator).

This post was edited on 12-26-2007 at 12:52 AM by Guido.
12-26-2007 12:50 AM
Profile E-Mail PM Web Find Quote Report
CookieRevised
Elite Member
*****

Avatar

Posts: 15522
Reputation: 173
– / Male / Flag
Joined: Jul 2003
Status: Away
RE: [split] Version numbers: 4.5 vs. 4.50
So you're saying and assuming that everybody who reads it on the main page sees it as a number with a decimal point and/or doesn't care about it?

This is not the case; there are also people who do know about proper version number formatting (without reading this thread) and do care about it.

In fact, one must actually read this thread to understand what the 4.5 actually means. Even those who still see it as a version number didn't even know that it was meant to be the milestone (or branding or revolution or whatever you call it) four and a half!!!

Thus my point was to make it so that there is no confusing for anybody, including those who don't know about version numbers, including those who don't care about it and including those who do know about version numbers (and including those who see it as a brand name).

This can only be accomplished if you show 4.50...

The reason why I personally made such a fuss about it is because if people are constantly going to ignore these facts or do as if it doesn't matter, nobody would ever learn how to use version numbering properly. I know there are more important things in the world. But simply stating "who cares" or ignoring it isn't helping either. Why would you do/make something which can be seen as confusing to some people, while you can make it not-confusing for everybody, with the same amount of effort?

This post was edited on 12-26-2007 at 12:28 PM by CookieRevised.
.-= A 'frrrrrrrituurrr' for Wacky =-.
12-26-2007 12:18 PM
Profile PM Find Quote Report
Pages: (3): « First « 1 [ 2 ] 3 » Last »
« Next Oldest Return to Top Next Newest »


Threaded Mode | Linear Mode
View a Printable Version
Send this Thread to a Friend
Subscribe | Add to Favorites
Rate This Thread:

Forum Jump:

Forum Rules:
You cannot post new threads
You cannot post replies
You cannot post attachments
You can edit your posts
HTML is Off
myCode is On
Smilies are On
[img] Code is On