| ??? 09/12/01 06:16 Read: times |
#14895 - RE: Coments field ( ;),Andy |
Hi Andy,
Yes its upto you how cover that in the contract. If client insists on explanation on each intsruction then you would set a price too accordingly. But if your client just needs the code so that he may recover the application in case of destruction then only working code without the detailed comments would be adviseable. And show your client without letting him have a feel of comments, (unless he himeself is a smart one), that this is what he will be getting. Giving away library. I think that will be in binary. And isn't it possible to generate commentless assembly from binary ?? So the best is that you refrain from making loose comments leaking you approach and technique. Simon |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Coments field ( ;) | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;) | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;) | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;) | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;) | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;) | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;), Kathy | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;) - Kathy | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;) | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| No Never Comment !! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;) - Kathy | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Still Off_Base - Kathy | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;) - Kathy | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;) - Bordyn | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;) | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;),Alfredo | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;),Gil | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;),Bordyn | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;),Bordyn | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Coments field ( ;),Andy | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Coments field ( ;),Andy | 01/01/70 00:00 |



