FAST/SLOW again....

[Peet]

in my view it doesn't matter what mode it's in

This is your point of view, others are interested in the info.

Bottom line is this is easily resolved by the small number of folks that need such a solution, with several solutions listed above.

really? I'm surprised

And even if this were justified, the 41X has no available FAT slots (i.e. no room to add new commands), so a new command for this is unlikely.

I don't care. Maybe you should tell this to whoever asked about it.

[Panchdara]

... in my view it doesn't matter what mode it's in ...

... And even if this were justified, the 41X has no available FAT slots (i.e. no room to add new commands), so a new command for this is unlikely ...

Well, that doesn't sound right - you're saying that the DM42 can't take advantage of any new features that T.O. impements??

Whilst I didn't intend to create a storm over this, I am a little taken back by these dismissive statements.

I have made a suggestion, we'll see where that goes.

[rprosperi]

... in my view it doesn't matter what mode it's in ...

... And even if this were justified, the 41X has no available FAT slots (i.e. no room to add new commands), so a new command for this is unlikely ...

Well, that doesn't sound right - you're saying that the DM42 can't take advantage of any new features that T.O. impements??

Whilst I didn't intend to create a storm over this, I am a little taken back by these dismissive statements.

I have made a suggestion, we'll see where that goes.

Well, this has been a discussion only of the DM41X AFAIK (it is in the 41X SubForum) and totally unrelated to the DM42, so not sure why you're asking about this here??

And these are not intended as dismissive comments, they were not intended that way, they are simply some suggestions of how you can accomplish what you want. It's easy to think of of new functions to suggest be added, however if there are only few folks seeking this and it can be accomplished easily with small programming effort, it is quite unlikely it will be added, it's simply unjustified.

[Ángel Martin]

If you want the machine to run fast then execute FAST
If you want the machine to run slow then execute SLOW

That's how the cookie crumbles, no need to look for a three-legged cat.

[Panchdara]

Ángel Martin.

As I stated previously - this was not intended to be a sh!t stirring post, just an informal question: "Is there any flag/indicator that a program/test can determine whether the DM41X is in one of these modes?"

A couple pgm suggestions were sent thru. Perhaps their comments stated DM42 - at least comments were included.

Bob then dismissed (or might have well as), but was somewhat courteous.

I then made a simple suggestion (in the appropriate place - forum area) - please see under suggestions.

I think Bob thought I was refering to the DM42 and stated "Well, this has been a discussion only of the DM41X AFAIK (it is in the 41X SubForum) and totally unrelated to the DM42, so not sure why you're asking about this here??" - IT WAS THE DM41X FORUM! Thats why I was asking in the DM41X forum.

Let sleeping dawgs lie. I give up.

Then you, Ángel Martin, come along and totally dismiss, disrespect my question with your arrogant answer. I had some respect for you Ángel Martin, actually alot. I am saddened that such a simple question has turned into a negative tone, especially from yourself and some other respected members.

Peet.... I appreciate you comments. We should do lunch.

I can now consider this thread CLOSED!!!!!!

[rprosperi]

Closed or not, some comments are in order...

There's no need to get angry, at me, or Angel or anyone else. After asking how to accomplish something, several folks offered suggestions with different kinds of solutions, some trivial, others more thoughtful. Later, you requested a feature addition to accomplish the same thing via a new built-in command. Rather than ignore it, or give you false hope something may come later, I tried to give you a straight answer that such an enhancement is not likely to be coming, and the reasons why not.

There is limited time available from David (SM's genius programmer) and that precious resource is prioritized for new products, fixing critical bugs for existing products, and product enhancements needed by a notable percentage of users, and especially where the function is essential and can't be accomplished (easily) using the built-in capabilities.

To date, a total of two people want this, yet have still not stated why or what advantage such an enhancement would bring, and meanwhile the objective of the enhancement can be accomplished in several ways, which although provided by several users here, were ignored or rejected for unstated reasons.

If you will be near NY, let me know and we can do lunch and discuss it further, as it seems there is a communication gap, leading you to see hostility where I can assure you none was intended from me, and as far as I can see, not from others either.

[Ángel Martin]

Then you, Ángel Martin, come along and totally dismiss, disrespect my question with your arrogant answer. I had some respect for you Ángel Martin, actually alot. I am saddened that such a simple question has turned into a negative tone, especially from yourself and some other respected members.

I suggest you cool it down a notch and count up to 20 before casting aspersions like those.
There was no arrogance or hostility in my post, just a matter-of-fact, not sugar-coated recap of the purpose of those functions.

The offense is in the eye of the beholder.

[Panchdara]

Wadeva...

OUT

[Peet]

There's no need to get angry, at me, or Angel or anyone else. After asking how to accomplish something, several folks offered suggestions with different kinds of solutions, some trivial, others more thoughtful. Later, you requested a feature addition to accomplish the same thing via a new built-in command. Rather than ignore it, or give you false hope something may come later, I tried to give you a straight answer that such an enhancement is not likely to be coming, and the reasons why not.

That's not entirely correct, you guys made fun of the question itself and mocked the solutions offered. No wonder, then, that your posts looks condescending.