| "John Smith" wrote in message
| ...
| ...
| Again, I would never look a gift horse in the mouth ... I don't
| find the lack of comments an surmountable problem. If you have
| a basic understanding of the concepts which a piece of software
| source deals with, it is relatively easy to locate them and
| comment/document them yourself. For example, when looking in
| software for routines and statements dealing with a circle, you
| would simple search for constructs dealing with area,
| circumference, diameter, etc. It is just a logical progression
| to look for those dealing with the implementation of the
| moment method. NEC source used in conjunction with these
| efforts makes it a tolerable exercise in reverse engineering
| the task ...
|
| I see nothing wrong with expecting someone to do a bit of work
| to get something for "free", LOL.
|
| Regards,
| JS

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

That's right! Since -as you already said- there are various
aspects of "free". Therefore, there is no field of application
of term 'reverse engineering' especially under the licenses
'Free Libre Source Code' and 'Public Domain Source Code',
since there is nothing there to disassembly it.

Moreover, under these licenses, ethics impose to give in return
at least as much as you get. This is especially holds in VEMSA3D
case, in which we get the Source Code included in J.H.Richmond's
report:

"Computer program for thin-wire structures in a homogeneous
conducting medium"

or just

"Computer program for thin-wire structures"

from NASA Technical Reports Server at:
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp

in the way already described in message:

| Sent......: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 8:59 AM
| Subject...: vemsa3d 1.1 - a floss visual em simulator
| : for 3d antennas
| Newsgroups: sci.physics.electromag,rec.radio.amateur.antenna
| From......:

Well, this source code has 1,044 lines of code, in 16 routines:

(1,044 = 100 + 61 + 158 + 36 + 9 + 98 + 120 + 104 + 40 + 64 +
+ 45 + 22 + 22 + 40 + 87 + 38)

and in return, we give for now:

* only 3 comment lines less than *

those exist among these 1,044 lines -as one can easily find
them in SGANT routine, at page 22, of the aforementioned
report.

Best regards,

pez, SV7BAX

On 8/25/2010 2:18 AM, wrote:

...
That's right! Since -as you already said- there are various
aspects of "free". Therefore, there is no field of application
of term 'reverse engineering' especially under the licenses
'Free Libre Source Code' and 'Public Domain Source Code',
since there is nothing there to disassembly it.

Moreover, under these licenses, ethics impose to give in return
at least as much as you get. This is especially holds in VEMSA3D
case, in which we get the Source Code included in J.H.Richmond's
report:

"Computer program for thin-wire structures in a homogeneous
conducting medium"

or just

"Computer program for thin-wire structures"

from NASA Technical Reports Server at:
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp

in the way already described in message:
Best regards,
...
pez, SV7BAX

Yes. Well, "reverse engineering", apparently, has many different
meanings to many different people, as "free", also. However, all
reverse engineering, done by engineers, does not involve a disassembler.
Physical devices and concepts lend themselves well to reverse
engineering, also.

I certainly have no interests in implementing any of this in a
business/financial interest. And, since amateur radio itself demands the
concept of "giving back"; It is a well known tradition. I see no
conflicts with my directions, uses and interests.

NASA's contribution has already been paid for. NASA is the beneficiary
of public funds ... I am sure the taxpayers say, "Thank you NASA;" I
know I do.

Regards,
JS