News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on NASA's Through-Hole Workmanship Req (2002). Parent comment

Re:NASA's Through-Hole Workmanship Req (2002) by 1996 on Thursday December 17, 2020 @01:11PM (#25458351)
> > Did you read the specs?

> 'Please don't comment on whether someone read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that."'

Not an article, but specs. You read specs carefully, you don't skim, especially to write long paragraphs about your personal experience

> And in this case it was very clear that the OP read the article

I disagree. Not read, skimmed at best.

> and just missed that part.

I agree: the most important part was indeed skipped.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:NASA's Through-Hole Workmanship Req (2002) by xxs on Friday December 18, 2020 @04:24AM (#25465340)
"Whiskers" actually 'grow', they are not part of the soldering process[0]. Lead free solder is very susceptible to the phenomenon.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whisker_(metallurgy)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:NASA's Through-Hole Workmanship Req (2002) by jcims on Thursday December 17, 2020 @02:08PM (#25459059)
>I agree: the most important part was indeed skipped.

You're factually wrong here. So the question would be where did this go off the rails?

[ Parent | on HN ]