From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sean Quinlan Subject: Re: [9fans] plan or side effect To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Message-id: <3C83AABC.47C50393@research.bell-labs.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <3C7F6F11.2A1CD8DC@strakt.com> <87664dv3gj.fsf@becket.becket.net> Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 12:11:24 -0500 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 5eba68c4-eaca-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 You are confusing We kept it simple and as a result it goes fast with We made it massively more complex to squeeze out a little more performance. "Thomas Bushnell, BSG" wrote: > > boyd@strakt.com (Boyd Roberts) writes: > > > s/magic/stupidity/ > > The amazing thing is that you think performance is hugely important, > so much so, that you claim run time of compilation is the most > important thing. Then when another system does something faster, you > call it "stupid". Puhleez. If your real opinion is just "Whatever > Plan 9 does is brilliant, and anything different is stupid", then say > it, instead of pretending to have reasoned opinions. > > For my part, Plan 9 does some things very well, and other things less > well. I enjoy learning from the successes of Plan 9, but it's a real > shame that many people here have a kind of allergic reaction to > learning from the successes of anything else. > > Thomas