From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5d375e920909061603i428f54bfm97179b168f0af11d@mail.gmail.com> References: <3e1162e60909040652y5504130dqc7bc737452193ad5@mail.gmail.com> <9fe2df93f80bf5bea9bf494f1436edf0@quanstro.net> <3e1162e60909040756r3e114e84v82412406620d22cc@mail.gmail.com> <5d375e920909061603i428f54bfm97179b168f0af11d@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 6 Sep 2009 17:45:44 -0700 Message-ID: <3e1162e60909061745g73d6d1d2te6d4377bd182047@mail.gmail.com> From: David Leimbach To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cd25d228a8a130472f22b14 Subject: Re: [9fans] "Blocks" in C Topicbox-Message-UUID: 673a1c8c-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 --000e0cd25d228a8a130472f22b14 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 4:03 PM, Uriel wrote: > On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 4:56 PM, David Leimbach wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 7:20 AM, erik quanstrom > > wrote: > >> > >> > I could be wrong, but I feel like you're not really interested in > >> > entertaining that this idea could be useful, but more interested in > >> > shooting > >> > it down [...] > >> > >> remember, if a guy says to the king, hey you're fly's undone, > >> we send that guy to the stockades for a week. meanwhile > >> the king's fly remains undone. > >> > >> since the raison d'etre of blocks is ease of programming, > >> i would think it would follow that it should be uniformly > >> easier across the board. if there are big exceptions to this > >> (like extra locking), i would think the feature would earn > >> a fail. > >> > > > > I am totally agreeing with you so far on all points you've just made. > And I > > think that's why Apple is seeking feedback. > > Here is some feedback for Apple: Fire your whole software and > programming division, they are making the GNU and Gnome crack monkeys > look sane, competent and responsible. > > uriel > > > Why am I not surprised that this is your reaction? At least you're consistent :-) --000e0cd25d228a8a130472f22b14 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 4:03 PM, Uriel <lost.goblin@gm= ail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 4:56 PM, David Leimbach<leimy2k@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 7:20 AM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>
> wrote:
>>
>> > I could be wrong, but I feel like you're not really inter= ested in
>> > entertaining that this idea could be useful, but more interes= ted in
>> > shooting
>> > it down [...]
>>
>> remember, if a guy says to the king, hey you're fly's undo= ne,
>> we send that guy to the stockades for a week. =A0meanwhile
>> the king's fly remains undone.
>>
>> since the raison d'etre of blocks is ease of programming,
>> i would think it would follow that it should be uniformly
>> easier across the board. =A0if there are big exceptions to this >> (like extra locking), i would think the feature would earn
>> a fail.
>>
>
> I am totally agreeing with you so far on all points you've just ma= de. =A0And I
> think that's why Apple is seeking feedback.

Here is some feedback for Apple: Fire your whole software and
programming division, they are making the GNU and Gnome crack monkeys
look sane, competent and responsible.

uriel


<= div>Why am I not surprised that this is your reaction? =A0At least you'= re consistent :-)=A0

=A0

--000e0cd25d228a8a130472f22b14--