From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 10683 invoked from network); 26 Nov 2023 02:27:02 -0000 Received: from 9front.inri.net (168.235.81.73) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 26 Nov 2023 02:27:02 -0000 Received: from wopr.sciops.net ([216.126.196.60]) by 9front; Sat Nov 25 21:24:03 -0500 2023 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sciops.net; s=20210706; t=1700965375; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=J789OCyctEFybt4WcCr95eCn/UlUYHMMPABuHeUQaQU=; b=ZW6lMSU3hw9RQUbaQoW8bQaQeuPdy4FemNvny27wuUkNueoqpzr11JJExBKYYfIDsGJ+s2 kZA3vrmphruWH3ZUp9K+Eo7xJ0WoAizhJS8CtiCgI0oASIPFElIRe6iV2aUW2bKXb9TmW4 3rsRJakVrRQw3X0m2Ib6YjIfJlyJ5Ys= Received: from localhost (wopr.sciops.net [local]) by wopr.sciops.net (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPA id 195bfe14 for <9front@9front.org>; Sat, 25 Nov 2023 18:22:55 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2023 18:22:55 -0800 From: Kurt H Maier To: 9front@9front.org Message-ID: Mail-Followup-To: 9front@9front.org References: <9968586B-D663-4350-A1C2-DC7801182998@quintile.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: List-ID: <9front.9front.org> List-Help: X-Glyph: ➈ X-Bullshit: shared template-scale framework just-in-time firewall Subject: Re: [9front] [PATCH] Fix assert macro to not break on commas Reply-To: 9front@9front.org Precedence: bulk On Sat, Nov 25, 2023 at 03:39:57PM -0500, Dan Cross wrote: > On Sat, Nov 25, 2023, 3:12 PM Steve Simon wrote: > > i strongly agree with kurt. > > > > this should go into the fortunes file imho. > > > > > Making the language dumber because someone wants to do something stupid > > > is the wrong plan. > > The statement is factually wrong. The language is already the way that > it is, and this change just makes a macro useful in more contexts; > that's not "changing the language" unless someone is adding the > variadic macro stuff to the compilers to do it. > > - Dan C. The statement is not 'factually wrong' according to this argument; it would instead be irrelevant, which it very well might be. I suppose this is an opportunity to be pedantic about where the line is drawn between a language, the implementation of that language, and the detritus that habitually grows around a language, but it's all irrelevant, because I don't care. Doing fancy shit with macros in places where you have the opportunity not to do fancy shit with macros is bad. I know this goes against many currently-popular dogmas, where we all love to build abstraction castles into the sky, but there is a difference between making something convenient and building yet another indirection layer some poor bastard later has to unravel in order to understand what is happening. This macro has been fine as it sits for a lot of use. We have no convincing demonstrations that this change will enable anything useful that was not previously possible. We have no arguments that it will even make anything more convenient which isn't justifiably difficult at the moment. Finally,I'm doubly suspicious of it because the submitter has a history of asshattery and obnoxious behavior in the irc channel. If this patch came from some drive-by rando I'd be less opposed to it; instead it comes from someone with a recent history of willfully refusing to communicate clearly, and is defended by someone who chose to support it based on sophistry instead of any clear technical grounds. I'm not gonna stop anyone from merging anything. I don't have a dog in this fight. But the reasons given suck and further deponent sayeth trash. khm