From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18902 invoked by alias); 10 Jan 2015 23:20:20 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Id: Zsh Workers List List-Post: List-Help: X-Seq: 34224 Received: (qmail 5087 invoked from network); 10 Jan 2015 23:20:17 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on f.primenet.com.au X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=T/C1EZ6Q c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=409km5Jzyi9hcadZZk99kQ==:117 a=409km5Jzyi9hcadZZk99kQ==:17 a=Hpgzp-inWqAA:10 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=6UCCe687q_YGyVX_SYIA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 Message-id: <54B1ACA3.1050001@eastlink.ca> Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2015 14:50:11 -0800 From: Ray Andrews User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.3.0 To: =?UTF-8?B?TGF3cmVuY2UgVmVsw6F6cXVleg==?= Cc: zsh-workers@zsh.org Subject: Re: PATCH: hist: remove wrong NULL terminator References: <1420807419-9270-1-git-send-email-mikachu@gmail.com> <54B013C5.6090307@eastlink.ca> <54B04A7A.1010402@eastlink.ca> <20150109223028.6e003bff@ntlworld.com> <54B066C5.3010008@eastlink.ca> <54B0D893.4080202@eastlink.ca> <510FB8E2-EA0C-4582-BD31-527E9755F0FB@larryv.me> In-reply-to: <510FB8E2-EA0C-4582-BD31-527E9755F0FB@larryv.me> On 01/10/2015 02:04 PM, Lawrence Velázquez wrote: > Surely you are familiar with the concept of connotation, whether > intentional or not. Compare this… > > "This bug seems like it could have been caught sooner with > better testing and code auditing. Is there a reason you don't do > more of that? Here are some suggestions for making testing > easier and more robust." > > …with… > > "WOW, this is a REALLY DUMB MISTAKE. How could a bunch of people > who are *so smart* make such a _boneheaded_ blunder? It confuses > me because I'm used to a development culture that puts software > quality *first*. I'm not commenting on anything, just asking > a question." > ...with... "In what environment does that sort of thing happen? Is it really that important anyway? How should I view this? We'd have considered that serious in DOS, but maybe it's a detail here. Looks like we need more testers? That's me! OTOH, it seems that zsh/linux code is just naturally more robust, maybe? Seems so. Is this 'bad' or just par for the course, I wonder. So many added layers! Must it be so? Perhaps I need a complete change in how I view a code defect."