lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Oct]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateSun, 31 Oct 2004 10:04:19 +0800
FromMichael Clark <>
SubjectRe: code bloat [was Re: Semaphore assembly-code bug]
On 10/31/04 07:28, Tim Hockin wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 31, 2004 at 02:13:37AM +0300, Denis Vlasenko wrote:
> >>>Bloat is cause by feature creep at every layer, not just the app.>>>>I actually tried to convince maintainers of one package
>>that their code is needlessly complex. I did send patches
>>to remedy that a bit while fixing real bugs. Rejected.
>>Bugs were planned to be fixed by adding more code.>>I've lost all hope on that case.> > > See, there is an ego problem, too.  If you rewrite my code, it means
> you're better than I am.  Rejected.> > Features win over efficiency.  Seriously, look at glibc.  Hav eyou ever
> tried to fix a bug in it?  Holy CRAP is that horrible code.  Each chunk of
> code itself is OK (though it abuses macrso so thoroughly I hesitate to
> call it C code).  But it tried to support every architecture x every OS.
> You know what?  I don't CARE if the glibc code compiles on HPUX or not.
> HPUX has it's own libc.> > >>I guess this is a reason why bloat problem tend to be solved
>>by rewrite from scratch. I could name quite a few cases:> > > From-scratch is a huge risk.  But yeah, sometimes it has to be.
> > >>It's sort of frightening that someone will need to>>rewrite Xlib or, say, OpenOffice :(

Well, the xlib rewrite is happening (XCB/XCL).
One of the reasons cited is the size of xlib.

   http://www.freedesktop.org/Software/xcb

~mc
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:07    [from the cache]
©2003-2008