Messages in this thread |  | | From | lilo <> | Date | Sun, 4 Aug 1996 15:13:43 -0500 (CDT) | Subject | Re: Not a bible thumper. . . |
| |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Wed, 31 Jul 1996, root wrote:
> My point, while perhaps not clear, was that such language in a > professional enviornment is inappropriate. Too many posts I have > read condone or even praise such language. My reference to "remove" > was to the printk. > > It was never my intention to insult anyone although it seems others > are only too willing to insult me while hiding behind email addresses > I cannot reach. > > It is still my understanding that such language is still considered > vulgar. At least in the U.S.
If the language needs to be vetted for various venues in the US, that can be done. It would certainly be helpful for someone to make such a program available. I think it would be an unnecessary inconvenience to have to change the canonical source.
I've been programming for 28 years (in the U.S.) and 23 of those in professional environments, and I simply don't see a problem. Nor would most of my peers. I think my parents and grandparents would consider it vulgar, but I just consider it a bit on the `colorful' side. As long as the actual end-users don't have to see it; I think we can assume that programmers will be adult and motivated enough to overcome their various cultural biases. Or flexible enough to rewrite the comments for their own consumption.
Your mileage apparently varies, and that's fine....
lilo
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2
iQCVAwUBMgUEoZ23L4XLlypxAQHO+wP+ObX3Z+Hugr3oLWDp5e5Mf5hq1vOe2quN xN5BA88Vc3w/V2wsOrpft1IKFsywUne49cDhJIJHkeTS0+W2oynPdr4CzhnXfOGm 0CYbWnHyX6O6ncAbGLJJOWtqnT+MIUedpj1YJFLqoPbdz4r4GI35ejftGm8L6/GG mHCjVERN3wE= =8O0S -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|  |