Messages in this thread |  | | From | (John Alvord) | Subject | Re: Availability of kdb | Date | Sun, 10 Sep 2000 07:47:01 GMT |
| |
On Sun, 10 Sep 2000 00:23:43 -0700, "J. Dow" <jdow@earthlink.net> wrote:
>From: "Stephen E. Clark" <sclark46@gte.net> > >> Linus Torvalds wrote: >> > >> > On Sat, 9 Sep 2000, Oliver Xymoron wrote: >> > > >> > > Tools are tools. They don't make better code. They make better code easier >> > > if used properly. >> > >> > I think you missed the point of my original reply completely. >> > >> > The _technical_ side of the tool in question is completely secondary. >> > >> > The social engineering side is very real, and immediate. >> ... >> >> > Linus >> > >> >> Then why don't we get rid of the compilers and assemblers and go back to >> the old way of doing it >> all - coding on the bare metal. Believe it or not at one time it was >> done this way. Imagine where >> we would be if everyone had said lets not invent tools to make ourselves >> more productive. >> >> My $.02 >> >> Steve Clark > >And for my severely depreciated $0.02 I am becoming concerned >that these guys are more concerned about some macho ideal of >generating programs while half crippled than about having things >work properly and maintainably no matter what gets in the way. >Art has flaws in it that have been painted over, often two or three >times. I grew up with a giant painting of Beethoven along side the >dinner table. It had been presented to my step-grandfather by >the Leipzig Symphony Orchestra. It captured the brooding artist >wonderfully. And in humid weather you could see his third hand, >the one the artist didn't like and painted over. > >For all the zen meditation on code I begin to wonder how many of >the fixes really are fixes or painted over features that didn't quite >work out. It worries me no small bit. > ><sigh> and here I thought macho didnt' fit well with people who >used their brains. I see it is as alive and well here as on the >streets of East LA. > >{O.O}
How can anyone judge that a debugger was used in development of a patch, along with system understanding, Linux knowledge, etc? The changed code stands along with no provenance. If it reflects a shallow understanding, it will be rejected. If it is a deep elegant fix, that will stand on its merits.
john alvord - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |