Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Sun, 15 Sep 2002 00:00:24 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [linux-usb-devel] Re: [BK PATCH] USB changes for 2.5.34 |
| |
Pete Zaitcev wrote: > > > From: Daniel Phillips <phillips@arcor.de> > > Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2002 07:10:00 +0200 > > >[...] > > Let's try a different show of hands: How many users would be happier if > > they knew that kernel developers are using modern techniques to improve > > the quality of the kernel? > > I do not see how using a debugger improves a quality of the kernel. > Good thinking and coding does improve kernel quality. Debugger > certainly does not help if someone cannot code. > > A debugger can do some good things. Some people argue that it > improves productivity, which I think may be true under some > circomstances. If your build system sucks and/or slow, and > if you work with a binary only software, debugger helps. > If you work with something like Linux, and compile on something > better than a 333MHz x86, it probably does not help your > productivity. This is all wonderful, but has nothing to do > with the code quality.
Uh, I feel obliged to respond to these statements just in case anyone thinks they contain anything which is correct.
I have spent twelve months doing kernel development without kgdb and eighteen months with. "With" is better.
> And to think that your users would be happier with a crap produced > by a debugger touting Windows graduate than with a quality code > debugged with observation simply defies any reason. >
uh-huh. - 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/
|  |