X-Git-Url: https://git.lizzy.rs/?a=blobdiff_plain;f=lib%2Frob;h=15399b5d45dc743fca9d2d9ea451bec3ad776bf9;hb=f8467210359d5c4e576e8c4aa89177902517ec5b;hp=5c1ef6b6b487edb66c28b8b91bc55ef814ab271f;hpb=1e1c89001d06f1d06bdb0da214add710d2641aa3;p=plan9front.git diff --git a/lib/rob b/lib/rob index 5c1ef6b6b..15399b5d4 100644 --- a/lib/rob +++ b/lib/rob @@ -194,3 +194,161 @@ Remember, the language is not the point here, it's the implementation. Nothing is worth spending a week with bureaucratic Germans. Caches are bugs waiting to happen. The hermeneutics of naming yields few insights. +What difference does it make whether it's an "object-oriented language"? +Why not just use a URL shortener? +Remember this? +three programmers go into a bar. the sam user is there because he's finished the day's work and wants to relax. the vi user is there because he's going to be working all night and needs a break. the emacs user is there because there's nothing else he can do: both his hands are in splints because of carpal tunnel syndrome. +Oh yeah, great: eye tracking and mind reading. +Certainly not. +It's a terrible idea. +First, check your errors. +I second that! +Ha ha. +Let the machine do the work. +I'm not going back in there. +Advertisers. +I'm not used to success. +Not needed. +2106 is a long time from now. +Why does this matter? +Does anyone know of a version of sam for Windows that will run on 64-bit installations? +Great, thanks. +I used to be a physicist. +Please file an issue at golang.org/issue/new +There is no simple definition for what people want. +One man's toy is another's real system, and every tool adds to the arsenal. +There is no problem in computer science that cannot be solved by another JSON configuration file. +Anything important enough to be in a dot-file is important enough not to be in a dot-file. +Again, please read the blog post I cited. +Experiment! +Live and learn. +Something else may happen one day. +I don't know what the right answer is. +If it's not worth doing well, it's not worth doing at all. +Manual is wrong. +The Plan 9 FAQ needs work. +In another 24 years, programmers will learn how to use malloc. +Use a tool. +Please define 'trouble'. +I just noticed that Glenda, the Plan 9 bunny, has a body the same shape as Tor Johnson's head. +I must admit I find the fissiparous nature of the Open Source/FSF community a little dispiriting. +Thanks for saying that. +Is this a bug fix? +I disagree with the premise. +I speak from experience here. +It's not how many features that matter, it's how the features interact. +Just write the code. +Looks like a bug. +And now we have diverged so far from the original question that we can safely ignore it. +I oversold due to fading memory. But I stand by the fundamental point. +Although there may be specific examples where generated output is uninteresting, deciding whether to read code based entirely on whether a computer or a human wrote it doesn't seem a good general principle to me. +Short answer: No. +None of that is excusable, only true. +File an issue? +The documentation is clearly insufficient. +You don't say anything about the problem beyond "it doesn't work". +Can you be a little more specific please? +Working as intended. +That's a shame. +Nothing has changed. +Correct as written. Maybe badly written, but correct. +Does it make a difference? +One more thing. +That's odd. +Nothing in Go is accidental. +Go was supposed to be a fresh start. +Ken and I ported Plan 9 to the SPARC in 6 days over one fun Christmas break. +I told the truth as I saw it. +Wait, teletypes are finally gone so we need *pseudo* teletypes? +I started complaining about this long ago and nobody cared then, either. +It is very unlikely to change. +Don't do that. +This is just me speaking, not the Go team. +Go doesn't have it. +Even the simplest changes can be disruptive. +Feels like the wrong solution to me. +Copying source just leads to confusion. +More discussion is required. +What are you really trying to do? +I wrote a book about this once; I recommend it. +I just thought it would be nice. +My recent incompetence is humbling. I should quit the industry. +Three cheers for dropping things that are too complex. +Great. +This is one special case. +This slippery slope is long and steep. I'd prefer not to take the first step. +All that aside, the rule works very well in practice. +dot dot dot +Sounds nice. +Yes. +It is legal. +At MIT the server is the unit of invention. +Nothing is wrong here. +Да! +Noted. +нет. +THIS OPUS LACKS PERSPICACITY +THIS INCHOATE EMISSION DOES NOT ADUMBRATE CONSUMMATION +OK I'll stop now. +Russ is prepping some words about what's happening. +I will fix. +Feature requests will be ignored. +I would call that a bug. +Feel free to file an issue. +I really dislike knobs in APIs. +??? +What's wrong with the obvious? +I am dyspeptic. +I do not. +The Yacc grammar was translated by sam-powered hands. +Turning off comments. +This is unfortunate. +NaN is unfortunate. +No we can't. +go away +You misinterpreted my suggestion. +Not a great situation, I admit. +I do not understand your criticism. +If you want to do the work, I will review the results. +Now, this is one of the things where the guy who blogged about me being a world-class jackass missed the point. +Please drop this. +Maybe yes, maybe no. +Please be respectful in this forum. +It sounds reasonable and should be easy enough to implement. +There is a widespread assumption that garbage collection and kernels cannot coexist but history shows a number of examples that demonstrate otherwise. +Speaking as a one-time kernel writer, I would have loved to have garbage collection available inside the kernel. Hell, half the code in the kernel is tied to memory management. +Thanks for the report. +It takes precautions but there are no guarantees. +What is the problem you are trying to solve? +Please be civil. +I think this would be a mistake. +Go's interfaces were designed to solve particular problems. +Go is not the product of a Whiggish development process. +complexity is multiplicative +i always intended to fix the problem; i never saw how. +apologies. +The choice cannot be explained, only understood. +Indeed. +i see no bug here. +I support the idea of unrecorded talks. +We do not accept patches +Syntax highlighting is juvenile. +Working as designed. +I've written programs with twenty implementations of io.Reader inside. +Who cares? Shut up. +What is wrong with my analysis? +I just want to explain something. +I recommend in the strongest terms that you don't do this. +Sockets are the X windows of IO interfaces. +Ignore what I wrote. +In other words, here's how to do it but don't do it. +I did indeed. +I don't understand what you mean by 'reset'. +I am, and as far as I can tell it makes no difference whatsoever. +Please put this silly objection to rest. It has no merit. +Interpretations will vary. +I think the pattern used well is perfectly acceptable in certain situations. +Like everything that attracts scrutiny, the key point is to use the idea well: safely, clearly, correctly, and only when appropriate. +I am not trying to be difficult, but you must understand it's not simple to address your question. +One step at a time. +Thanks for grinding through those.