> > > Childish and amateurish were not my words in the first place, they were > Crockford's. And, although there may have been a bit of provocation in my > post, I think that the problem is real (otherwise, why would Crockford use > these words?). >
No, childish is your word, and so is unprofessional, which you alude to again in your response. Don't hide behind Crockford just because he also used them. He's not here. The node community IS sometimes unprofessional. Because we don't really buy the old school idea of why being "professional" is supposed to be so great. If you want to work with people, you deal with real people. Not rigid, restrained approximations of real people. You can make the argument that the underlying irreverence is in some way hampering node adoption. That's debatable I think. But what you fail to realize is that even if it were true to a certain extent, we simply do not care. There are things we're willing to compromise on to push node to the top, and some things we are not. Nuno Job is is part of 2 successful node businesses (Nodejitsu, The Node Firm), and he manages to do it while still being funny. Oh mah gawd, how is that possible?! The community has chosen to be genuine instead of "professional". You can disagree, but I'm afraid your protests fall on deaf ears there. We all get enough of being professional at our day jobs. > My expectation would have been that the topic be discussed at the > technical, professional level between the different people involved. Did > this ever happen? Did any member of the core team ever show any interest in > what Jorge had produced? > This is happening right now. In this thread. Ben is a core member and he's being very receptive and offering lots of info in return. Bradley Meck is also very active and expressed his appreciation for TAGG in the right context. And it has happened in other threads as well. I'm not sure what you think this is supposed to look like. Your beef seems to be that the core team isn't over the moon about the way TAGG approaches the problem. Again, they have opinions about what they want threading support in node to look like. If you want to influence those opinions, you should engage more often, with more data, and in better faith. But you should be prepared for some obstinance because first class threaded programming is not something the community at large is clamoring for. It doesn't fit with the current vision of node. So you'll be fighting to change the vision. That is no small thing and I'm not sure why you think it should be easy. > > There should be a way to discuss issues like threads without going into > sarcasms and personal things. > There probably is. I don't think you've found it yet, and you may not find it here. People here are not a huge fan of threads, and we're doing awesome without them. We may be swayed with some cajoling though. But you are terrible at cajoling. Just terrible. Get your cajoling skills up. <-- This is me having a little fun with you. You could practice reading it and not going into apoplectic fits. > > This feature (being able to do CPU intensive stuff in JS) may not hit the > sweet spot of node, which is I/O intensive apps. But it does not hurt node > either; it enables something that was impossible (or much harder) to do > before, and it does it with a design which is aligned with node's > principles (computations being treated just like async operations). So why > bash it? > You've heard the reasons why. You just don't like them. And you also seem to be misunderstanding what node's principles are. :Marco -- Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/ Posting guidelines: https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nodejs" group. To post to this group, send email to nodejs@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to nodejs+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en
