> On Jun 13, 2015, at 11:47 AM, Ian Lepore <i...@freebsd.org> wrote: > > On Sat, 2015-06-13 at 11:38 -0400, David Chisnall wrote: >> On 13 Jun 2015, at 11:17, Ian Lepore <i...@freebsd.org> wrote: >>> >>> If you would have told me a year ago that you had a simple scheme that >>> could make 30 years of experience maintaining code for unix-like systems >>> completely worthless I would have been skeptical, but it seems we're >>> well on our way. >> >> There is a lot of heckling and unhelpful hyperbole in this thread. Reading >> the xo_emit format strings takes a little bit of getting used to, but the >> same is true of printf - it’s just that we’re already used to printf. The >> structured parts (xo_open_container, xo_close_container and friends) are >> clear and descriptive. The changes are fairly invasive, but the benefits >> are also very large for anyone who is wanting to automate administration of >> FreeBSD systems. >> >> If you have suggestions for how the libxo APIs could be improved, then >> please let us know - Phil is very reception to suggestions but objections >> along the lines of ‘it’s not what I’m used to and changes sometimes break >> things so we should never have changes’ are not helpful. >> > > "This is a piece of crap that needs to be excised from the system and > done a different way" is useful input whether you agree with it or not.
Actually: no. Not only does one not demonstrate an understanding of the problem by calling it “crap” and thus leaving the recipient to wonder whether it’s worth his or her time to even respond; the sentence also lack a concrete suggestion and, last but not least, is utter after this was all discussed on arch@, making it very much one of “too little, too late”. So, not useful at all. -- Marcel Moolenaar mar...@xcllnt.net
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
