On Feb 11, 2012, at 2:14 PM, john skaller wrote: > > On 12/02/2012, at 4:37 AM, Chuck Remes wrote: > >> I will aggressively merge patches that make 0mq a safer and more "forgiving" >> library. > > No you won't :) > > You want a robust check? I can give you 99.9999%. > But you'll pay.
John, why do you make this more complex than it needs to be? I don't need 99.9999%. I'm happy with less and I bet others are too. If someone produces patches that add robustness without a lot of cost (performance or code complexity) then we're all better off. If you want to prove a point and ruin the library with crazy and/or pointless checks to get to 99.9999% robustness, I bet those patches will get reverted very quickly. In other words, quit being some fucking pedantic. :) so you know I don't actually hate you cr _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
