develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from March 2013

Re: [perl #117239] Re: [perl #117259] Re: Bleadperlv5.17.9-200-g0e0ab62 breaks MLEHMANN/JSON-XS-2.33.tar.gz

Thread Previous | Thread Next
Marc Lehmann
March 24, 2013 15:22
Re: [perl #117239] Re: [perl #117259] Re: Bleadperlv5.17.9-200-g0e0ab62 breaks MLEHMANN/JSON-XS-2.33.tar.gz
Message ID:
On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 03:19:42AM -0700, "H. Merijn Brand via RT" <> wrote:
> > > you could change  the line
> > >
> > >     HE *hes [count];
> > > to
> > [...]
> > 
> > He wrote no such thing, neither clearly not implied nor even hinting at
> > that.
> Come on Marc. You care for your software, so you are able to combine an
> error message and two lines of code to see the intention.

The simple fact is, I was not able to, for whatever reason. In isolation
and in hindsight, things often look "obvious" that aren't.

And I had to wade through a lot of bullshit, such as things being
"unacceptable", code not being "ANSI-C" etc. etc. and the first time it
occured to me that you might have meant this as some kind of patch occured
to me in this very thread.

So no, your intentions weren't at all clear to me. It still sounds as if
you just wanted to troll me a bit with your comments (comments that, I am
confident, you know were wrong and/or misleading).

Maybe you wanted to rant, because you were obviously pissed off by somebody
having the audacity to use "unacceptable" versions of the C language.

I don't mind when somebody acts like that (that would be rather
hypocritical of me...), but then he or she better is prepared to get some
clear response.

> > A patch is, at the very least, is a description of changes to apply.
> And a test case, which in view of what Vadim noted would have shown

I have no such requireemnts for patches. Neither do patches have to have
any specific format nor is a test case required. In fact, I very much
prefer an explanation of a prose description over a patch, as patches
are almost never directly applicable. A clear explanation of whats wrong
is way more useful to me than a patch, because the quality requirements
_I_ put on myself require me to understand what I am doing, and blindly
applying patches does not work for me.

> > > > Making up lies like these just makes clear to me that you are not honest.
> In how (other) people interpret written text, and reflecting their
> feelings on those interpretation doesn't make them liars.

I fully agree, but things are a bit different here.

People can be confused about meanings, and can misinterpret things as much as
they want. That does not make them liars.

But when you tell them it isn't true, and give reasons, and they ignore
that and just repeat them, then they actively lie.

Just look at this sad thread. I don't know how many times it was pointed
out that changing the C99-style comments to C89 comments does not make the
module it compile, or more portable.

Yet I still receive private mails where people tell me that all I need to
do is change the comments, and the problem is solved.

Fair enough you might say, and to some extent, that's true. But when they
keep making this false claim after being explicitly and personally told it
isn't true, and why (because the module used a lot more extensions that
are found in C99), then they start becoming liars, it's that simple.

And there also has to be a limit. When somebody replies to this thread,
I can reasonably expect him or her not to repeat something that has been
shown to be false many times over an extended period of time.

Also, make no mistake. This list has been used before to spread lies about
me and/or my modules, and is quite welcoming to this kind of behaviour. I
am the only one to defend when it happens (after all, I am old enough to
speak for myself, and don't expect the correctness police to come into
play and fix things for me).

> Dave and me both try to read past that first impression and are maybe
> more optimistic about intentions then you are. Perception is subjective,
> not objective. Dave is no liar.

Let's not get hung up over an apparently politically-incorrect word.

Dave made untrue statements while well knowing that they are likely
untrue, without an effort to correct them. To me, that's a lie, but to
him, that might be business as usual.

The words aren't important, it's whats being done that is.

Or rather, that's wrong. Seems for some people the words are more
important than whats done (or is fact), but I am definitely not one of

                The choice of a       Deliantra, the free code+content MORPG
      -----==-     _GNU_    
      ----==-- _       generation
      ---==---(_)__  __ ____  __      Marc Lehmann
      --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ /
      -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\

Thread Previous | Thread Next Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at | Group listing | About