Re: f0dder's Fabulous Wait States.
- From: Donkey <donkey@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 12:19:32 GMT
hutch-- wrote:
Edgar,
I am sorry you have been foolish enough to take this position as I have never had anything against you but your injury here is self inflicted.
I have had no injury inflicted here, you might imagine that you have done some but it only counts if I am concerned about that kind of thing. However I do believe that I am correct about the right way to code the shell function and my library code passes every test that I could throw at it without the thousands of context switches per second your suffers or the 259 bug. So in the end, I feel no overwhelming urge to agree with you on this one, but I see no point in arguing about it ad infinitum, lending creedance to your opinion as if it were worthy of debate might mislead some programmers.
Donkey .
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: f0dder's Fabulous Wait States.
- From: hutch--
- Re: f0dder's Fabulous Wait States.
- References:
- f0dder's Fabulous Wait States.
- From: hutch--
- Re: f0dder's Fabulous Wait States.
- From: Donkey
- Re: f0dder's Fabulous Wait States.
- From: hutch--
- Re: f0dder's Fabulous Wait States.
- From: Donkey
- Re: f0dder's Fabulous Wait States.
- From: hutch--
- f0dder's Fabulous Wait States.
- Prev by Date: Re: Iczelion's tutorials revisited.
- Next by Date: Re: f0dder's Fabulous Wait States.
- Previous by thread: Re: f0dder's Fabulous Wait States.
- Next by thread: Re: f0dder's Fabulous Wait States.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|