Re: Brian Kernighan, maybe I'm not worthy, maybe I'm scum

On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 06:57:25 -0600, spinoza1111 wrote
(in article
<e46245c6-29cb-4337-b16d-184647c3f807@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>):

Somewhere in here the attributions to CBF's comments got waxed...

On Dec 29, 3:58 pm, Randy Howard <randyhow...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 01:12:21 -0600,spinoza1111wrote
(in article
<8712e837-59e1-4161-ac43-9735a14d8...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>):





On Dec 29, 6:37 am, CBFalconer <cbfalco...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
spinoza1111wrote:
Randy Howard <randyhow...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
spinoza1111wrote

When I had started working at Princeton University's Information
Centers in 1987, my boss at a reception for alumni student Info
Center workers said to me, Ed, this is *Brian Kernighan*.

Nilgewater is back again.

This time, Mr. Howard, your compulsive stalking will not be
tolerated.

PLONK

Good, you do that. And stay away if you plan on bullying people here.

A rational person might determine that when you try to tell people what
to do, it is you that is doing the bullying.

This is complete nonsense.


No it is not. You told him to "stay away", as if you somehow have such
authority. Perhaps since you were in his killfile this made you feel
like you had "told him off" without him ever seeing it.

Is your boss a bully? Or does money talk?

Relevance?

Or, if you're self-employed, is your client a bully? Or does money
talk?

Relevance?

The bully, whose prototype is indeed Hitler

False. They were around long before Hitler, and I think you need a
better dictionary.


[reams of nilgewater snipped]

Not once, to my recollection and to my knowledge, did you in 2003
contribute anything positive to the discussion.

Apparently you forget all the efforts (which admittedly appear to have
failed) to teach you something about your horrifically bad code you
posted, and your mistaken (proven by benchmark data) beliefs about what
"magic" the optimizer would do for you (demonstrated to be false) to
save what can only be described is childishly naive logic, to which you
imagined a C compiler would save you from yourself.

Instead, you stalked me, and your observations on programming seemed
to me deliberately jejune so as to avoid the risk of being found wrong.

False. The discussion focused for far too long on trying to show you,
through code examples, analysis of your own code which was posted here,
and through benchmarking examples and results (on multiple compilers,
hardware architectures and operating systems) of exactly why your
assumptions were incorrect. When faced with such, you did you
nilgewater routine, which is often indistinguishable from the
"postmodernism generator" in an attempt to use persiflage as cover for
incompetent code decisions.

You based your
campaign on some assertions and a Web page created by Programmer Dude
which in turn addressed mostly unprovable and undecidable issues of
programming style, which were neither verifiable nor falsifiable.

Incorrect.

I'd taken the risk, as I take here, in being wrong, as people did in
the old "structured walkthrough" (which has been pretty much
eliminated by corporate bullying), to verify my opinions about the
superiority of OO, and here, I am concerned about Pike's code. You
entered strictly to "tell me what to do", which was mostly, get
fucked.

If you wish to persist with exercising your right to "selective memory
disorder", go ahead, but the archives show different. Little about OO
versus whatever will provide cover for "gee, this guy is just too
stupid to figure out how and when to hoist a loop invariant".

This type of "telling people what to do" is bullying and stalking, and
this time around I'm not going to put up with that *** from you or
anyone else.

No, telling people what to do is saying things like "stay away". This
time around, will you also be a hypocrite, or was that the last example
of it for a while?

--
Randy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR)
"The power of accurate observation is called cynicism by those
who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw





.

Quantcast