Re: Kernighan Scum project status announcement from spinoza1111

On Jan 13, 2:02 pm, spinoza1111 <spinoza1...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jan 4, 8:50 pm, Randy Howard <randyhow...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Fri, 4 Jan 2008 00:00:29 -0600, spinoza1111 wrote
(in article
<9fa7f8aa-ae62-4939-a5ea-da6cbac5b...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>):

The Kernighan Scum project was started in the vandalized thread "Brian
Kernighan, Maybe I'm Not Worthy, Maybe I'm Scum".

So now you have stooped to using even more stupid subject lines for
your threads, in some pathetically weak attempt to use character
assassination of a well known and respected computer scientist.  Fail.

Sure, a subject line such as "Kernighan's 'Beautiful' Code" is
sarcastic.

If that's what's bugging you, I would only ask why countless ordinary
people are fair game when they attempt to use usenet without being
thug insiders, while we mustn't "attack", not the person-hood of big
authorities, but their output.

This is authoritarianism, a source of Fascism according to Theodore
Adorno and Erich Fromm.

The IMPORT of the work that Kernighan did in the 1970s on effective
programming style in old languages, and that of Gerald Weinberg, was
that authoritarian style not only destroyed spirits and careers.

It was also that in programming, where we all make errors, a
paraprofession that would be less than a paraprofession, indeed a form
of typing, were it not for errors, authoritarianism creates and
preserves bugs.

No, stupid, I'm not saying you caused my bug. I'm saying that I'd
guess that in the real world, you ignore bugs that conflict with your
world-view and self-image.

We know that you're ready to maintain, for example, that the high
probability that for any arbitrary C program, it will fail for data
containing Nul strings, is a kewl feature.

But it's not.

Compared even to Pascal, and even more to Java or C Sharp, C programs
are either ridden with found bugs including "strings" that aren't
strings, hard-coded limits, and leakage, or else are useless black
boxes because nobody has had the time to audit the code line by line
for stunts which are the stock in trade of the C bum.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Revisiting an old friend: Set oRS = Nothing
    ... > Yet bugs have been documented that have been corrected by explicitly ... metaphor: "defensive programming". ... recent discovery of the cargo cult metaphor. ...
    (microsoft.public.inetserver.asp.general)
  • Re: Ancient history [was Re: Public disclosure ...]
    ... >who were programming in C didn't seem to fully understand the range of ... by security concerns instead of merely avoiding crashes. ... No one can "fully understand the range of possible effects of bugs." ... presumably a feel for the numuber of computable functions. ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Static vs Dynamic
    ... (Java has too much noise in its source code, ... lot to ask and is typical in a typed language supporting polymorphism. ... > developers can easily learn the Java programming language; ... > obivous bugs slip through and b) in many cases, ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Priority Queue confusion
    ... Using Macros ... 90% probability of 90% bugs being generated at run time. ... Programming is programming, there's no reason ... Using anything can definitely cause problems in debugging. ...
    (comp.programming)
  • Re: Is this a good idea?
    ... you risk introducting bugs into ... in memory - induces lazyness in the programmers. ... >> few MB per script, ... Sometimes it does not - sometimes, due to lazy programming or bad DB design, ...
    (comp.lang.php)