Re: submitting code
- Posted by useless Oct 01, 2009
- 1660 views
You were on the dev team and did commit code directly just as I do but you flew off the handle when your code met legitimate criticisms, as all of our code does. We've went over this before.
I "flew off the handle" after days of trying to explain the use of the word "to" in the context of how you misstated the suggestion that a task be allowed to yield the parent. Again, there is a difference between "yield the parent" and "yield TO the parent". Regardless of how the task manager operates, there will be timing issues and program flow issues, and i was and remain against a task yielding it's parent task.
This had/has ZERO to do with task messaging, but if that paragraph is not completely clear to you, then in frustration, i do not know how i can explain why task msging is a good idea. It's just crystal clear to me that a task which returns data only when it's abort() quit() or return()'d is not keeping in the spirit or complete functionality of the task concept.
So we discuss my inability to make that clear, and instead to leave, and take the arguement to euphorum, where the arguement is STILL not pertaining to task msging directly, again i ask, why bother submitting more new task msging code, when i must defend myself (against your inability to understand "to") every time it's brought up?
When you developed an ifdef to deal with the "compile as dll", and added that plus some to http.e (and i have no problems with you doing that), someone said that was "fixing" (or was it "correcting"?) my code. That's a complete mischaracterisation of what happened, and i feel that was an attack against me.
We fought about "progression of code developement" regarding news.ex, and you said that should go into a tutorial, and i did agree with that. Yet just submitting the series caused an uproar, because the most recent in the series was not nice and tidy and the final complete .ex file. Somehow, the open source mantra "release early, release often" was turned against me, which is odd, considering i was the only one working on that code, and it was a development environment and no official release was due.
So the code worked, there was no significant constructive critique of the code, but every irrelavant side issue was thrown at me.
useless
