Re: submitting code
- Posted by mattlewis (admin) Oct 01, 2009
- 1802 views
That's all fine and good, it's not MY code, yet Matt did say you fixed MY code, when in fact the problem was due to the task code not allowing the dll to compile properly. I did add task code to http.e, and sped it up considerably, and was adding task msging to it as well, making it even more multi-tasking-friendly. Matts tone was derisive, and implying it was all me that broke it, and there were no other factors, but i don't see it as my fault that a general lib (tasks) was not tested to be useable in a dll before it was added to core.
If I said he fixed YOUR code, I'm sure I meant it as code that you'd submitted. I don't recall saying much of anything about the ifdef, other than to discuss other ways around that particular issue. Most what I said was focused on other code, and on mutitasking concepts in general (especially this), rather than any specific code.
I don't think anyone but you cares whose fault anything was. I'm sure I've created more bugs than you (probably than anyone) in the development of v4. The goal was simply to figure it out and fix it. Again, it's not all about you.
I am aware no code stays the same for long. AGAIN, i did not consider what you did to be an attack, i considered it code development and evolution. I did not complain about your fixes, they were valid. In fact, i was happy the code was staying in despite me "breaking" it, and a way was being sought to allow task.e to be useable in http.e. Can you please just accept this fact, or must this also be in contention forever?
We've accepted it. Have you? Signs point to no. Why else would you continue to bring this up?
Matt
