Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 14:14:13 -0700 From: Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com> To: Mark Murray <mark@grondar.za> Cc: obrien@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.bin/rwall rwall.c Message-ID: <15495.55333.300370.385829@caddis.yogotech.com> In-Reply-To: <200203072038.g27KcGRV064577@grimreaper.grondar.org> References: <20020307120711.A62212@dragon.nuxi.com> <200203072038.g27KcGRV064577@grimreaper.grondar.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > > This is by *NO* means more readable than the old code! > > > > > > I guess this comes down to an opinion, right? :-) > > > > There seems to be more NO's than agreements with you in this case. BUT > > that does not matter. We've operated under the "don't change things w/o > > a good reason" to (1) settle cases of opinion like this. And (2) because > > changing things too much throws away over a decade of tested proven code. > > This is something that should not be taken lightly. We hold our age up > > all the time as one of our advantages over Linux. However these > > WARNS/lint runs are making our code as volatile as the GNU stuff we snub. > > There is no clear direction in the above statement, although it has > elements of truth from several disparate arguments. > > "Good reason" == "code rot". Code can not 'rot'. If it works, it works. All the rest of the arguments are based on the invalid assumption. Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15495.55333.300370.385829>