3 ms·
Yes, I don't argue with that. But, saying "this dual locking implementation we're looking at is definitely written by a retard"* is still 99% more about the qua
by jzzskijj 11y ago
Yes, I don't argue with that. But, saying "this dual locking implementation we're looking at is definitely written by a retard"* is still 99% more about the quality of the implementation than about the person who did it.
*) quote made up
- chris_wot 11y agoNo its not. There is no constructive criticism in that comment, it was 100% abusive. And what did you gain by calling someone a "retard"? The entire reason for saying that was to make the commenter look good by making someone else look bad. Torvalds, ironically, doesn't encourage this sort of thing. Unfortunately, he is also an offender - the "shut the fuck up Mauro" incident comes to mind.
- jzzskijj 11y agoI'd say this made up quote started with constructive criticism and what ever came after that could be ignored. Was it necessary? No.
- chris_wot 11y agoWhat specifically could I action from that one sentence? All it told me was it was a double-locking implementation. But if I was the original developer, I'd know that.
- imgabe 11y agoSure, but it's also extremely unhelpful. I'm sure it makes the person writing it feel superior, but it doesn't actually convey any useful information. "this dual locking implementation creates a race condition under circumstances X, Y, and Z" would be more accurate and probably more successful in achieving the purported goal of having a working dual locking implementation. Still direct, but addresses the technical problem without insulting the contributor.