4 ms·

I think those quotes are not to be interpreted literally. It's very likely that there's some humor in them that's being lost in this context. What does he even

I think those quotes are not to be interpreted literally. It's very likely that there's some humor in them that's being lost in this context. What does he even mean by bad or good? Does he really hate programming or maybe he hates academic programming? Additionally, the project has really moved on. Admittedly, there are people who still code in php 5.5 and don't use a framework, or roll their own, but their experience does not reflect on how pleasant php can be. Coding in php without using the ecosystem is like walking across town instead of driving.

DonHopkins 9y ago
You sound like you're trying to justify a Trump tweet. But there's a long well documented history and consistent pattern you're ignoring. Do you consider PHP 5.3.7 "moving on"? > 5.3.7 upgrade warning: [22-Aug-2011] Due to unfortunate issues with 5.3.7 (see bug#55439) users should postpone upgrading until 5.3.8 is released (expected in a few days). No seriously, he's literally as careless as he claims to be, and his lack of giving a shit about things that are extremely important has caused actual serious security problems, like breaking crypt() by checking in sloppy buggy code that would have caused a unit test to fail, but without bothering to run the unit tests (because so many of them failed anyway, so who cares??), and then MAKING A RELEASE of PHP 5.3.7 with, OF ALL THINGS, a broken untested crypt()! http://i.imgur.com/cAvSr.jpg http://i.imgur.com/cAvSr.jpg Do you think that's just his sense of humor, a self deprecating joke, breaking then releasing crypt() without testing, that's funny in some context? What context would that be? Do you just laugh and shrug it off with "Let Rasmus be Rasmus!" https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/jsudd/you_see_rasmus_lerdorf_creator_of_php_wrecking/ https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/jsudd/you_see_... >r314434 (rasmus): Make static analyzers happy >r315218 (stas): Unbreak crypt() (fix bug #55439) # If you want to remove static analyser messages, be my guest, but please run unit tests after http://svn.php.net/viewvc/php/php-src/trunk/ext/standard/php_crypt_r.c?r1=314438&r2=314437&pathrev=314438 http://svn.php.net/viewvc/php/php-src/trunk/ext/standard/php... https://plus.google.com/113641248237520845183/posts/g68d9RvRA1i https://plus.google.com/113641248237520845183/posts/g68d9RvR... >Rasmus Lerdorf >+Lorenz H.-S. We do. See http://gcov.php.net http://gcov.php.net >You can see the code coverage, test case failures, Valgrind reports and more for each branch. >The crypt change did trigger a test to fail, we just went a bit too fast with the release and didn't notice the failure. This is mostly because we have too many test failures which is primarily caused by us adding tests for bug reports before actually fixing the bug. I still like the practice of adding test cases for bugs and then working towards making the tests pass, however for some of these non-critical bugs that are taking a while to change we should probably switch them to XFAIL (expected fail) so they don't clutter up the test failure output and thus making it harder to spot new failures like this crypt one.

DonHopkins 9y ago

You sound like you're trying to justify a Trump tweet. But there's a long well documented history and consistent pattern you're ignoring. Do you consider PHP 5.3.7 "moving on"? > 5.3.7 upgrade warning: [22-Aug-2011] Due to unfortunate issues with 5.3.7 (see bug#55439) users should postpone upgrading until 5.3.8 is released (expected in a few days). No seriously, he's literally as careless as he claims to be, and his lack of giving a shit about things that are extremely important has caused actual serious security problems, like breaking crypt() by checking in sloppy buggy code that would have caused a unit test to fail, but without bothering to run the unit tests (because so many of them failed anyway, so who cares??), and then MAKING A RELEASE of PHP 5.3.7 with, OF ALL THINGS, a broken untested crypt()! http://i.imgur.com/cAvSr.jpg http://i.imgur.com/cAvSr.jpg Do you think that's just his sense of humor, a self deprecating joke, breaking then releasing crypt() without testing, that's funny in some context? What context would that be? Do you just laugh and shrug it off with "Let Rasmus be Rasmus!" https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/jsudd/you_see_rasmus_lerdorf_creator_of_php_wrecking/ https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/jsudd/you_see_... >r314434 (rasmus): Make static analyzers happy >r315218 (stas): Unbreak crypt() (fix bug #55439) # If you want to remove static analyser messages, be my guest, but please run unit tests after http://svn.php.net/viewvc/php/php-src/trunk/ext/standard/php_crypt_r.c?r1=314438&r2=314437&pathrev=314438 http://svn.php.net/viewvc/php/php-src/trunk/ext/standard/php... https://plus.google.com/113641248237520845183/posts/g68d9RvRA1i https://plus.google.com/113641248237520845183/posts/g68d9RvR... >Rasmus Lerdorf >+Lorenz H.-S. We do. See http://gcov.php.net http://gcov.php.net >You can see the code coverage, test case failures, Valgrind reports and more for each branch. >The crypt change did trigger a test to fail, we just went a bit too fast with the release and didn't notice the failure. This is mostly because we have too many test failures which is primarily caused by us adding tests for bug reports before actually fixing the bug. I still like the practice of adding test cases for bugs and then working towards making the tests pass, however for some of these non-critical bugs that are taking a while to change we should probably switch them to XFAIL (expected fail) so they don't clutter up the test failure output and thus making it harder to spot new failures like this crypt one.