Frankly, it's really difficult to talk to people that always run syntactic analyzers on everything written and aren't open to absorb the full context. Do I need

Frankly, it's really difficult to talk to people that always run syntactic analyzers on everything written and aren't open to absorb the full context. Do I need to go step by step to talk what was wrong with the code? You are mistaking generosity (i.e. it has faults, but it was in a different age) with stupidity (I have no clue what I am talking about; despite writing my own compilers, writing self-modifying code in assembly language, using super duper optimizations in C++ that crashed compilers because nobody expected them etc.). Thank you very much and good luck with your literal approach! Actually, reading that code was fun for me. I wish I could go so low level these days in the mainstream...