5 ms·

As long as Linus is blaming the work done and not the people behind it, that's fine. Something truly aggressive would be "This benchmark is garbage and the peop

by needs 7y ago

As long as Linus is blaming the work done and not the people behind it, that's fine. Something truly aggressive would be "This benchmark is garbage and the people responsible for writing it are monkeys on crack". He did such things in the past, but in the 4 emails I got to find on this specific benchmark, none of them critic people writing code. I think Linus got upset that a badly designed benchmark got popular and therefor is spreading misconceptions. His strongly worded answer is getting popular too and as a result everybody learns and he has stopped an urban legend from spreading. A success on every points.

speedplane 7y ago
> As long as Linus is blaming the work done and not the people behind it, that's fine. Certainly, ad hominem attacks are worse than making substantive attacks, but is that really the standard we should judge it by? Instead of a sprawling thread of visceral, wouldn't it be better if he just explained the reasons why the approach is bad in a professional manner? Writing like this just seems sloppy and non-professional. It's rambling and unclear. It could have been far more effective if written point-by-point with far less emotion.
- xelxebar 7y ago
  Calling out non-professionalism and bashing a stranger's communication style are, perhaps ironically, nice examples of non-professional behavior. I would answer your rhetorical questions with an emphatic "no." People's emotions and mental state are important. It's also important that we communicate, understand, and think about people's interior worlds. Question for you: What else is Linus communicating with his writing style? Does he show that he cares? About what? What can we tell about his values? Are these values we want in a leader? Sometimes it's good to take off the prescriptivist hat and try on Honest Curiosity.
  - loopz 7y ago
    If what you're measuring are random delays due to default scheduling and flawed code implementation, calling it "garbage" should give the author and others pause to think. In some cases, one need to establish a boundary, so as to not waste time and efforts into an endless discussion on flawed premises. Explaining why and educating about the concepts, is the better approach, and was there as well. Short and concise would be best, while limiting the negative to exactly what need be pointed out: A spade is a spade after all. If it stops people from developing "their own userspace spinlocks", it may even be kind of necessary to be quite direct.
  - speedplane 7y ago
    > Calling out non-professionalism and bashing a stranger's communication style are, perhaps ironically, nice examples of non-professional behavior. I don't see how this is the case. One can critique a style of communication professionally just like any endeavor. I'm not "bashing" Linus, or even suggesting that he should be less honest. Just that there are far more effective ways to make the same point.
simias 7y ago
>As long as Linus is blaming the work done and not the people behind it, that's fine. I think your comment is just wrong and generally pure garbage. I can't believe some poor server will have to host this nonsense for years to come. It's the most inane thing I've read all year. I'm just talking about your comment, not you though, so clearly no hard feelings here and it's definitely the right way to frame my argument to have a nice, peaceful and constructive technical discussion.
- mda 7y ago
  Except your attempt is not exactly analogus to the situation discussed.
- needs 7y ago
  Believe it or not, it's one way or another to formulate a critic, and I'm fine with it. However your strongly worded answer lacks arguments, so color me unconvinced.
- AndriyKunitsyn 7y ago
  No, reductio ad absurdum is not an argument. What you wrote is an exercise in swearing. What Linus wrote is getting his point across. It is certainly possible to describe a code with bad words without hurting the feelings of person who made it, and I think, in order for it to work everyone has to understand that everybody writes “garbage” or “crap” code sometimes, so when it happens, it’s not a big deal; it shouldn’t hurt your professional dignity. On my job, in team of 4, we do it from time to time and it’s just much mentally easier, streamlined - and yes, constructive to conduct code reviews this way. I understand this may not work for other, bigger teams, but it’s certainly a valid way.
  - polishTar 7y ago
    There were ways for him to communicate those same ideas less negatively. And it was more than just the "garbage" line. It was also things like "If I haven't convinced you of that by now, I don't know what I can say.", and "See how simplistic - and self-centered - your expectation is?". Writing this way doesn't "streamline" anything. I interpreted it as a negative interaction, and clearly others have as well including the original author (since he said as much in his response).

by needs 7y ago

speedplane 7y ago

> As long as Linus is blaming the work done and not the people behind it, that's fine. Certainly, ad hominem attacks are worse than making substantive attacks, but is that really the standard we should judge it by? Instead of a sprawling thread of visceral, wouldn't it be better if he just explained the reasons why the approach is bad in a professional manner? Writing like this just seems sloppy and non-professional. It's rambling and unclear. It could have been far more effective if written point-by-point with far less emotion.

xelxebar 7y ago
Calling out non-professionalism and bashing a stranger's communication style are, perhaps ironically, nice examples of non-professional behavior. I would answer your rhetorical questions with an emphatic "no." People's emotions and mental state are important. It's also important that we communicate, understand, and think about people's interior worlds. Question for you: What else is Linus communicating with his writing style? Does he show that he cares? About what? What can we tell about his values? Are these values we want in a leader? Sometimes it's good to take off the prescriptivist hat and try on Honest Curiosity.
- loopz 7y ago
  If what you're measuring are random delays due to default scheduling and flawed code implementation, calling it "garbage" should give the author and others pause to think. In some cases, one need to establish a boundary, so as to not waste time and efforts into an endless discussion on flawed premises. Explaining why and educating about the concepts, is the better approach, and was there as well. Short and concise would be best, while limiting the negative to exactly what need be pointed out: A spade is a spade after all. If it stops people from developing "their own userspace spinlocks", it may even be kind of necessary to be quite direct.
- speedplane 7y ago
  > Calling out non-professionalism and bashing a stranger's communication style are, perhaps ironically, nice examples of non-professional behavior. I don't see how this is the case. One can critique a style of communication professionally just like any endeavor. I'm not "bashing" Linus, or even suggesting that he should be less honest. Just that there are far more effective ways to make the same point.

simias 7y ago

>As long as Linus is blaming the work done and not the people behind it, that's fine. I think your comment is just wrong and generally pure garbage. I can't believe some poor server will have to host this nonsense for years to come. It's the most inane thing I've read all year. I'm just talking about your comment, not you though, so clearly no hard feelings here and it's definitely the right way to frame my argument to have a nice, peaceful and constructive technical discussion.

mda 7y ago
Except your attempt is not exactly analogus to the situation discussed.
needs 7y ago
Believe it or not, it's one way or another to formulate a critic, and I'm fine with it. However your strongly worded answer lacks arguments, so color me unconvinced.
AndriyKunitsyn 7y ago
No, reductio ad absurdum is not an argument. What you wrote is an exercise in swearing. What Linus wrote is getting his point across. It is certainly possible to describe a code with bad words without hurting the feelings of person who made it, and I think, in order for it to work everyone has to understand that everybody writes “garbage” or “crap” code sometimes, so when it happens, it’s not a big deal; it shouldn’t hurt your professional dignity. On my job, in team of 4, we do it from time to time and it’s just much mentally easier, streamlined - and yes, constructive to conduct code reviews this way. I understand this may not work for other, bigger teams, but it’s certainly a valid way.
- polishTar 7y ago
  There were ways for him to communicate those same ideas less negatively. And it was more than just the "garbage" line. It was also things like "If I haven't convinced you of that by now, I don't know what I can say.", and "See how simplistic - and self-centered - your expectation is?". Writing this way doesn't "streamline" anything. I interpreted it as a negative interaction, and clearly others have as well including the original author (since he said as much in his response).