4 ms·

I think with "few lines of codes as possible" he wants auditability. Rob mentions it as something of a feature: https://youtu.be/MkJkyMuBm3g?t=744 https://yout

I think with "few lines of codes as possible" he wants auditability. Rob mentions it as something of a feature: https://youtu.be/MkJkyMuBm3g?t=744 https://youtu.be/MkJkyMuBm3g?t=744 about 12 minute mark, he mentions how people used BusyBox in US army because they wanted to audit all the code, and this was his realization. I think it's a worthy goal. But surely if bc is missing some useful features there is probably no harm having multiple implementations.

ghoward 5y ago
Upvoted your for good points. However... I think it's a false goal if it comes before correctness. Auditability is great, but it's kinda useless to say, "Yep, I know your code is wrong." Unfortunately, it seems to be Rob's number one goal over even correctness. (Busybox is even worse about binary size.) And with the way Rob asked for me to change things, it actually made things less readable, which is an important part of auditability. So he and I have a fundamental disagreement over it.