Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 10:33:16 -0700 From: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> To: "Niall Douglas" <s_sourceforge@nedprod.com> Cc: threads@freebsd.org, arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [Patch] C1X threading support Message-ID: <E6656282-8FD0-4C64-A2C9-BD10B832B18A@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <4EF084A8.32369.B604AD16@s_sourceforge.nedprod.com> References: <Your message of "Tue, 20 Dec 2011 09:48:12 GMT." <4EF059DC.26433.B55D8036@s_sourceforge.nedprod.com>>, <3065.1324375763@critter.freebsd.dk> <4EF084A8.32369.B604AD16@s_sourceforge.nedprod.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Dec 20, 2011, at 5:50 AM, Niall Douglas wrote: > The job was NOT done half-arsed. If you had any experience of sitting=20= > on these committees you would know how much dedication and effort is=20= > put into standards, especially JTC1 SC22 subcommittees. Every single=20= > API in there has been studied and pored over at length across=20 > multiple years. >=20 > Everything is the way it is for a good reason. If it doesn't make=20 > sense to you that's most likely because you're not half as=20 > experienced or clever as you think you are. If you really want to=20 > know why something is the way it is, all discussion regarding all=20 > points is documented in full. Incredible claims require incredible proof. The APIs speak for = themselves: they are half-assed (and the wrong half in some cases). To = assert that they are somehow clever and we're stupid requires that one = walk through the cleverness. The participants in this thread likely = have a combined century of implementation experience with threads. Perhaps you can point us to the archives where all this discussion is = available? Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E6656282-8FD0-4C64-A2C9-BD10B832B18A>