Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:02:35 +0000
From:      "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
To:        Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au>
Cc:        arch@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: amd64 cpu_switch in C. 
Message-ID:  <5546.1205229755@critter.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 11 Mar 2008 20:55:58 %2B1100." <20080311095557.GX68971@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <20080311095557.GX68971@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org>, Peter Jeremy write
s:

>>The only appreciable downside is that it lowers the barrier of entry for
>>modifying a very sensitive piece of code.
>
>IMHO, this isn't a valid reason.  Increasing the both the legibility
>and performance of a very sensitive piece of code is a good thing.
>Having more people understand the code is also a good thing.

This is not a legal inference, and that's exactly the point Jeff made:

Just because it is written in C doesn't mean people will understand
it, it merely means that they will _think_ they understand it.

Nontheless, we have plenty of 
	/* You ARE supposed to understand this */
C-code already, so I don't see it as an objection to Jeff's patch.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5546.1205229755>