On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 12:12:13 +0100 Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 05:30:03 +0000 (UTC) > Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote: > > There's value in someone being just contrarian enough to purposefully > > look for the strangest or most illogical read of a spec and > > (initially) implement it that way, in ordered to root out and get the > > bugs in the spec fixed. That said... > > I highly doubt the person implementing the code for Paludis was doing > it in a contrarian way. As far as I can see, he simply implemented what > the spec says. Then the person implementing the code for Paludis is either a monkey or a robot*. Anyone capable of reasoning could puzzle out the implications of not allowing user-given options to override the defaults. Obviously you can write code that follows a spec but is still broken or useless. *or both (?!) -- gcc-porting toolchain, wxwidgets @ gentoo.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
