[Fwd: Re: deferred deallocation of local objects]

[Alex Perez]

> Adam Fedor <fedor@doc.com> wrote:
>> On Tuesday, October 14, 2003, at 10:48 AM, Chris B. Vetter wrote:
> [...]
>> > FWIW, I can vouch for everything Alex said, especially the "It
>> works
>> on my box"_TM and "your BSD must be broken" (with respect to the
>> networking
>> > stack for crying out loud!!! yea, very likely...) parts.
>> I don't really like to respond to rants such as this, but I think
>> that people on the sidelines of GNUstep might get the wrong
>> impression. Free Software projects, by their very nature, depend a
>> certain level of user responsibility, and it's not just because they
>> are free.
>
> I agree and that is _exactly_ why his occasional "What do you want?
> It's working on my box"_TM approach is NOT the way to go.
Yes, this is really the problem in many of the instances I've observed.
A more enlightened approach would be admitting that GNUstep is designed
to run on a plethora of various systems and configurations, some of
which have their own unique quirks...not bugs, quirks. Anyone that's
ever used Solaris, for instance, knows that it has PLENTY of quirks.
>> - It's not easy doing remote debugging without a lot of help from the
>> person who is having the problem.
>
> No one is talking or even expecting anyone to do remote debugging.
> Alex (and I) are talking about, for example, the now (in)famous commit
> of a certain class with a missing /* at the head of the file ...
>
> Checking that code works BEFORE actually commiting it to CVS is the
> issue here.
Exactly. It's about quality control, or the lack thereof, and nothing
more.
>> - The libraries (particularly gnustep-base) are in some places very
>> complex and it's very often that even minor changes break things in
>> other places.
>
> True. Yet, no one can be experienced in everything. While someone may
> have experience in security, another has experience in networking. Not
> taking the advice or recommendation of someone who HAS experience in a
> certain field is, pardon my French again, stupid.
Agreed, true. NSSocket comes to mind... :) Chris gets 5 'polite points'
here ;-)
NSURL was also pretty screwed up, last I checked.
>> I'm very reluctant to change anything of importance in the base
>> library because of this and I think it's amazing that Richard has
>> kept up so well with the intricacies of the library. No one else has
>> invested the knowledge and time understanding as much as is needed to
>> keep the base library maintained.
>
> Absolutely, and no one disputes that fact. Yet, see above. His
> responses along the line of "it works on my box"_TM and "then your
> system must be broken" annoy not only me.
Agreed, this is not just a personality conflict. Everything is built on
Base. Users have come and gone becuase they haven't been able to get
legitimate issues in -base resolved. That's bad.
> You are right in saying that the occasional visitor to this list will
> get a wrong impression by reading this thread, however, talk to people
> who actually develop for or are actually trying to use GNUstep and
> they can and will tell you that there are lots of problems being left
> untouched (although pointed out) or are fixed in a ... weird way.
> There is one application in particular that comes to mind that had to
> be rewritten (at least partially) to work around bugs that were
> introduced while fixing the very same problem.
>
> I don't want to step on Richard's toes, far from it. But I have to
> agree with Alex, that his quality control leaves a lot wanting...
>
> --
> Chris
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss-gnustep mailing list
> Discuss-gnustep@gnu.org
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep