From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29379 invoked by alias); 29 Jul 2010 02:13:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 29364 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Jul 2010 02:13:57 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_40,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,TW_CG X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-wy0-f171.google.com (HELO mail-wy0-f171.google.com) (74.125.82.171) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 29 Jul 2010 02:13:52 +0000 Received: by wyb29 with SMTP id 29so25888wyb.2 for ; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 19:13:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.154.80 with SMTP id n16mr1251569wbw.120.1280369630500; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 19:13:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.2.99] ([82.6.108.62]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id e31sm233750wbe.23.2010.07.28.19.13.48 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 28 Jul 2010 19:13:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4C50E8DD.3010806@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 02:13:00 -0000 From: Dave Korn User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: all pretty tame compared to usenet Subject: Re: Constructive criticism References: <20100728001415.GD4000@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> In-Reply-To: <20100728001415.GD4000@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-talk-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-talk-owner@cygwin.com Reply-To: The Vulgar and Unprofessional Cygwin-Talk List Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-talk@cygwin.com X-SW-Source: 2010-q3/txt/msg00006.txt.bz2 On 28/07/2010 01:14, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 07:55:14PM +0100, Andy Koppe wrote: >> Darn, dropped the punchline: >> >>>> Your code is 100% bogus and should be taken out the back, >>>> lined up against a wall, and machine-gunned. >>>> >>>> Then the bleeding corpse should be hung, drawn and quartered. >>>> >>>> Then burnt. >>>> >>>> Then the smouldering rubble should be jumped up and down on. >>> >>> By a hippo > > Oh boy. That brought back memories. I guess I'm glad I'm not the > object of the discussion though. > > cgf Clearly, I was too subtle in that reply. It doesn't seem that anyone in that thread was distinguishing between criticising someone's code and criticising the person themselves. Oh well, never mind. Well, I'm too busy to care right now anyway, I've got a whole bunch of parents that I have to go and tell that their babies are ugly! cheers, DaveK