Re: [linux-usb-devel] Re: [BK PATCH] USB changes for 2.5.34

[Robert Love <rml@tech9.net>]

On Sun, 2002-09-15 at 19:52, Larry McVoy wrote:

> We clearly have different definitions of what is acceptable.  If your
> attitude is that understanding the code is a luxury all that means is
> that I want you nowhere near any code I maintain.  Non-trivial code
> requires non-trivial understanding and that understanding is not a
> "luxury" in my book.

Well, since the code Daniel was referring to having debugged (ptrace and
thread debacle earlier) was broken and he successfully fixed it -- he is
welcome to come near code as far as I am concerned.

In short, he and Ingo fixed some messed up code and that is all that
matters.  I do not care if he uses a debugger or a magic ball, so long
as he fixes it.

Personally, I do not use a debugger and it is partly because of the
reasons you list.  But if Daniel can fix a problem (which he most likely
ran into firsthand with his work on gcc and gdb) then he is welcome in
my eyes.

> If your company has such a poor business model that they can't afford to
> pay you enough to take the time to do a good job then find a different
> place to work.  No amount of debugger "help" is going to make up for a
> lack of understanding.

Please, give it up.

	Robert Love