From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Brad Boyer Subject: Re: m68k-queue Date: Sat, 18 May 2013 10:53:07 -0700 Message-ID: <20130518175307.GA1414@cynthia.pants.nu> References: <5191FC4C.8010707@biophys.uni-duesseldorf.de> <20130515054540.GA8137@cynthia.pants.nu> <20130518070910.GA26647@cynthia.pants.nu> <51973E02.6090302@biophys.uni-duesseldorf.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from cynthia.allandria.com ([76.245.85.235]:41231 "EHLO cynthia.pants.nu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751874Ab3ERRxO (ORCPT ); Sat, 18 May 2013 13:53:14 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <51973E02.6090302@biophys.uni-duesseldorf.de> Sender: linux-m68k-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org To: schmitz Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven , Linux/m68k On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 08:38:26PM +1200, schmitz wrote: > I'm sure it was one of these 'how can we get some piece of code > reused to do something almost entirely unrelated' ideas. Sounds like > what I'd have done just to solve the hwclock handling and get on > with hacking other stuff without being irritated by constant fscks > ... > > Code quality has improved a huge lot since. Keep in mind that mac68k > was developed separate from m68k in the beginning. I have never had > Alan's instinct for writing good clean code, 'it works' was usually > good enough. I hope nobody took my comments as criticism of their coding skills. I'm pretty sure I was not only involved in but at the time actively advocated the solution I was saying was a bad idea. I've certainly been guilty of as much or more sloppy coding than everyone else. In any case, I want to encourage all the people who still do work on this that their work is not wasted and people do appreciate it. Brad Boyer flar@allandria.com