From: Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com>
To: Rob Landley <landley@trommello.org>
Cc: Pete Zaitcev <zaitcev@redhat.com>,
Daniel Phillips <phillips@arcor.de>,
linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [linux-usb-devel] Re: [BK PATCH] USB changes for 2.5.34
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2002 20:00:02 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020915200002.B23345@work.bitmover.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200209160236.g8G2a6Qn022070@pimout3-ext.prodigy.net>; from landley@trommello.org on Sun, Sep 15, 2002 at 05:35:59PM -0400
On Sun, Sep 15, 2002 at 05:35:59PM -0400, Rob Landley wrote:
> And reading glasses won't help someone who can't read. Is your above set of
> statements somehow meant to imply that a debugger cannot help someone who CAN
> code? (Logic. Logic is good here.)
>
> A similar argument would be "Nobody should own an oven. If you can't cook
> you'll just make a mess."
>
> > A debugger can do some good things. Some people argue that it
> > improves productivity, which I think may be true under some
> > circomstances.
>
> It's a tool. Does anybody really disagree about its nature?
I can't speak for others, but my guess is that the people who don't like
debuggers don't like them for pretty much the same reasons they don't like
C++. The tool makes bad behaviour too seductive.
It's true that one can write supportable perl but noone but a naive person
would base a multiple platform, multi-year lifespan product on perl.
It's true that one can write good systems code in C++ but experience has
shown that noone but a naive person would argue for C++ for a kernel.
Debuggers are sort of in this camp. Yup, useful tool. The problem is
that the real answer is that you should read and understand the code.
It's a sign of a naive programmer when you hear "this code is all shit"
and it's useful code. That means the programmer would rather rewrite
working code than understand it enough to fix it. Extremely common.
And extremely wrong in almost all cases. It's *hard* to understand code.
Get over it. Read the code, think, read again, think some more, keep
it up. Always always always assume the guy who came before you *did*
know what they were doing. Otherwise all you do is replace mostly working
code with brand new code that works for the *one* case in front of the
new programmer and none of the 100's of cases that the old code handled.
I don't think anyone is against debuggers. I'm not. I'm against people
not thinking. I'm for people who think, who are careful, who have some
respect for code that works.
It's so much more fun to say "this code is shit, I can do better", but
whenever I've said that I've been wrong about 90% of the time. And I'm
a pretty good programmer, I know that I shouldn't think like that. All
I'm saying is that thinking is greater than debuggers. Much greater.
--
---
Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-09-16 2:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 99+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-09-09 22:17 [BK PATCH] USB changes for 2.5.34 Greg KH
2002-09-10 0:17 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-09-10 0:19 ` Greg KH
2002-09-10 0:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-09-10 0:40 ` [linux-usb-devel] " Alan Cox
2002-09-10 1:41 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-09-10 1:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-09-10 10:23 ` Andries Brouwer
2002-09-10 0:35 ` Nicholas Miell
2002-09-10 1:01 ` [patch] dump_stack(): arch-neutral stack trace Andrew Morton
2002-09-15 4:34 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-15 4:51 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-10 1:27 ` [BK PATCH] USB changes for 2.5.34 Linus Torvalds
2002-09-10 2:07 ` Matthew Dharm
2002-09-10 2:49 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-09-10 2:59 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-09-10 16:32 ` [linux-usb-devel] " David Brownell
2002-09-10 16:51 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-09-10 17:16 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-09-10 18:16 ` David S. Miller
2002-09-10 18:40 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-09-10 18:48 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-09-10 19:31 ` David S. Miller
2002-09-10 19:32 ` Oliver Xymoron
2002-09-10 19:38 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-09-10 19:43 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-09-10 21:52 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-09-10 22:02 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-09-10 18:44 ` Alan Cox
2002-09-10 19:03 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-09-10 19:27 ` Rik van Riel
2002-09-10 20:18 ` Alan Cox
2002-09-10 22:00 ` David Woodhouse
2002-09-10 22:23 ` Alan Cox
2002-09-10 22:26 ` David Woodhouse
2002-09-10 23:01 ` Alan Cox
2002-09-10 19:29 ` David S. Miller
2002-09-15 5:10 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-15 5:33 ` Daniel Berlin
2002-09-15 16:41 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-16 0:32 ` Horst von Brand
2002-09-15 6:07 ` Pete Zaitcev
2002-09-15 7:00 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-15 20:05 ` David Woodhouse
2002-09-15 14:53 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-15 18:23 ` Pete Zaitcev
2002-09-15 18:34 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-09-16 0:55 ` Larry McVoy
2002-09-15 21:35 ` Rob Landley
2002-09-16 3:00 ` Larry McVoy [this message]
2002-09-16 3:08 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-16 11:16 ` Henning P. Schmiedehausen
2002-09-16 18:35 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-09-16 18:45 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-16 19:36 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-09-16 19:40 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-16 8:50 ` Ian Molton
2002-09-16 9:37 ` Rob Landley
2002-09-15 18:06 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-09-15 18:36 ` Roman Zippel
2002-09-15 19:04 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-09-15 19:43 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-15 19:43 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-15 23:24 ` Larry McVoy
2002-09-15 23:41 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-09-15 23:52 ` Larry McVoy
2002-09-16 0:01 ` Robert Love
2002-09-16 1:29 ` Alan Cox
2002-09-16 2:13 ` Larry McVoy
2002-09-16 11:05 ` Henning P. Schmiedehausen
2002-09-16 14:05 ` Rogier Wolff
2002-09-16 16:24 ` Marco Colombo
2002-09-16 0:44 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-16 1:23 ` Alan Cox
2002-09-15 19:07 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-16 9:06 ` Jens Axboe
2002-09-16 14:14 ` David Woodhouse
2002-09-16 14:53 ` Jens Axboe
2002-09-16 15:15 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-16 15:59 ` kernel debuggers was [Re: [linux-usb-devel] Re: [BK PATCH] USB changes for 2.5.34] Soewono Effendi
2002-09-15 19:08 ` [linux-usb-devel] Re: [BK PATCH] USB changes for 2.5.34 Linus Torvalds
2002-09-15 19:10 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-15 19:26 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-09-15 19:32 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-09-15 19:48 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-16 4:59 ` Jeff Dike
2002-09-16 4:05 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-16 4:55 ` Jeff Dike
2002-09-15 19:35 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-16 4:51 ` Jeff Dike
2002-09-16 15:29 ` Oliver Xymoron
2002-09-18 0:33 ` Rusty Russell
2002-09-18 0:46 ` Linus Torvalds
2002-09-18 0:50 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-18 1:16 ` Rik van Riel
2002-09-15 13:54 ` Rogier Wolff
2002-09-15 5:01 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-09-10 16:46 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-09-10 16:56 ` Vojtech Pavlik
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20020915200002.B23345@work.bitmover.com \
--to=lm@bitmover.com \
--cc=landley@trommello.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=phillips@arcor.de \
--cc=zaitcev@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox