From: viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk
To: retu <retu834@yahoo.com>
Cc: James Antill <james@and.org>,
m.fioretti@inwind.it, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.7 thoughts: common well-architected object model
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 07:46:53 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20031014064653.GR7665@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20031014053155.31639.qmail@web13004.mail.yahoo.com>
On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 10:31:55PM -0700, retu wrote:
> Now here's the competition:
>
> System
[snip the revolting offense against Occam's Razor]
> System.Xml.Xsl
>
> These are massive and can't be built in a day. But
> with a very decent component model and design
> philosphy on what to put in and what not it would
> enable people to quickly fill in the blanks (plus
> maybe some rapid abstracting/wrapping) which would do
> a very lot for the OS.
Please, take your cargo-cult education somewhere else. You are yet to
show that you understand what does "component model" mean, let alone
to demonstrate that you are capable of discussing benefits of such
beasts. "It had been mentioned in lecture notes" doesn't cut it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-10-14 6:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-10-11 4:45 2.7 thoughts: common well-architected object model asdfd esadd
2003-10-11 14:30 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2003-10-11 16:06 ` asdfd esadd
2003-10-11 16:48 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2003-10-11 17:13 ` asdfd esadd
2003-10-11 17:38 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2003-10-11 17:56 ` asdfd esadd
2003-10-11 18:20 ` Mark Hahn
2003-10-11 18:13 ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2003-10-11 23:33 ` J.A. Magallon
2003-10-11 17:00 ` Scott Robert Ladd
2003-10-11 17:57 ` Kenn Humborg
2003-10-11 18:34 ` asdfd esadd
2003-10-11 18:46 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2003-10-11 19:01 ` Kenn Humborg
2003-10-11 19:11 ` retu
2003-10-11 19:25 ` viro
2003-10-12 11:59 ` Jamie Lokier
2003-10-12 16:04 ` retu
2003-10-12 16:44 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2003-10-12 16:51 ` retu
2003-10-12 17:50 ` viro
2003-10-12 21:52 ` Jamie Lokier
2003-10-12 20:21 ` Rik van Riel
2003-10-13 20:21 ` James Antill
2003-10-14 5:01 ` retu
2003-10-14 6:00 ` Nick Piggin
2003-10-14 5:31 ` retu
2003-10-14 6:05 ` Tim Hockin
2003-10-14 6:46 ` viro [this message]
[not found] <Ft4B.3ML.3@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <FutO.5TB.29@gated-at.bofh.it>
2003-10-11 17:03 ` Ihar 'Philips' Filipau
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=20031014064653.GR7665@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk \
--to=viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk \
--cc=james@and.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=m.fioretti@inwind.it \
--cc=retu834@yahoo.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