This is a discussion on interview with Linus within the General Discussions forums, part of the Community Boards category; Originally Posted by Fordy they have a project that values at over 1 billion dollars and nickelback sells millions of ...
and nickelback sells millions of albums. does that make their music more valid than mine, when my last band sold about 20 copies? no, it does not.Originally Posted by Fordy
the monetary value of something does not determine its importance or its intrinsic value. Linux is certainly an achievement, but Linus needs to get off his high horse and realize that his opinion is not the only valid one.
^_^;Linus needs to get off his high horse and realize that his opinion is not the only valid one.
Well, to be fair, if I had so many telling me how awesome I was I would absolutely start believing the hype.
Soma
>>Out of curiosity, would it make me a jackass?
You?...Never!
^_^
So long as a I get a pass as well...
Soma
>>and nickelback sells millions of albums. does that make their music more valid than mine, when my last band sold about 20 copies? no, it does not.
Validity in this context is purely relative, so I cant argue against the proposition you have made. For the greater number of people in the world probably wont see it in so narrow a context.
>>the monetary value of something does not determine its importance or its intrinsic value.
You might not like that I used a financial value/cost measure to assess the project's validity, but for me its a decent yardstick (BTW my career is finance based so maybe I have a tendency towards this way of thinking). I can also suggest the kernel's usage in all different types of systems from super computers to tiny £25 gadgets, the amount of exposure we all have to it in our day to day lives or the way its licensed for usage.
Still, the measure of validity of the project itself is itself not a perfect way to measure the validity of the opinions of the people involved - I accept that. Ultimately its an issue of preference based on individual experience - and arguing with others who have different preferences based on individual experience rarely ends in consensus. I should know that by now, and I should know never to post an opinion after opening a bottle of wine!
-_-
This isn't exactly "on topic" as much as it might be anyway so I feel justified in asking, what kind of wine?
Soma
Chianti - I like Italian & Spanish reds. I had a bottle of it left from Xmas - shows how often I open a bottle as I prefer beer & whiskey. I never usually open a bottle mid-week as it usually gives me a rotten headache the next day - not today I'm glad to say.
bleehhck...Spanish reds
Now that I can agree with.whiskey
Soma
I have read several rants against C++ in the past, by people I know nothing of, and ended in agreement. So, no, I don't find his distaste for C++ respectable because of who he is.
I do, however, think his opinion carries more weight than most others, because of who he is. How is this a bad thing?
Because he hates C++, that must mean he doesn't know how to use it?
I'm very comfortable with the OOP and polymorphic models of C++, but whenever I start using it too much, I realize just how much it sucks. This is probably in part due to the fact that I hold the opinion that OOP is overrated. But, in spite of C++'s monstrous warts, I do actually like the language; it's not my intention to flame it.
I don't see why people think Chuck Norris is so awesome. If he was really as great as they say, he would be over here slamming my head into the keybsk;lah;flksalfksdnlcslcnsldk;acklsd;glfbaskfl
/* When I wrote this, only God and I understood what I was doing... Now, God only knows */
And?I have read several rants against C++ in the past, by people I know nothing of, and ended in agreement.
No, really, do you have a point with this?
C++ has a lot of flaws. There are a lot of real reasons to choose a different language.
Certainly, if any other cleaner language offered me the same facilities without also getting in my path every step of the way I'd be using that language instead of C++.
You reading a rant against C++ with real and valid complaints by people using a modern compiler who actually know C++ well and finding that you agree is no issue.
You reading an insulting rant against C++ with very few real or valid complaints by a person which had a bad experience with an ancient compiler who clearly doesn't know C++ well and finding that you agree for no other reason than his position makes you look foolish.
Hitler. Pol Pot. Charlie Manson.How is this a bad thing?
No. I'm not comparing Linus to these people. This is an issue of perception not person.
Allowing yourself to be influenced by a person and not by an argument is clearly extremely dangerous.
Here it is obviously not a big deal in the comparison, but the fact remains.
That's not what I intended, but I can see how you may have interpreted the statement that way.Because he hates C++, that must mean he doesn't know how to use it?
That man clearly does not understand how to use many parts of C++ as evidenced by the complaints in his rants, refusal to revisit the language, but most crucially the fact that he has admitted he doesn't have but a few direct experiences with C++. You see, he hates C++ because of the way he was exposed to the language. I don't blame him for that. However, that fact also means he has steadfastly refused further exposure to the language. You'll have to forgive the mutated expression: he doesn't understand the language simply because he doesn't understand the language, and he doesn't understand the language because he doesn't want to understand the language.
So, he hates C++ because of his experience with it, and because of this experience has little actual knowledge of programming with it; do to the nature of these things, "The man rails against features he clearly doesn't understand how to use.".
Soma
Just read the next sentence I posted. I've agreed with unpopular people complaining about C++, and likewise can find Linus' agreeable. His popularity in this sense, is irrelevant. Your accusation is false, is what I'm saying.
He's an experienced and professional kernel programmer. When he says something about kernel programming, I listen. I'm surprised that distresses you so much.
I don't see why people think Chuck Norris is so awesome. If he was really as great as they say, he would be over here slamming my head into the keybsk;lah;flksalfksdnlcslcnsldk;acklsd;glfbaskfl
/* When I wrote this, only God and I understood what I was doing... Now, God only knows */
Your statements suggest that my "accusation" is spot on.Your accusation is false, is what I'm saying.
Okay.When he says something about kernel programming, I listen.
Which of these statements have anything to do with kernel programming?
"I've come to the conclusion that any programmer that would prefer the project to be in C++ over C is likely a programmer that I really *would* prefer to ........ off, so that he doesn't come and screw up any project I'm involved with."
"C++ leads to really really bad design choices."
"the whole C++ exception handling thing is fundamentally broken."
Oh, wait, none of those things have anything to do with kernel programming; those are sweeping generalizations that aren't even intended to be limited to kernel implementation.
So, for you to find those opinions respectable ("So,Really, I do like C++, but I still find his opinion of it to be respectable.") because he is a great kernel programmer is incredibly foolish.
[Edit]
To be clear, it is this steadfast "I listen." even when he is talking out of his ass about things he is admitted not knowing anything about that distresses me.
[/Edit]
Soma
Last edited by phantomotap; 07-04-2012 at 02:02 PM.
I would think that since he said those things on a kernel mailing list (or other kernel focused environments), it's an understood thing that it does in fact have something to do with kernel programming.
He wants to annoy people who use a language he doesn't like, because he doesn't want them using it around him. Make sense."I've come to the conclusion that any programmer that would prefer the project to be in C++ over C is likely a programmer that I really *would* prefer to ........ off, so that he doesn't come and screw up any project I'm involved with."
Introducing polymorphism into kernel primitives is just looking for trouble."C++ leads to really really bad design choices."
Kernel error handling is very tight, in part because it's the one generating most of them, and in part because it should only abort due to an error as a very last resort."the whole C++ exception handling thing is fundamentally broken."
Whereas the whole point of exceptions is to provide a very loose error handling mechanism.
Even if it was his intention to speak beyond kernel programming, I'm not going to suddenly disregard his opinion regarding kernel programming.
You forgot to show me that quote.
Personally, I'm guessing your adamant views against Linus' opinions are largely from your own ignorance to kernel development. I've never built a kernel, but I have studied kernels a lot, and just from what little I know, I can easily say that I would never use C++ for a kernel, even though I do like the language.
I don't see why people think Chuck Norris is so awesome. If he was really as great as they say, he would be over here slamming my head into the keybsk;lah;flksalfksdnlcslcnsldk;acklsd;glfbaskfl
/* When I wrote this, only God and I understood what I was doing... Now, God only knows */
Are you basing this on that when you use C++ you suddenly have to start using polymorphism and exceptions? That's silly. C++ can also be seen as a "better C," with things such as stricter type system that allows for more bugs to be found at compile time.
Also, don't forget that there have been successful kernels built around C++. In fact, Symbian, while now old, was built with C++ and it was darn good in its day. Heck, it was even an operating system meant for mobiles that were nowhere near the beasts we have today.
I think you are being blinded, just as Linus is.
For information on how to enable C++11 on your compiler, look here.
よく聞くがいい！私は天才だからね！ ^_^
O_OIntroducing polymorphism into kernel primitives is just looking for trouble.
Quickly you must Hurry!
Report this immediately! You must tell Linus and the kernel crew this as soon as is possible!
Oh, no!
It is worse than I though, "POSIX" is plagued with bloody bastards!
O_o
Are you serious?
The "Linux" kernel, and in fact all modern kernels, are riddled with polymorphisms and other abstractions besides.
In fact, the "Linux" model of devices is one of the finest abstractions ever conceived.
Who asked you to?Even if it was his intention to speak beyond kernel programming, I'm not going to suddenly disregard his opinion regarding kernel programming.
At what point has anyone in this thread said that Linus doesn't know what he is talking about with regards to kernel programming?
His classic "debate" with developers of other kernels is probably more instructive than entire books on the subject.
But his expertise in one field doesn't imply expertise in any other field.
You clearly do not know anything about the C++ exception mechanism.Whereas the whole point of exceptions is to provide a very loose error handling mechanism.
I didn't forget.You forgot to show me that quote.
Almost all of his points in every rant he has ever made about C++ are devoid of actual criticism, argument, or supporting rationale.
I'm spoiled for choice.
O_oI've never built a kernel, but I have studied kernels a lot, and just from what little I know, I can easily say that I would never use C++ for a kernel, even though I do like the language.
I have built a kernel.
So, I must necessarily be right, right?
I wouldn't use C++ for a kernel either, but then, I wouldn't assume that a C++ programmer would ruin any project I worked on so the comparison isn't quite the same is it?
Soma
27Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
