1 |
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ |
2 |
On Saturday, July 18, 2020 10:28 PM, Ashley Dixon <ash@××××××××××.uk> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> This sociological position may be valid, but please understand that I was not |
5 |
> suggesting you "don't insult" them. But placing a picture of a shit next to |
6 |
> their project name based solely on the fact it is written in C++ instead of |
7 |
> Python, does not cast your project (or you) in the greatest of lights. |
8 |
|
9 |
i don't see the problem. the unicode consortium |
10 |
says the pile of sh*t is a normal character. |
11 |
|
12 |
alternatively, i can replace the sh*t character by |
13 |
a blown off leg, alongside the bjarne stroustrup |
14 |
quote about c++. |
15 |
|
16 |
> I'm not sure why you're so against C++ ? It is certainly not perfect, as it |
17 |
> allows inherently poorly written code (Java, for example, tries to enforce good |
18 |
> coding styles a bit more), but that is no reason to (quite literally) shit on |
19 |
> any project/programmers using it. Having a quick review of the KeePassXC code- |
20 |
> base, I can say with reasonable confidence, that it is written to a very |
21 |
> professional standard. |
22 |
|
23 |
i'm not universally against c++, but i'm against |
24 |
it for a passwords manager, because it needlessly |
25 |
re-invents many wheels including memory management |
26 |
which is already done in other languages, such as |
27 |
python. and a passwords manager is too critical |
28 |
to risk re-inventing such wheels. |
29 |
|
30 |
and keepassxc is full of segfaults [1] |
31 |
|
32 |
[1] https://github.com/keepassxreboot/keepassxc/issues?q=segfault |
33 |
|
34 |
> That's OK. I have no problem with that, aside from not personally understanding |
35 |
> it myself. However, the complete lack of capital letters does make your project |
36 |
> look juvenile. |
37 |
|
38 |
thanks. that's a feature. it's by design. i |
39 |
hope my writing style functions as repellent of |
40 |
superficial ppl. |
41 |
|
42 |
> However, I do have a rather significant issue with you calling those you dare to |
43 |
> use the English language correctly "superficial" and "arrogant". |
44 |
|
45 |
i didn't say that. people are free to waste their |
46 |
time by capitalizing what they want. people are |
47 |
also free to advise others on wat they think is |
48 |
better. |
49 |
|
50 |
but what i'm saying is different: if someone |
51 |
rejects my app simply because i don't capetalize |
52 |
in my writings in README.md, then nothx don't use |
53 |
my app. |
54 |
|
55 |
> I'm not going |
56 |
> to say too much here, as I don't want to get into an argument over something |
57 |
> completely off-topic, but I strongly advise that you stop confusing "cool, |
58 |
> quirky, and different" with "semantically incorrect". |
59 |
|
60 |
you already did, but thx for advise. |
61 |
|
62 |
> The best way to make your project stand out is to make it of exceptionally |
63 |
> quality, usability, and stability. You really don't want the complete lack of |
64 |
> spelling and grammar to be your entire project's unique claim-to-fame. |
65 |
|
66 |
it's already more stable than keepassxc. spelling |
67 |
of README.md is unrelated. |
68 |
|
69 |
nsapass is slightly over 400 lines of py code. |
70 |
super easy to audit. one doesn't need to guess |
71 |
code reliability based on my spelling in |
72 |
README.md. |
73 |
|
74 |
alternatively, if my spelling in README.md is too |
75 |
scary/offensive, people are free to use the |
76 |
thousands of c++ lines of keepassxc code and |
77 |
segfault away from me. |
78 |
|
79 |
> The fact that a projecthas a build utility is a really, really poor vector of |
80 |
> attack. If the build utility did not work, or was a virus, or anything other |
81 |
> than a good build utility, then you may use that to discredit the project.However, criticising the mere existence of a few Makefiles and automated testing |
82 |
> scripts is a monumentally BAD idea. |
83 |
|
84 |
true, but that's not my point. my point is the |
85 |
increased complexity by itself, from an |
86 |
occam-razorian point of view. |
87 |
|
88 |
this is a logical consequence that follows once |
89 |
you accept that every assumption has a positive |
90 |
probability of error, by definition. |
91 |
|
92 |
then fancier build setup is effectively equivalent |
93 |
to requiring more assumptions. |
94 |
|
95 |
|
96 |
> It turns out that they exist to aid the main code-base. |
97 |
|
98 |
true, their main code-base system needs extra |
99 |
assumptions in order to operate. |
100 |
|
101 |
> C and C++ are certainly double-edged swords; I've been writing code in C since I |
102 |
> was about twelve years of age. Fortunately, the nice thing about a double-edged |
103 |
> sword is that one of the "edges" work in your favour. If you (over two-hundred- |
104 |
> and-thirty individual contributors) work at ensuring the quality of a project |
105 |
> over a period of seven years, in whatever language, it's very likely that few |
106 |
> legs are to be lost. |
107 |
|
108 |
true. in some apps c/c++ is superior thanks to |
109 |
performance or lower level system management. |
110 |
|
111 |
> You're essentially saying that all C++ code is of poor quality. Do you honestly |
112 |
> think that such an observation is correct ? |
113 |
|
114 |
no. thats a strawman. you're ignoring the |
115 |
context: passwords manager. i'm sayin, c++ is an |
116 |
overkill for a passwords manager. |
117 |
|
118 |
feel free to use c++ for lower level |
119 |
things like a games engine that demands high |
120 |
performance, in fact i'd recommend c/c++ for some |
121 |
cases, such as a gaming engine, or stuff that need |
122 |
high throughput/low latency. |
123 |
|
124 |
but c++ for a passwords manager? nothx, i don't |
125 |
want to risk funny memory bugs around my dear |
126 |
passwords. |
127 |
|
128 |
> If people look at the image and don't read the text, then they will be |
129 |
> misinformed. |
130 |
|
131 |
i don't see where is the misinformation. it's all |
132 |
around occam's razor and characters approved by |
133 |
the unicode consortium. |
134 |
|
135 |
> I must say, this is probably the weirdest and most invalid method |
136 |
> of attacking another project I've ever seen: the GitHub-generated distribution |
137 |
> of languages ? Please do not take offence, but I cannot resist laughing while |
138 |
> writing this; your method of advertising a product it is quite absurd. |
139 |
|
140 |
dunno, imo it's just an honest, direct and |
141 |
down-to-earth approach to express project's |
142 |
stance. if they disagree, they are free to put |
143 |
"nsapass" around other unicode characters of their |
144 |
choice. the unicode consortium is generous. |
145 |
|
146 |
i hope all open source projects adopt this style, |
147 |
and stop being too serious about their apps. |
148 |
because, imo, many devs or founders kinda act as |
149 |
if they are some sacred space unicorns, or as if |
150 |
their apps are "holy". |
151 |
|
152 |
and, imo, this style is not new. i think this is |
153 |
how people in the open source community used to be |
154 |
decades ago (before people got detached from |
155 |
reality and started living in another imaginary |
156 |
dimension with all the needlessly dramatic CoCs. |
157 |
they probably watched too much twilight). |
158 |
|
159 |
> If you want to be creative, invent a new algorithm or program that is |
160 |
> indubitably superior to its predecessor, much like chip designers are doing |
161 |
> today. People will appreciate and respect new, beneficial ideas much more than a |
162 |
> few layers of free clip-art put together in GIMP. |
163 |
|
164 |
not mutually exclusive, and 2nd part is strawman |
165 |
(nsapass is more than layers of GIMP; the layers |
166 |
of GIMP is only part of the README.md content for |
167 |
honest and to the point dissemination of content). |
168 |
|
169 |
> I am not trying to stifle your freedom of speech, but I am trying to convince |
170 |
> you that it is important to provide a balanced analysis of previous |
171 |
> technologies. Doing so will probably significantly aid the development of your |
172 |
> program, as you can borrow ideas and build upon them. |
173 |
|
174 |
thanks for trying. highly appreciate your time |
175 |
and efforts. but tbh there is no way i see to |
176 |
justify re-invented wheels in c++ for a passwords |
177 |
manager. |
178 |
|
179 |
> As a prominent Gentoo developer once told me, "you do need to take a different |
180 |
> look at the world". You also need to understand the meaning of "freedom of |
181 |
> speech", as this is something about which many of the younger generations are |
182 |
> confused: I am not a Governmental organisation, I am not trying to detain you |
183 |
> for your views, and your right to freedom of speech does not protect you from |
184 |
> all critique. |
185 |
|
186 |
looks like an appeal to authority. plus that |
187 |
gentoo dev's quote is wrong. |
188 |
|
189 |
the key is not to have a "different" view. the |
190 |
key is to be open minded to explore different |
191 |
views in order to discover the "correct" view, |
192 |
then stick to it, while still being open to look |
193 |
around. but once you find the correct view, you |
194 |
don't leave it for the sake of adopting a |
195 |
different view. |