On Wed, 20 Aug 2008 14:35:07 -0400 (EDT) Charles Gregory <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Pity you can't read what is written. I never suggested lowering >standards, I actually suggested returning to a *higher* standard, >where people don't just use bloated tools to write bloated code, but >return to writing good, compact (and as a side benefit, usually less >error-prone) code. Doing the same (or better) job, and using less >resources all around. THAT would benefit "all", as opposed to sloppy, >careless "standards" created by large corporations with only their own >self-interest in mind. Well, to write the smallest and most efficient code possible, the developers would need to write in pure assembly language. I guess we can all agree that, that is not about to happen anytime soon. Personally, I think they do a good job. You cannot please everyone, which is why I believe in the old saying: "If you cannot please everyone, then you better please yourself." Besides, I would not go around bad mouthing large corporations. You, exactly like them, have your own self interest as a priority. The difference, is that they have the clout to get what they want, and you don't. Therein lies the problem. As usual, just my 2¢. -- Gerard [EMAIL PROTECTED] No wonder Clairol makes so much money selling shampoo. Lather, Rinse, Repeat is an infinite loop!
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net http://www.clamav.net/support/ml
