On 5 April 2016 at 02:34, Aliaksei Syrel <alex.sy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Seriously, brute force is synonym of dumb. If you cannot solve the > problem > by anything else than using brute force, then first thing you do, you > leave an extensive comment "sorry guys, this piece stinks, but i was <...> > unable to do any better". > > That is enough, Igor. > Calling other developers or their decisions "dumb" is unacceptable! It is > far way beyond a red line and only shows impoliteness. You are not trying > to constructively criticize but just trolling us. > > Why i should be polite to bad code and bad practices? And have you thought what i should feel , when you using 'perfect' wording for something that not nearly close to perfect? That was insulting. > Here are some basic rules if you want to continue discussion: > > 1) Before "pushing" other people to spend time on you, try to spend your > own. Read previous posts at least in the same thread before writing an > email. Link to bloc build was in the second email but you asked for it 2 or > 3 messages later. > > 2) Don't use "pfff...", "yadda yadda", " pony" or whatever other jargon > in any thread related to bloc. It distracts and shows your disregard to the > reader. > 3) Don't judge others that they don't know or understand something. There > are no stupid people around here. > > 4) Write short but informative emails. We have a lot of other stuff to do. > Everything that you wrote can be expressed using much less amount of > characters. > If you don't have time to read mails, don't read them. Just ignore. Nobody forcing you to to read it. I had to write long, because i need to explain what i don't like and why. Or would it be better for you if i would review the code and just state: - i don't like it, fix it. Leaving you clueless what i don't like and how it should be fixed? Will such brevity help you to fix things? Apparently not. It is quite opposite, because them you can simply ignore it. And if i would do it like that, this is exactly will be disregard to participants of discussion. > 5) First ask why decision was made and only then describe cons and pros. > There is obsolete code in multiple places left because it maybe forgotten > or we realized that it was a mistake but accidentally committed. That > shadow problem was a mistake and big thanks to Glenn who explained and > fixed it in bloc a lot of month ago by using ShadowFilter which is in > another repo for a moment. > > 6) When criticizing try to find and mention also positive desicions. It is > called politeness. > I just want it to see it fixed. Yes, #containsX:Y: works.. but that's far from 'perfect'. Because right now it using a private method of Cairo, bypassing layer of abstraction provided by Athens. So, you need to expose feature in proper way via Athens API.. and then it is perfect. And i didn't mentioned it, because as to me it is obvious. You asking me to be short, but then pointing that i don't mention positive decisions. You can't have both, choose one. >From your side, i don't like to see that on all that mails with many questions, all i got in response it: 'bullshit, it is perfect'. Because it feels like that. If all that i wrote here is bullshit, then fine.. perfect. You don't have to do and worry about anything. > Thanks > Alex > > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
