Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
On 05/03/2010 11:51 PM, Gurney Halleck wrote: == Quote from Sean Kelly (s...@invisibleduck.org)'s article Donnos...@nospam.com wrote: Nick Sabalausky wrote: another lurkerlur...@lurk.urk wrote in message news:hrfcfi$1ea...@digitalmars.com... == Quote from Don (nos...@nospam.com)'s article FeepingCreature wrote: ... I appreciate your decision to leave that wasp nest and join Phobos. -- Gurney Halleck It doesn't really help to disparage the other people. I know that lots of strong emotions have been raised here, but use them to support the cause you favor, not to tear down the other side. It yields a much healthier community.
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
== Quote from Sean Kelly (s...@invisibleduck.org)'s article Don nos...@nospam.com wrote: Nick Sabalausky wrote: another lurker lur...@lurk.urk wrote in message news:hrfcfi$1ea...@digitalmars.com... == Quote from Don (nos...@nospam.com)'s article FeepingCreature wrote: The quality-of-code metric seems to be universally acknowledged - after all, druntime itself is a fork of tango core. We think you suck, so we'll base our new standard library on your work. You seem to be unaware of the history, and this may be leading you to misunderstand the situation. Sean Kelly wrote Ares as a replacement for Phobos. Tango began as a merger of Ares with Mango. Tango core is Ares. Druntime is also Ares. The primary author has never changed, and it's an unbroken continuation of development on a single code base. Ditto with tango.math, (which was written by me, originally in a project called 'mathextra'). Thank you Sean Kelly, Don and Steve Schveiguy for leaving Tango and coming to Phobos. It means very much for everybody. Don just said in the message you're replying to that they didn't leave Tango. My most recent svn commit to Tango was only a month ago, so I still have a toe in both camps. But actually I've spent almost all of my time working on the compiler. I have not yet decided on how I will respond to this situation. I don't know whether it's relevant, but I haven't even looked at Tango code (other than my own modules) since Druntime was created. Regardless of any personal reasons, I simply don't have the time to support more than one project. Regrding this latest bit of drama, I have to say that I'm coming to regret my decision to help start Tango. It was a great opportunity to do some work that interested me, but the cost to the community has been too high. I sincerely hope that people get over whatever issues they have and simply focus on making D a better language. I appreciate your decision to leave that wasp nest and join Phobos. -- Gurney Halleck
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
So far I've been just lurking here, but these are my 5 cents. I think the library situation is terrible. It's not for the good of D. We should just simple ditch Tango. It's D 1.0 only and always causing trouble. We absolutely need support from professionals and enterprises. D is growing fast. The need for attribution is just intolerable, we need brown tongue attitude to lure in the big money. Would a professional use BSD? I agree Boost has very high quality and they might not even notice/care if we steal from them. I totally agree with the convincing arguments I found from the mailing list: Now I'm glad I never looked at Tango. I don't empathize with the Tango fellows keeping their precious locked because it's very difficult to frame that action as having D's community interest at heart. To be frank their whole motivation looks petty and political to the extreme, particularly because it's not a rocket science library. I think for practical reasons we should simply stay away from Tango. We'd be wasting time otherwise. It's not like they discovered the cure for cancer.
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
On 30.04.2010 15:46, lurker wrote: So far I've been just lurking here, but these are my 5 cents. I think the library situation is terrible. It's not for the good of D. We should just simple ditch Tango. It's D 1.0 only and always causing trouble. We absolutely need support from professionals and enterprises. D is growing fast. The need for attribution is just intolerable, we need brown tongue attitude to lure in the big money. Would a professional use BSD? I agree Boost has very high quality and they might not even notice/care if we steal from them. I totally agree with the convincing arguments I found from the mailing list: Now I'm glad I never looked at Tango. I don't empathize with the Tango fellows keeping their precious locked because it's very difficult to frame that action as having D's community interest at heart. To be frank their whole motivation looks petty and political to the extreme, particularly because it's not a rocket science library. I think for practical reasons we should simply stay away from Tango. We'd be wasting time otherwise. It's not like they discovered the cure for cancer. Would be nice if you'd actually refer to your parent post in, you know, _any_ way instead of rehashing the very arguments they debunked. Phobos1 is shit. The Tango devs know this, the Phobos devs know it. Anyone who denies it has never compared the Phobos and Tango sourcecode. Your simple solution is never gonna happen. You're not freaking Alexander the Great, cutting the Gordian Knot. The way D2 is going is the best solution for both sides, imho; but _anything_ that prevents Tango/Phobos interop in D2, or pushes away Tango devs, or pushes away Phobos devs - should be treated as a *severe* threat to the future of the language. We *absolutely need* to present a unified front in D2. We fucked this up once already; let's not repeat that experience. --feep
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
FeepingCreature Wrote: Phobos1 is shit. The Tango devs know this, the Phobos devs know it. Anyone who denies it has never compared the Phobos and Tango sourcecode. It's impossible to verify those claims because reading the Tango source might taint one's mind and after that one wouldn't be allowed to contribute any code to Phobos anymore. Your simple solution is never gonna happen. You're not freaking Alexander the Great, cutting the Gordian Knot. The way D2 is going is the best solution for both sides, imho; but _anything_ that prevents Tango/Phobos interop in D2, or pushes away Tango devs, or pushes away Phobos devs - should be treated as a *severe* threat to the future of the language. We *absolutely need* to present a unified front in D2. We fucked this up once already; let's not repeat that experience. The Tango developers could have handed over all copyrights to Walter or Phobos. This would solve the licensing problems if anything needs to change later. Many open source projects such as MySQL do this. Instead they yearned the attribution. Which one is more important, personal fame or potential solid enterprise support? If the library isn't rocket science or doesn't cure the cancer, what value does the attribution have then? The new Phobos licensing is altruistic, it reflects the modest mentality of the contributors.
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
On Fri, 30 Apr 2010 09:14:24 -0400, Daniel Keep daniel.keep.li...@gmail.com wrote: #1: Tango didn't block SHOO's code. Kris and Lars contacted me to ask about it, and I indicated that I had alleviated all my concerns that the code was not copied, after having examined his code against Tango's existing code, and getting his response on the NG. In a statement, which Lars repeated in the mailing list (linked in your post), he indicated that it would be very hard to do a clean room implementation of Tango's code simply because the doc generator does not always capture every nuance of the API. He also implied that only a clean room implementation was free of infringement when APIs are similar (paraphrasing, see exact quote linked in Daniel's post). I don't know the timeline of when he sent the email to me and when they contacted Walter, but I'm assuming they received my position before contacting him. To be fair, Walter is the one who blocked the code, and arguably, he could fix this situation by just accepting that the code does not infringe through reasonable logic. But I understand both Tango's position and Walter's position. I don't actually agree with either of them. I just happen to think my best interests are served by contributing to the project which is least restrictive. By doing this, my code can be used in Phobos and in Tango, as long as someone else ports it to Tango. Nevermind the fact that Tango's time API is derived from Microsoft's in .NET. If Walter /had/ adopted SHOO's code, and it was similar to Tango's, he's far more likely to have problems with Microsoft. Microsoft would have zero ground to stand on -- their code is not available to SHOO unless he signed an NDA. Tango also copied almost wholesale their formatting style. This is of the same type of copying. Copying ideas and design is done regularly, you cannot copyright ideas. #2: Tango is not deliberately licensed to prevent cooperation with Phobos. I believe this as well, Tango is licensed the way it is because of the reasons you stated. It's unfortunate that the license cannot be changed, I wish that could be different. Walter also suggested that all new code be licensed under Boost. The maintainers do not want to go down this road because they have expended considerable time and effort attempting to bring Tango down to a single license. There is another problem here. In order to dual-license your code, you have to be the sole owner of it. For example, someone (like myself) contributing improvements, even if almost completely rewrites, is still obligated to obey the license of the base code. The time library falls into this category, I made massive modifications to the library, but my changes fall under the original license as a derivative work. Until SHOO's code was deemed to be possibly infringing, I thought it would be feasible for me to re-implement Phobos' time in a similar manner to how SHOO did, using my experience with Tango's time code. Now I see this will be unworkable (mostly because it's outside Walter's comfort zone). As an example of free-and-clear code, Don's BigInt module is fine because he owns all parts of it. I'll give you another example. Dcollections was originally written to be a replacement for Tango's collection classes. Although I wrote all the code from scratch, it bears vast similarities to Tangos' old collection package, because I did that intentionally. When Tango declined to accept it as an improvement, I created a new project because I wanted to keep developing it. I had hoped at some point it could be contributed to Phobos. But now, I am concerned that Walter would reject it because of the hint of infringement. I will still maintain the library separately, but the possibility that all my hard work is not usable how I see fit pisses me off to the point where I am just done with Tango. Whose fault is it? I don't care. I wrote my post to make people aware of the possibility that I see, and the conclusions that I have reached, so they can make an informed decision of whether to use/contribute to Tango or not. I'm leaving it up in the air as a possibility, so it's not perceived as an accusation. Some Tango devs noticed similarities between SHOO's code and Tango. Kris phoned Walter privately to let him know and give him a chance to either inspect the code himself or possibly ask SHOO to clarify whether the code was based at all on Tango. SHOO has already clarified, in several posts to the NG. I specifically asked him whether he used Tango as a base, and he said he did not. At the same time, Tango devs could examine the code and say whether they think it infringes or not. As far as I can see, most of what's happened since then has been a massive overreaction. Is it? How about you write a really cool piece of code and then try to contribute it
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
On 30.04.2010 16:04, lurker wrote: The Tango developers could have handed over all copyrights to Walter or Phobos. This would solve the licensing problems if anything needs to change later. Many open source projects such as MySQL do this. They could have jumped off a bridge too. Yay, no more Tango. All problems magically go away. Well except the Tango devs' problems, but who cares about those. Instead they yearned the attribution. Oh, because you always make perfect license choices on first try in a muddy context, or alternately when it turns out you made the wrong choice, you can always change the license without hassle! Because it's not like there's other people who contributed code that you can't reach, that never happens. Sometimes I forget you're a superhuman fantasy creature.
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
lurker wrote: FeepingCreature Wrote: Phobos1 is shit. The Tango devs know this, the Phobos devs know it. Anyone who denies it has never compared the Phobos and Tango sourcecode. It's impossible to verify those claims because reading the Tango source might taint one's mind and after that one wouldn't be allowed to contribute any code to Phobos anymore. Well, there are other objective means. This is a subjective statement: but as someone who has used D extensively over the past several years, including both Phobos and Tango, I honestly believe that Tango is generally of a higher quality. Except for Tango's Zip code which is an abomination and should be killed with fire--the original author is clearly a talentless hack. Your simple solution is never gonna happen. You're not freaking Alexander the Great, cutting the Gordian Knot. The way D2 is going is the best solution for both sides, imho; but _anything_ that prevents Tango/Phobos interop in D2, or pushes away Tango devs, or pushes away Phobos devs - should be treated as a *severe* threat to the future of the language. We *absolutely need* to present a unified front in D2. We fucked this up once already; let's not repeat that experience. The Tango developers could have handed over all copyrights to Walter or Phobos. This would solve the licensing problems if anything needs to change later. I don't know how many times this has to be explained. To quote myself: Thirdly, the Tango maintainers have *ALREADY TRIED* to change Tango's license. They wanted to move to just Apache 2.0 on the basis that it was similar enough to the AFL to allow this without too much trouble. The problem was that of the 50-odd contributors, there are people who they simply couldn't get in contact with. Without express permission, they *CANNOT* legally change the license to something incompatible. Many open source projects such as MySQL do this. (Aside: I find it somewhat amusing that you're suggesting the Tango devs should relinquish all claim on their work; the same thing the FSF asked for in order to include the GDB patches.) Instead they yearned the attribution. Which one is more important, personal fame or potential solid enterprise support? If the library isn't rocket science or doesn't cure the cancer, what value does the attribution have then? We've already established that this is a legal issue, not one of ego. It'd be nice if you refrained from personal attacks. The new Phobos licensing is altruistic, it reflects the modest mentality of the contributors. The Boost license still requires source to contain attribution. Lars commented in his post that he doesn't like the binary attribution requirement. But he's stuck with it because of the code's heritage. As I tried very hard to explain, this is not about attempting to sabotage D or Phobos or, for that matter, anyone or anything. Please, PLEASE stop with the needless rhetoric and hate.
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
Daniel Keep wrote: lurker wrote: The Tango developers could have handed over all copyrights to Walter or Phobos. This would solve the licensing problems if anything needs to change later. I don't know how many times this has to be explained. To quote myself: Thirdly, the Tango maintainers have *ALREADY TRIED* to change Tango's license. They wanted to move to just Apache 2.0 on the basis that it was similar enough to the AFL to allow this without too much trouble. The problem was that of the 50-odd contributors, there are people who they simply couldn't get in contact with. Without express permission, they *CANNOT* legally change the license to something incompatible. That's true, but largely irrelevant. Individual developers can make agreements about relicensing of their personal contributions, and stating that they're happy with their code being used in Phobos. Sean, Steven, and I did. AFAIK the other Tango developers have not. Everything's in version control, you can see who's contributed to which components. Sure, there'll be places where a dozen uncontactable people have been involved. But that shouldn't be an argument for making no progress. It seems very clear to me that there are Tango developers who do not want any of their code to be used in Phobos. Which is fine, that's their choice. But I wish they'd have the decency to say so, so that the community stops wasting time on the issue. I've tried for the past two years to make tiny steps towards unity. But Tango does not seem to be interested. Please tell me I'm wrong.
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
On 04/30/2010 08:14 AM, Daniel Keep wrote: #1: Tango didn't block SHOO's code. I cannot find any indication that anyone representing Tango /ever/ said SHOO copied from us. Based on what Kris has said in IRC [1] and from asking Lars, the intent, if not the specific content, was this: At casual examination, SHOO's code looks similar to Tango's. There were no demands to block SHOO's code, no cries of theft. Kris phoned Walter to let him know about there being a *potential* issue. This was a courtesy given that Walter has demonstrated extreme caution when it comes to IP issues. Kris could have posted it on the newsgroup, but I suspect he didn't because he would have been flamed for accusing SHOO of stealing. I think, given the situation, that a phone call is bound to mean something. Now, could we all please stop with the personal attacks and demonisation of the other side? This isn't a war, for Pete's sake. You're making the situation look symmetrical. It isn't. Andrei
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
On 30.04.2010 17:10, Don wrote: It seems very clear to me that there are Tango developers who do not want any of their code to be used in Phobos. Which is fine, that's their choice. But I wish they'd have the decency to say so, so that the community stops wasting time on the issue. So what you're saying is, you have this knowledge despite the relevant Tango devs not actually saying anything in that direction. Could you maybe explain how you came to that conclusion, please?
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
On 30.04.2010 17:22, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: I think, given the situation, that a phone call is bound to mean something. Well .. what does it mean? I mean, what do you mean it means. Not saying what you mean is just mean. Now, could we all please stop with the personal attacks and demonisation of the other side? This isn't a war, for Pete's sake. You're making the situation look symmetrical. It isn't. It is, in fact, asymmetrical; but in two different directions. In my experience, on average, Tango has higher quality of code whereas Phobos has more support from Phobos developers. The quality-of-code metric seems to be universally acknowledged - after all, druntime itself is a fork of tango core. We think you suck, so we'll base our new standard library on your work. I am starting to consider that accusations of arrogance contain a smitten of projection, maybe. Andrei --feep
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
== Quote from Don (nos...@nospam.com)'s article That's true, but largely irrelevant. Individual developers can make agreements about relicensing of their personal contributions, and stating that they're happy with their code being used in Phobos. Walter said, basically, that since it's possible that SHOO may have used code from Tango, Tango devs should relicense their work. That's insulting. It's admitting theft and demanding that the victim call it a gift. If it were a policy, Walter would have a way of badgering us into relicensing most of Tango against our will. I'm not saying that SHOO copied any Tango code. Walter's reaction, though, means I would never relicense any code for Phobos.
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
On 04/30/2010 10:28 AM, FeepingCreature wrote: On 30.04.2010 17:22, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: I think, given the situation, that a phone call is bound to mean something. Well .. what does it mean? I mean, what do you mean it means. Not saying what you mean is just mean. Now, could we all please stop with the personal attacks and demonisation of the other side? This isn't a war, for Pete's sake. You're making the situation look symmetrical. It isn't. It is, in fact, asymmetrical; but in two different directions. In my experience, on average, Tango has higher quality of code whereas Phobos has more support from Phobos developers. The quality-of-code metric seems to be universally acknowledged - after all, druntime itself is a fork of tango core. We think you suck, so we'll base our new standard library on your work. I am starting to consider that accusations of arrogance contain a smitten of projection, maybe. I wasn't referring to code quality. Andrei
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
On 04/30/2010 10:46 AM, retard wrote: Fri, 30 Apr 2010 10:22:59 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: Now, could we all please stop with the personal attacks and demonisation of the other side? This isn't a war, for Pete's sake. You're making the situation look symmetrical. It isn't. No, you're right. There's only one person who's insolently dismissing the quality and efforts of other's work and blatantly advertising his own GODDAMN precious work in the same post. Who is that? (Honest question.) I believe the license issues were enough to justify a reimplementation, you're doing nothing but harm by feeding the flame war. I agree. Andrei
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
Chris Wright wrote: Walter said, basically, that since it's possible that SHOO may have used code from Tango, Tango devs should relicense their work. Not exactly. To rephrase, I said that since SHOO has viewed Tango's source code, there is the appearance of impropriety. Not that there actually is any impropriety. It's the appearance I wish to avoid. I am not accusing anyone of infringement, and have no basis to. I have asked the Tango devs to relicense their work. I feel that if that can be accomplished, this would bury this issue once and for all, and the rift between the communities should heal. That's insulting. It's admitting theft and demanding that the victim call it a gift. If it were a policy, Walter would have a way of badgering us into relicensing most of Tango against our will. I can't make you do anything you don't want to. I especially have no means, desire, or intention of forcing anyone to change their license or give up their copyrights. I'm not saying that SHOO copied any Tango code. Walter's reaction, though, means I would never relicense any code for Phobos. I've repeatedly stated, and say so again, that I give explicit permission to Tango to incorporate any or all of code I have written for Phobos into Tango, and to relicense those derived works as necessary to be compatible with Tango. Tango's garbage collector is such a derived work, and I have no issue with it. As for Phobos code I did not write, in order to relicense it, you'd have to get the permission of the author(s) of it, which is stated in each module. But it is entirely unnecessary to relicense it - the Boost license allows you to use it any way you want to. The Boost license is not viral, it will not infect anything you hook it up to (neither does the BSD license - in fact, the only real difference between the BSD and Boost licenses is the binary attribution clause).
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
== Quote from Chris Wright (dhase...@gmail.com)'s article == Quote from Don (nos...@nospam.com)'s article That's true, but largely irrelevant. Individual developers can make agreements about relicensing of their personal contributions, and stating that they're happy with their code being used in Phobos. Walter said, basically, that since it's possible that SHOO may have used code from Tango, Tango devs should relicense their work. That's insulting. It's admitting theft and demanding that the victim call it a gift. If it were a policy, Walter would have a way of badgering us into relicensing most of Tango against our will. I'm not saying that SHOO copied any Tango code. Walter's reaction, though, means I would never relicense any code for Phobos. http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chromeie=UTF-8q=chris+wright+site:tango.dsource.org The loss is unbearable. -- Gurney Halleck
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
== Quote from Gurney Halleck (gurney.hall...@dune.com)'s article The loss is unbearable. Yes, all the code I've ever written or will write is in those two modules. Sad, isn't it? I'm legally required to submit all my code to a D standard library, and that's all I could accomplish.
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
Daniel Keep wrote: I won't discuss the details, but I *have* been accused of ripping off someone else's code. So have I, falsely, many times. Perhaps I am overly cautious about these issues, but I feel compelled to be. (I've also been on the other side, my game Empire was once described as the most ripped-off game in history g, with not only people making ripoff versions, but people actually deleting my name out of the source code and putting their own name in. Having a registered copyright of the source code saved the day on that one.) It was particularly hurtful given that my code was written entirely separately without ever having even used, let alone seen, the other person's code. The accusation was based, literally, on the name of a single function. And yeah, it really upset me to be called, more or less, of being a cheat and a liar. I totally am sympathetic to this. It is just as bad to be falsely accused as it is to have someone take what is yours. But I didn't copy from them, and I knew that the accusation was baseless. Rather than throw away my code, I double-checked that there was nothing that could be reasonably seen to be copied and moved on. One of the great things about svn is it provides a verifiable legal trail of the evolution of the source code, so when and where bits of it came from can be documented if necessary. Ironically, making things open source seems to greatly reduce the chances of code theft!
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
On Fri, 30 Apr 2010 11:36:02 -0400, Chris Wright dhase...@gmail.com wrote: == Quote from Don (nos...@nospam.com)'s article That's true, but largely irrelevant. Individual developers can make agreements about relicensing of their personal contributions, and stating that they're happy with their code being used in Phobos. Walter said, basically, that since it's possible that SHOO may have used code from Tango, Tango devs should relicense their work. That's insulting. It's admitting theft and demanding that the victim call it a gift. If it were a policy, Walter would have a way of badgering us into relicensing most of Tango against our will. This is completely false. Walter did not say that. He said that he will not participate in the transaction, even if such copying didn't occur, unless Tango says it's ok to copy that code. It's like someone you don't know tries to give you $1000 and at the same time, your friend says that they might be missing $1000. You tell the person giving you the money that since there is no way to prove that he did or didn't steal the money, your friend must say it's ok for you to accept it. How is that any admission of guilt or theft? How is that any kind of demand of your friend? How does this do anything against anyone's will? All parties involved here are able to do whatever they want, Walter is just giving a set of conditions that he will accept. No demands were made. -Steve
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
== Quote from Chris Wright (dhase...@gmail.com)'s article == Quote from Gurney Halleck (gurney.hall...@dune.com)'s article The loss is unbearable. Yes, all the code I've ever written or will write is in those two modules. Sad, isn't it? I'm legally required to submit all my code to a D standard library, and that's all I could accomplish. Thank god your not authoring more. Your code is shit. -- Gurney Halleck
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
Andrei Alexandrescu seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote in message news:hreuei$bk...@digitalmars.com... On 04/30/2010 10:46 AM, retard wrote: Fri, 30 Apr 2010 10:22:59 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: Now, could we all please stop with the personal attacks and demonisation of the other side? This isn't a war, for Pete's sake. You're making the situation look symmetrical. It isn't. No, you're right. There's only one person who's insolently dismissing the quality and efforts of other's work and blatantly advertising his own GODDAMN precious work in the same post. Who is that? (Honest question.) FWIW, I'm unclear on that too.
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
Daniel Keep Wrote: ... skipped How is that an overreaction? I entirely understand Steve. He did some work and now because of the licensing crap another person isn't allowed even to be inspired by Steve's code, although he doesn't mind it at all. That's why he is frustrated and reluctant to deal with Tango, because it leads to complications like we currently have, where someone can't use his own code(Yes I know that there are 4 people more and I don't know how much each other contributed, but Steve did a major rewrite). And there is nothing personal here. Because of the licenses, code from Phobos can go to Tango, but not the other way round. That is not fair and very unfortunate, as people are loosing time reinventing the same wheel and participating in these useless discussions. Steve(being involved in writing of tango.Time) confirmed that there wasn't any copying of the code. SHOO only implemented the same interfaces (not even retaining source compatibility). So why even bother?
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote: On 04/30/2010 10:46 AM, retard wrote: Fri, 30 Apr 2010 10:22:59 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: Now, could we all please stop with the personal attacks and demonisation of the other side? This isn't a war, for Pete's sake. You're making the situation look symmetrical. It isn't. No, you're right. There's only one person who's insolently dismissing the quality and efforts of other's work and blatantly advertising his own GODDAMN precious work in the same post. Who is that? (Honest question.) Allow me to introduce the very modest myself. I'm N=NP?, a travelling mirror salesman, dear effendi. This is the luckiest day in my life since I may have the honor to offer You my best goods. The mirrors I sell are of the finest quality, definitely not iterating snake oil. They help your std.algorithm become non-petty rocket science and even have practical applications like curing cancer. No need to worry about your ego, it will make it HUGE as we can all see from the picture. You also don't need to spread FUD anymore to send competitors away. They surely realize now that the lawn isn't large enough for the both of you.
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
FeepingCreature wrote: On 30.04.2010 17:10, Don wrote: It seems very clear to me that there are Tango developers who do not want any of their code to be used in Phobos. Which is fine, that's their choice. But I wish they'd have the decency to say so, so that the community stops wasting time on the issue. So what you're saying is, you have this knowledge despite the relevant Tango devs not actually saying anything in that direction. Yes. The silence is deafening. Could you maybe explain how you came to that conclusion, please? Essentially, two years of trying to prove that it is false, and failing, despite heavy involvement in both Tango and Phobos. I have not come to that conclusion lightly.
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
== Quote from Gurney Halleck (gurney.hall...@dune.com)'s article Thank god your not authoring more. God? Leto Atreides is over there --
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
FeepingCreature wrote: The quality-of-code metric seems to be universally acknowledged - after all, druntime itself is a fork of tango core. We think you suck, so we'll base our new standard library on your work. You seem to be unaware of the history, and this may be leading you to misunderstand the situation. Sean Kelly wrote Ares as a replacement for Phobos. Tango began as a merger of Ares with Mango. Tango core is Ares. Druntime is also Ares. The primary author has never changed, and it's an unbroken continuation of development on a single code base. Ditto with tango.math, (which was written by me, originally in a project called 'mathextra').
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
On 04/30/2010 02:01 PM, traveling mirror salesman wrote: Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote: On 04/30/2010 10:46 AM, retard wrote: Fri, 30 Apr 2010 10:22:59 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: Now, could we all please stop with the personal attacks and demonisation of the other side? This isn't a war, for Pete's sake. You're making the situation look symmetrical. It isn't. No, you're right. There's only one person who's insolently dismissing the quality and efforts of other's work and blatantly advertising his own GODDAMN precious work in the same post. Who is that? (Honest question.) Allow me to introduce the very modest myself. I'm N=NP?, a travelling mirror salesman, dear effendi. This is the luckiest day in my life since I may have the honor to offer You my best goods. The mirrors I sell are of the finest quality, definitely not iterating snake oil. They help your std.algorithm become non-petty rocket science and even have practical applications like curing cancer. No need to worry about your ego, it will make it HUGE as we can all see from the picture. You also don't need to spread FUD anymore to send competitors away. They surely realize now that the lawn isn't large enough for the both of you. Funny :o). (Let me clarify that std.algorithm is under the Boost License lest that aspect gets forgotten in the discussion.) Now, that is a honest question, though clearly Walter and I are prime suspects of the sniping. First, I am careful with giving credit where credit is due, so if I failed to do so, I'd definitely want to correct course. Second, I recall a similar accusation (I'm not sure whether it was coming from 'retard' or someone else) about an arrogant language designer on this newsgroup who has barely read the Wikipedia article about algebraic data types. Again it is reasonable to infer that Walter or I (though I don't consider myself a language designer) were the primary targets of that one too, but I failed to recognize my own actions - so in brief I want to make sure what the state of affairs is. Andrei
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
On 30.04.2010 20:26, Gurney Halleck wrote: == Quote from Chris Wright (dhase...@gmail.com)'s article == Quote from Gurney Halleck (gurney.hall...@dune.com)'s article The loss is unbearable. Yes, all the code I've ever written or will write is in those two modules. Sad, isn't it? I'm legally required to submit all my code to a D standard library, and that's all I could accomplish. Thank god your not authoring more. Your code is shit. -- Gurney Halleck Oh come on. That's just off-topic.
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
== Quote from Don (nos...@nospam.com)'s article FeepingCreature wrote: The quality-of-code metric seems to be universally acknowledged - after all, druntime itself is a fork of tango core. We think you suck, so we'll base our new standard library on your work. You seem to be unaware of the history, and this may be leading you to misunderstand the situation. Sean Kelly wrote Ares as a replacement for Phobos. Tango began as a merger of Ares with Mango. Tango core is Ares. Druntime is also Ares. The primary author has never changed, and it's an unbroken continuation of development on a single code base. Ditto with tango.math, (which was written by me, originally in a project called 'mathextra'). Thank you Sean Kelly, Don and Steve Schveiguy for leaving Tango and coming to Phobos. It means very much for everybody.
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
another lurker lur...@lurk.urk wrote in message news:hrfcfi$1ea...@digitalmars.com... == Quote from Don (nos...@nospam.com)'s article FeepingCreature wrote: The quality-of-code metric seems to be universally acknowledged - after all, druntime itself is a fork of tango core. We think you suck, so we'll base our new standard library on your work. You seem to be unaware of the history, and this may be leading you to misunderstand the situation. Sean Kelly wrote Ares as a replacement for Phobos. Tango began as a merger of Ares with Mango. Tango core is Ares. Druntime is also Ares. The primary author has never changed, and it's an unbroken continuation of development on a single code base. Ditto with tango.math, (which was written by me, originally in a project called 'mathextra'). Thank you Sean Kelly, Don and Steve Schveiguy for leaving Tango and coming to Phobos. It means very much for everybody. Don just said in the message you're replying to that they didn't leave Tango.
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
FeepingCreature default_357-l...@yahoo.de wrote in message news:hrfb5u$1bh...@digitalmars.com... On 30.04.2010 20:26, Gurney Halleck wrote: == Quote from Chris Wright (dhase...@gmail.com)'s article == Quote from Gurney Halleck (gurney.hall...@dune.com)'s article The loss is unbearable. Yes, all the code I've ever written or will write is in those two modules. Sad, isn't it? I'm legally required to submit all my code to a D standard library, and that's all I could accomplish. Thank god your not authoring more. Your code is shit. -- Gurney Halleck Oh come on. That's just off-topic. Just ignore him. All of his posts have been trolling so far.
Re: Can we all please stop overreacting?
Nick Sabalausky wrote: another lurker lur...@lurk.urk wrote in message news:hrfcfi$1ea...@digitalmars.com... == Quote from Don (nos...@nospam.com)'s article FeepingCreature wrote: The quality-of-code metric seems to be universally acknowledged - after all, druntime itself is a fork of tango core. We think you suck, so we'll base our new standard library on your work. You seem to be unaware of the history, and this may be leading you to misunderstand the situation. Sean Kelly wrote Ares as a replacement for Phobos. Tango began as a merger of Ares with Mango. Tango core is Ares. Druntime is also Ares. The primary author has never changed, and it's an unbroken continuation of development on a single code base. Ditto with tango.math, (which was written by me, originally in a project called 'mathextra'). Thank you Sean Kelly, Don and Steve Schveiguy for leaving Tango and coming to Phobos. It means very much for everybody. Don just said in the message you're replying to that they didn't leave Tango. My most recent svn commit to Tango was only a month ago, so I still have a toe in both camps. But actually I've spent almost all of my time working on the compiler. I have not yet decided on how I will respond to this situation.
