Re: Fwd: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:48:24AM -0800, Kees Cook wrote: > Better yet, since it's only 17 files, how about doing context-specific > changes? "This API is terrible" I think we should only use "good" with selected operators like !, ++, -- E.g. "This API is !good++" Suggested-by: George Orwell

Re: Fwd: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:48:24AM -0800, Kees Cook wrote: > Better yet, since it's only 17 files, how about doing context-specific > changes? "This API is terrible" I think we should only use "good" with selected operators like !, ++, -- E.g. "This API is !good++" Suggested-by: George Orwell

Fwd: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[resend with CCs dropped so it'll actually get delivered to lkml...] On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27 AM Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > In order to comply with the CoC, replace with a hug. Heh. I support the replacement of the stronger language, but I find "hug", "hugged", and "hugging" to be

Fwd: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[resend with CCs dropped so it'll actually get delivered to lkml...] On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27 AM Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > In order to comply with the CoC, replace with a hug. Heh. I support the replacement of the stronger language, but I find "hug", "hugged", and "hugging" to be