PHWinfo - Afficher un message

16/10/2007, 23h26

jameskuyper@verizon.net wrote:
> Kenny McCormack wrote:
> ...
>> And what is particularly amusing about this is that they (the regs and
>> their sock puppets) are, at the same time, telling us all what a pile of
>> sh*t Jacob's product is and how they all want to get more of it.
>>
>> Why else ask for the sources???
>
> As I understand it, at least some of the people who are challenging
> him to provide source code, are not doing so because they want to use
> his compiler. They're doing it in the expectation that if he does
> provide his source code they will be able to use it to prove that his
> code is just as bad as they believe his understanding of C to be. It's
> one thing to explain C badly in a newsgroup message. Many people who
> understand C perfectly have a hard time explaining their understanding
> verbally, particularly if it's not in their native language. It's a
> much more serious thing to write C badly in software that you're
> actually charging people for permission to use. They suspect that he
> has done so, but would prefer to have actual proof
>

My program is distributed freely. That is why the accuse me
(anonymously) of a "morbid interest for money". Then, I do not
know how C works, nor I do know anything at all. The fact that my
programs work and are used by tens of thousands of users all
over the wold is a proof that I do not know how to program.

lcc-win32 has gone beyond half a *million* downloads. This
is the PROOF that I have no knowledge of C: it is one of the
most popular C99 implementations in the world.

Obviously those people have produced software more successful
than mine, specially Mark McIntyre, "old wolf" etc... Everyone
knows about them. *Their* programs can also be freely downloaded
isn't it?

Yet another problem for those people is the fact that I have
implemented the standard C, not some obsolete standard they appreciate.
Because they have all the time "standard C" in their mouths but when
it comes to the real standard then they say that... well they do not
like it, that nobody uses it, etc etc.

Since my program works, and people like it, it is badly written,
OBVIOUSLY!

Your logic is the same logic that goes on and on here:

If I have people that insult me anonymously, *I* am responsible for
*their* behavior because by writing and distributing a C compiler for
free I somehow "provoked" them into that. They just couldn't do
otherwise the poor people.

So let's stop this polemic. I will not reply to any messages in this
thread, and give these people more importance than what they actually
have.

I will just go on working for the C community as I have done since
more than 12 years.

--
jacob navia
jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr
logiciels/informatique
http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32

16/10/2007, 23h26	#8
jacob navia Messages: n/a Hébergeur:	Re: GCC compiler error jameskuyper@verizon.net wrote: > Kenny McCormack wrote: > ... >> And what is particularly amusing about this is that they (the regs and >> their sock puppets) are, at the same time, telling us all what a pile of >> sht Jacob's product is and how they all want to get more of it. >> >> Why else ask for the sources??? > > As I understand it, at least some of the people who are challenging > him to provide source code, are not doing so because they want to use > his compiler. They're doing it in the expectation that if he does > provide his source code they will be able to use it to prove that his > code is just as bad as they believe his understanding of C to be. It's > one thing to explain C badly in a newsgroup message. Many people who > understand C perfectly have a hard time explaining their understanding > verbally, particularly if it's not in their native language. It's a > much more serious thing to write C badly in software that you're > actually charging people for permission to use. They suspect that he > has done so, but would prefer to have actual proof > My program is distributed freely. That is why the accuse me (anonymously) of a "morbid interest for money". Then, I do not know how C works, nor I do know anything at all. The fact that my programs work and are used by tens of thousands of users all over the wold is a proof that I do not know how to program. lcc-win32 has gone beyond half a million* downloads. This is the PROOF that I have no knowledge of C: it is one of the most popular C99 implementations in the world. Obviously those people have produced software more successful than mine, specially Mark McIntyre, "old wolf" etc... Everyone knows about them. Their programs can also be freely downloaded isn't it? Yet another problem for those people is the fact that I have implemented the standard C, not some obsolete standard they appreciate. Because they have all the time "standard C" in their mouths but when it comes to the real standard then they say that... well they do not like it, that nobody uses it, etc etc. Since my program works, and people like it, it is badly written, OBVIOUSLY! Your logic is the same logic that goes on and on here: If I have people that insult me anonymously, I am responsible for their behavior because by writing and distributing a C compiler for free I somehow "provoked" them into that. They just couldn't do otherwise the poor people. So let's stop this polemic. I will not reply to any messages in this thread, and give these people more importance than what they actually have. I will just go on working for the C community as I have done since more than 12 years. -- jacob navia jacob at jacob point remcomp point fr logiciels/informatique http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32