 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
>> What would you rather interface to: A protocol specified by an RFC, or a
>> protocol specified by a big chunk of C code?
>
> What if nobody intended the protocol to be used by any other software in the
> first place? (making it technically hard to fork the software)
Let's exclude from discussion open source software the author doesn't want
you to look at, hmm? :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Warp wrote:
>> Judging from thedailywtf.com, proprietary code isn't always much better
>> either.
>
> Quite true, but for different reasons. :-)
See Step 1:
http://blog.objectmentor.com/articles/2008/03/05/clues-for-reading-new-code
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 4/4/2009 5:42 PM, clipka wrote:
> At that point, I first take a pee, then a *deep* breath,
I totally understand, peeing always makes me breathe hard, too! :)
--
...Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Chambers wrote:
> On 4/4/2009 5:42 PM, clipka wrote:
>> At that point, I first take a pee, then a *deep* breath,
>
> I totally understand, peeing always makes me breathe hard, too! :)
Me too, except after asparagus.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
