On 08/04/2011 11:59 AM, Jim Holsenback wrote:
> On 08/04/2011 09:22 AM, Invisible wrote:
>> The programmer didn't read the documentation for the tools and libraries
>> he's using. (He probably wouldn't understand it anyway!) As such, the
>> software actually /depends on/ all the undocumented, undefined or just
>> plain erroneous behaviour of the compiler, the runtime and the libraries.
>
> Sounds a bit like the early days of squashfs (re: my previous post on
> the topic) ... I never could get the tools to compile correctly for what
> can only be some of the very issue's that you've raised.

clarification ... don't want the squashfs folks thinking some povray 
weenie was slamming the project, so I'll add that my comments relate to 
the many lzma variants out there, all aimed at getting just a little 
more blood out of the turnip (1% or 2% better compression) ... I mean 
maybe a good idea when RAM was more expensive. Now a days that's just an 
exercise in futility ;-)

Post a reply to this message