Re: any chance of 2.6.0-test*?

["Dimitrie O. Paun" <dpaun _at_ xxxxxxxxxx>]

On January 12, 2003 03:48 pm, Rob Wilkens wrote:
> As someone else pointed out, it's provable that goto isn't needed, and
> given that C is a minimalist language, I'm not sure why it was included.

Rob,
You should really try to post one controversial thing at a time... :)
Anyway, all programming languages (minimalistic or not) are Turing
complete, maybe you want to program in Turing-machine language?

On a side note, I do hope you realize that Linus & Co. are considered
by smart people in the business as being some of the best. And for good
reason, too. That is to say, they are held in high esteem by a lot of
very, _very_ smart people, based on their continuous review of the
exceptional work done on the kernel. Now, doesn't it strike you a little
bit odd that you come in here and find all this obvious "problems"?
How come you are the only one seeing all thing things that any 1st year
CS student should be able to spot, yet hundreds of the brightest minds
in the business failed to notice?

-- 
Dimi.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo _at_ vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/