Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Drop millions of allocations by using a linked list

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–158 of 158 posts

Re: Drop millions of allocations by using a linked list

#151

Post by EpicEng »

wukerplank wrote: post #150
EpicEng wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once you have a product, free or not, which is used and relied upon by a large group of people, you do owe them something. if you don't want that responsibility then don't release your code or get out when things become serious. I get the OSS philosophy, and I like many things about it, but I also understand why some won't touch it with a ten foot pole. "Oh, I made a boneheaded error and now your code is 100x slower…

> Tough sh*t, fix it yourself. I never said that, but most projects welcome pull requests. > I owe you nothing! True, it's the short version of the MIT license. > That's not a reasonable mentality to have if you want adoption. Yes, maintainers should always try to take care of their projects and to accommodate the needs of their communities. > Obviously the Ruby devs don't feel this way, but you seem to. You are over…

Sorry of I misinterpreted your position, I thought that was exactly what you meant.

Re: Drop millions of allocations by using a linked list

#152

Post by coldtea »

EpicEng wrote: post #146
wukerplank wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're talking about OSS - you didn't buy it. OSS does not entitle you to anything. Tenderlove and the Rubygems maintainers spend their time so you don't have to. If it doesn't fit your needs - okay. But don't act as if somebody owes you anything.

Once you have a product, free or not, which is used and relied upon by a large group of people, you do owe them something. if you don't want that responsibility then don't release your code or get out when things become serious. I get the OSS philosophy, and I like many things about it, but I also understand why some won't touch it with a ten foot pole. "Oh, I made a boneheaded error and now your code is 100x slower…

>Once you have a product, free or not, which is used and relied upon by a large group of people, you do owe them something.

No, you really don't. The fact is: they owe you something, but it's OK, since you give it away for free.

>If you don't want that responsibility then don't release your code or get out when things become serious.

Or else?

>That's not a reasonable mentality to have if you want adoption.

What if you DON'T want adoption? Or you want just the smart kids that can contribute back to adopt your code?

Re: Drop millions of allocations by using a linked list

#153

Post by EpicEng »

coldtea wrote: post #152
EpicEng wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once you have a product, free or not, which is used and relied upon by a large group of people, you do owe them something. if you don't want that responsibility then don't release your code or get out when things become serious. I get the OSS philosophy, and I like many things about it, but I also understand why some won't touch it with a ten foot pole. "Oh, I made a boneheaded error and now your code is 100x slower…

> Once you have a product, free or not, which is used and relied upon by a large group of people, you do owe them something. No, you really don't. The fact is: they owe you something, but it's OK, since you give it away for free. > If you don't want that responsibility then don't release your code or get out when things become serious. Or else? > That's not a reasonable mentality to have if you want adoption. What if…

And philosophical OSS people wonder why so many people chose closed alternatives. If you don't want adoption, fine, but don't pretend like that's true for every OSS project out there. I have no problem with that mentality until it comes into stark contrast with the goals of those pushing OSS (see: EFF.) You're not going to be taken seriously by people if you don't support the code you put out there.

>Or else?

Or else people just don't use your software and don't buy into your ideology. If you don't care, fine, but obviously many OSS proponents do.

Re: Drop millions of allocations by using a linked list

#154

Post by EpicEng »

chowyuncat wrote: post #148
EpicEng wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once you have a product, free or not, which is used and relied upon by a large group of people, you do owe them something. if you don't want that responsibility then don't release your code or get out when things become serious. I get the OSS philosophy, and I like many things about it, but I also understand why some won't touch it with a ten foot pole. "Oh, I made a boneheaded error and now your code is 100x slower…

Please describe why you believe the product owners owe the userbase something.

Because, for those projects who want a thriving userbase, the developers said "come, use our software to solve your problems." Once you do that you are making a promise to your users, whether explicit or implicit, that you'll be there when things go wrong.

If you release some script or small program which was useful to you thinking that it may help someone else down the road, I agree, you don't owe your users anything. However, when you position your solution as something people should adopt (e.g. RoR, etc) then you do owe a level of quality and support to your users (not saying RoR doesn't, just a random example.)

I love OSS, but every time it bites a user in the behind it loses mindshare.

Re: Drop millions of allocations by using a linked list

#155

Post by coldtea »

EpicEng wrote: post #153
coldtea wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Once you have a product, free or not, which is used and relied upon by a large group of people, you do owe them something. No, you really don't. The fact is: they owe you something, but it's OK, since you give it away for free. > If you don't want that responsibility then don't release your code or get out when things become serious. Or else? > That's not a reasonable mentality to have if you want adoption. What if…

And philosophical OSS people wonder why so many people chose closed alternatives. If you don't want adoption, fine, but don't pretend like that's true for every OSS project out there. I have no problem with that mentality until it comes into stark contrast with the goals of those pushing OSS (see: EFF.) You're not going to be taken seriously by people if you don't support the code you put out there. >Or else? Or else…

>. I have no problem with that mentality until it comes into stark contrast with the goals of those pushing OSS (see: EFF.)

Actually EFF has little to do with OSS.

Perhaps you meant FSF. In any case, most OSS software that isn't GNU has very little if anything to do with FSF. Some OSS authors, especially those MIT-licence inclined, even hate its guts.

Re: Drop millions of allocations by using a linked list

#156

Post by EpicEng »

coldtea wrote: post #155
EpicEng wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And philosophical OSS people wonder why so many people chose closed alternatives. If you don't want adoption, fine, but don't pretend like that's true for every OSS project out there. I have no problem with that mentality until it comes into stark contrast with the goals of those pushing OSS (see: EFF.) You're not going to be taken seriously by people if you don't support the code you put out there. >Or else? Or else…

> . I have no problem with that mentality until it comes into stark contrast with the goals of those pushing OSS (see: EFF.) Actually EFF has little to do with OSS. Perhaps you meant FSF. In any case, most OSS software that isn't GNU has very little if anything to do with FSF. Some OSS authors, especially those MIT-licence inclined, even hate its guts.

...Yes, FSF. I think I made that typo twice today. I know that not all OSS proponents agree on everything, but I do think that they all agree on the overall benefits of OSS and would like more people to stick with OSS. That's what I'm talking about here.

Re: Drop millions of allocations by using a linked list

#157

Post by thinkbohemian »

nevinera wrote: post #122
michaelfeathers wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Even the dev with the fix wasn't rude about the original problem, he seemed pretty humble about it actually. The Ruby community is very good interpersonally from my experience. It's a culture that I think comes from this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MINASWAN

Unfortunately, the rails community are the visible minority, and they follow DHH's example more than Matz's.

Tenderlove, the super nice guy who submitted that PR is on Rails core. Too bad to hear he's part of the evil visible minority that you just made up in your head.

Re: Drop millions of allocations by using a linked list

#158

Post by nevinera »

thinkbohemian wrote: post #157
nevinera wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, the rails community are the visible minority, and they follow DHH's example more than Matz's.

Tenderlove, the super nice guy who submitted that PR is on Rails core. Too bad to hear he's part of the evil visible minority that you just made up in your head.

Right, because I claimed that there are no nice people working on rails at some point..?

We were talking about the overall culture of the rails community. Nor did I intend to imply the DHH was evil, just abrasive.

"nice" != "good"

Post reply on HN