Xref: utzoo comp.bugs.4bsd:1733 comp.lang.c:35815
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!think.com!hsdndev!cmcl2!kramden.acf.nyu.edu!brnstnd
From: brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein)
Newsgroups: comp.bugs.4bsd,comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Complexity of reallocating storage (was users command crap)
Message-ID: <1521:Feb520:45:5291@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Date: 5 Feb 91 20:45:52 GMT
References: <27AD7A46.343B@tct.uucp> <10210:Feb505:10:2991@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <1123@gistdev.gist.com>
Followup-To: comp.bugs.4bsd
Organization: IR
Lines: 29

In article <1123@gistdev.gist.com> flint@gistdev.gist.com (Flint Pellett) writes:
> 1. If you post any code on usenet, expect it to be criticized.

You're right, I overreacted. Sorry. I was hoping for some constructive
criticism, though, and it doesn't help to be told something that I had
already noted in the code.

> 2. It would be nice, if people criticizing code did so as if were a
> professional code review.

Yes. Among other things, please check the original source, and when it
has a comment like /* XXX: We should have some error recovery here! */
then assume that the author does realize that the code can be improved.

> 3. Regarding the code: I didn't see the entire example code, but from
> the ensuing discussion, I conclude that there was a problem in the
> comments in the code.  It was stated that the initialization was put
> in "for a reason".  If the comments were complete, that would have
> been obvious,

Agreed, and I think that the comment makes it clear enough in context.
Geoff, why did you feel compelled to take the code out of context?

> 4. A good maintainer (or criticizer) always assumes the original
> author did things for reasons.

Although in practice most things are done for no reason at all. :-)

---Dan