Hartmut Birr wrote:
Hi,
sometimes I find some pieces of code, with which isn't clearly for me, from where does the knowledge come for the implementation. Such code isn't used and it isn't necessary for the current status of ros. This is only a statement and has nothing to do with the changes from revision 14047. If I see a discussion with an answer which does sound like 'look inside windows and you will find some line of code...', sorry call me paranoid, I must get this clarify. I am a little bit disappointed from the following dialogue. Actually I've expected the following answer or something like this: 'I wrote a test driver and it has hit an assertion on Windows for queues'.
- Hartmut
Hi Hartmut,
Sorry for lashing out against you -- I've had an extremly bad week, if that's any excuse --. I've been sick, tired, unadmitted to my first choice university, and spent sleepness nights with the branch patching.
Both Gunnar and I knew about the beaviour of Queues && KeWaitXxx, my reply with him was an "inside joke" on the reason why I un-shared the code. Since he argued that speed is not imporant for him, but it is for me (our usual chat conversion ;), I brought up as an "inside joke", "Hey, btw, windows also asserts!". This was not the reason for the changes, and is just a joke I was playing on Gunnar. I understand that due to its nature it might've raisen some flags with you, and I probabaly overeacted. I don't mean this in an offending way, but your English sounded as if you were attacking me (or it might've been that bad week I've been having).
In any case, that assert had nothing to do with the changes and it comes out of a publically viewable information inside XP Checked Build.
Best regards, Alex Ionescu