16 Mar
2005
16 Mar
'05
12:37 a.m.
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