Re: [ros-dev] Re: [ros-diffs] [ion] 14047: Dispatching & Queue Rewrite II:

[Steven Edwards]

--- Alex Ionescu [e-mail] wrote:
> What the fsck are you implying.

Its hard to claim our implementation is "clean room" if you are basing your implementation on
debug information rather than reverse enginered behavior. I am not opposed to observing the
implementation via debug information and then writting tests to match behavior but there is a fine
line...

Thanks
Steven

__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Make Yahoo! your home page 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

[Alex Ionescu]

Steven Edwards wrote:
> --- Alex Ionescu [e-mail] wrote:
> > What the fsck are you implying.
>
> Its hard to claim our implementation is "clean room" if you are basing your implementation on
> debug information rather than reverse enginered behavior. I am not opposed to observing the
> implementation via debug information and then writting tests to match behavior but there is a fine
> line...
>
> Thanks
> Steven

Then I would appreciate a more through reponse then just "explain this. NOW!". This is not a Nazi Gestapo. Am I being accused of something? If so, what? Please come forward and accuse me of whatever it is you wish to accuse me of, but don't order me to submit explenations for every comment I make. The conversion was between me and Gunnar, and it was interrupted in the middle by an accusation disguised as a question. I do not like that kind of hypocrisy; make the accusation, if you have the guts. Show everyone how after a year, you still spend your days making sure "Alex the newcomer is legit".

And when it's all over and your little show is done, please go hide in a corner as everyone laughs at you for making such a big deal out of public information.

strings ntoskrnl.exe:

"
d:\srvrc1\base\ntos\ke\wait.c
Objectx->Header.Type != QueueObject"

Hm, I didn't even copy the exact source line and I still was accused. Maybe next time you should learn what a checked build is, and write a driver that does KeWaitForSingleObject on a Queue.

This climate of paranoia is getting to my nerves.

As for Steven... WINE, ROS, and any other compatibility product out there is not 100% clean room. It has never been, will never be, cannot be. Especially if we consider debug information as being "dirty". Reminds me of people freaking out when I added functions that were in the IFS -- you'd hope people would've grown up by now--.

I could make a list of over 25 parts of ReactOS which are not 100% clean. But I won't, because that would tarnish our image. I would appreciate if you'd stop tarnishing mine and making accusations.

Best regards,
Alex Ionescu