Re: Let's stop feeding the NVidia cuckoo
* David Schmitt (david@schmitt.edv-bus.at) [050228 23:55]:
> On Monday 28 February 2005 02:43, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > "acceptable form for modification" will get you in even worse trouble
> > than "(author's) preferred form for modification". The former is a
> > subjective criteria, and could raise issues with any code that someone
> > claims is difficult to maintain (due to lack of documentation, poor
> > programming practices, obscure language, any arbitrary criteria you
> > might think of for unmaintainability). The latter is an objective
> > criteria, which will only ever trigger in cases of obfuscation and/or
> > compilation.
> The DFS_Guidelines_ don't need to hold up in court. Therefore they are able to
> say that source which is unacceptable for modification because of lack of
> documentation, poor programming practices, obscure language or any arbitrary
> criteria you might think of for unmaintainability is no service to our users
> but instead does lock them into low quality code which can only be modified
> at high costs if at all.
They would be able to say it, but they don't.
Cheers,
Andi
--
http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/
PGP 1024/89FB5CE5 DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F 3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C
Reply to: