News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Decoded: GNU Coreutils by 38 on Saturday September 09, 2023 @11:54AM (#37446791)
I am not seeing a technical argument here against the previous points, only one against the commenter:

https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

Re:Decoded: GNU Coreutils by rcr on Saturday September 09, 2023 @12:11PM (#37446983)
But you're also arguing in bad faith. Your go code is shorter, okay, but it doesn't do the same thing as the GNU yes code, so what point are you trying to make? I can also link to philosophy 101 wikipedia articles:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

Re:Decoded: GNU Coreutils by 38 on Saturday September 09, 2023 @12:37PM (#37447258)
I think I have made it pretty clear already, but here it is again:

the Go code has MORE functionality (flag parsing) with LESS code. yes its not as fast, and yes the executable is larger, but for many, thats a good tradeoff for the extra standard library features, and the reduced LOC/code complexity. sadly as of yet, I haven't seen any cogent technical arguments against my points thus far.

Re:Decoded: GNU Coreutils by rcr on Saturday September 09, 2023 @12:49PM (#37447384)
For an extremely simple utility like the 'yes' command that is compiled and distributed as a binary to trillions of installations what metric do you consider more important, size and speed? Or lines of code in the source? Think about this in engineering terms, everything is a tradeoff and it's your job to come up with the best solution.

I'm genuinely curious to hear your argument.

Re:Decoded: GNU Coreutils by 38 on Saturday September 09, 2023 @01:00PM (#37447512)
> I'm genuinely curious to hear your argument.

previous comments have demonstrated this not to be the case, so I will stand by my previous points. I have already made over 10 comments on this one topic, so if any aren't already convinced, they never will be, either because they disagree with the tradeoff, or they just have stockholm syndrome for C.

Re:Decoded: GNU Coreutils by rcr on Saturday September 09, 2023 @01:16PM (#37447693)
You've demonstrated nothing and made no discernable argument to anyone. Best of luck in the job search my friend.
Re:Decoded: GNU Coreutils by 38 on Saturday September 09, 2023 @01:22PM (#37447751)
I think anyone who has the ability to read and comprehend text would disagree with the comment I am replying to. Best of luck in the high school level reading class my friend.
Re:Decoded: GNU Coreutils by rcr on Saturday September 09, 2023 @12:57PM (#37447467)
Also, take a look at openbsd's version of yes

https://github.com/openbsd/src/blob/master/usr.bin/yes/yes.c

Re:Decoded: GNU Coreutils by 38 on Saturday September 09, 2023 @04:24PM (#37449916)
more lines of code, and still doesn't have flag parsing
Re:Decoded: GNU Coreutils by rcr on Saturday September 09, 2023 @04:43PM (#37450078)
There are no flags to parse. Why are you adding flag parsing? This would fail a junior interview Steven.
Re:Decoded: GNU Coreutils by 38 on Saturday September 09, 2023 @06:42PM (#37451043)
when people resort to doxing, it shows how truly pathetic they are. I pity those people.
Re:Decoded: GNU Coreutils by rascul on Saturday September 09, 2023 @01:12PM (#37447650)
> the Go code has MORE functionality (flag parsing) with LESS code.

Your code does not have more functionality than GNU's yes as written. It's less code you have to write because of the flag parsing code that has already been written, and it's incompatible with GNU's yes because yours requires -m to change the message.

Re:Decoded: GNU Coreutils by 38 on Saturday September 09, 2023 @03:39PM (#37449495)
> Your code does not have more functionality than GNU's yes as written.

it has flag parsing

Re:Decoded: GNU Coreutils by rascul on Saturday September 09, 2023 @03:58PM (#37449662)
Which does not do functionally more than the C version that was shared by inferiorhuman.
Re:Decoded: GNU Coreutils by 38 on Saturday September 09, 2023 @04:23PM (#37449911)
yes it does