From: bc@freeuk.com   
      
   On 29/10/2025 07:06, Janis Papanagnou wrote:   
   > On 29.10.2025 00:14, bart wrote:   
   >> On 28/10/2025 21:59, Keith Thompson wrote:   
   >>> [...]   
   >>   
   >> He (I assume) always dismisses every single one of my arguments out of   
   >> hand:   
   >   
   > No, I'm trying to speak about various things; basically my focus   
   > is the facts. Not the persons involved. But there's persons with   
   > specific mindsets (like you) that provoke reactions; on flaws in   
   > your logic, misrepresentations, limited perspectives, etc.   
   >   
   >>   
   >> Build speed is never a problem - ever.   
   >   
   > Like here. You're making things up. - For example I clearly said;   
   > "Speed is a topic". But since you're so pathologically focused on   
   > that factor that you miss the important projects' contexts. So I   
   > then even quoted that (in case you missed it):   
   > Speed is not an end in itself. It must be valued in comparison   
   > with all the other often more relevant factors (that you seem to   
   > completely miss, even when explained to you).   
   >   
   >> The speed of any language implemention is never a concern either.   
   >   
   > Nonsense.   
   >   
   >> [...]   
   >>   
   >> When I gave the example of my language that was 1000 times faster to   
   >> build than A68G, and which ran that test 10 times faster than A68G, that   
   >> apparently doesn't count; he doesn't care; or I'm changing the goalposts.   
   >   
   > Exactly. Or comparing apples and oranges. - Sadly you do all that   
   > regularly.   
   >   
   >> [...]   
   >>   
   >> On the face of it, it is uncontroversial: they do allow rapid   
   >> development and instant feedback, as one of their several pros. Yet, JP   
   >> feels the need to be contrary:   
   >>   
   >>> I can't tell about the "many" that you have in mind, and about their   
   >> mindset; I'm sure you either can't tell.   
   >>   
   >> And now you have joined in, to back him up!   
   >   
   > Bart, you should take Keith's words meant benevolent; all he's trying   
   > was you not always assuming that we want to hurt you if we criticize   
   > any misconceptions in your thinking or considering a topic only from   
   > one isolate perspective. If you continue to assume that the "worst"   
   > was meant, and only against you, you won't get anywhere.   
   >   
   > Keith has explained in his posts exactly what was said and meant, and   
   > made your discussion maneuvers explicit. (I would have been happier   
   > if you, Bart, would have noticed yourself what was obvious to Keith.)   
   >   
   >> [...]   
   >>> [...]   
   >>>   
   >>> You misunderstood what Janis wrote.   
   >>   
   >> I understand what he's trying to do. He despises me; he thinks the   
   >   
   > Obviously you don't understand, and certainly also don't know what   
   > I think; if you would understand it you wouldn't have written this   
   > nonsense.   
   >   
   >> projects I work on are worthless.   
   >   
   > Actually, as far as I saw your projects, methods, and targets, yes;   
   > they are completely worthless _for me_. (Mind the emphasis.)   
   >   
   > I also doubt that they are of worth in typical professional contexts;   
   > since they seem to lack some basic properties needed in professional   
   > contexts. - But that is your problem, not mine. (I just don't care.)   
   >   
   >> [...] Meanwhile he's a 'professional', as stated many times.   
   >   
   > Oh, my perception is that the regulars here are *all* professionals!   
   > And (typically) even to a high degree. - That's, I think, one reason   
   > why you sometimes (often?) get headwind from the audience.   
   >   
   > What I'm regularly trying to tell you is that your project setups   
   > and results might only rarely serve the requirements in professional   
   > _projects_ as you find them in _professional software companies_.   
      
   Everyone these days can do their own development on their own projects.   
   The standards do not need to be that high, the scale need not be that huge.   
      
   Yet the off-the-shelf tools available are still slow and cumbersome.   
      
      
   > You cannot seem to accept that.   
   >   
   > Personally I'm not working anymore professionally. (I mentioned that   
   > occasionally.) But I've still the expertise from my professional work   
   > and education, and I share my experiences to those who are interested.   
   >   
   > You, personally, are of no interest to me; your presumptions are thus   
   > wrong. (I'm interested in CS and IT topics.)   
      
   I'm interested in developing small, human-scale and *personal* projects   
   around compilers, assemblers, linkers, interpreters and emulators. I   
   also devise my own languages.   
      
   That they were small, simple, fast, and self-contained with no   
   dependencies (a necessity when I started out) was incidental.   
      
   But those aspects are now deliberately cultivated as a stand against   
   big, slow, complex tools and complex ecosystems.   
      
   I also (I seem to be unique in this regard) understand the vast   
   difference between building a WIP project from source during   
   development, which may be done 100s of times a day, and an enduser   
   building a finished product from source code, just once.   
      
      
   And yet, most source projects that you build from source are just a dump   
   of the developer's source tree. No effort is put into making it   
   streamlined with few points of failure.   
      
   So I am looking at that. And also at the problems of working with large   
   libraries. I posted elsewhere about this: so WHY isn't the provided API   
   for a library supplied as one compact monolithic header instead of   
   dozens or hundreds or several headers? Why possible benefit is that to   
   the /user/ of the library?   
      
   In short, I'm doing at lot of experimental work in finding tidy,   
   efficient solutions to building personal software, ones that are mainly   
   OS-agnostic too.   
      
   Meanwhile everybody else is striving to do that exact opposite! And in   
   this newsgroup, continously shout down my work and my views.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)