On Fri, Nov 12, 2004 at 09:49:57AM -0800, Matthew Dillon wrote:
>:It is unfortunate that Matt took my question for plagiarism of his code,
>:I can imagine how that unfolded and I'm glad he responded so I could
>:clarify. Hopefully any misunderstanding is already put aside. I did spend
>:a lot of time focusing that question, and I find all the responses, really
>:valuable. They frame (and develop!) nicely the direction I had a vague
>:notion I was headed in, controlling variable namespace in C. But first, I
>:need some time to really soak up the answers to my last question! :-)
>:
>:// George
>
> Well, I'm a little confused by that comment because I would find it
> hard to characterize anyone's work as plagiarism on my own since I
> give my code away free to all comers :-). But, for the record, I was
> only considering things in terms of questions rather than any other way.
>
> -Matt
Hi Matt, ...then I must be confused! :) ...since I didn't make any
optimization, only post your patch and discuss what it did, then
On Thu, Nov 11, 2004 at 12:18:51PM -0800, Matthew Dillon wrote:
> Well, George... in fact I've already made precisely the optimization
> you thought would clean up the code a few days ago. It's part of my
> VFS patchset.
>
> Now is that a coincidence or not?
I took that as a polite way of saying we must have both come up with the
same optimization or maybe you've just posted my patch as your own. So,
now I really don't understand what you where saying and asking there.
But, sorry for the misunderstanding.
// George
--
George Georgalis, systems architect, administrator Linux BSD IXOYE
http://galis.org/george/ cell:646-331-2027 mailto:george@galis.org