Linus Torvalds on ...
16 April 2008
Linus Torvalds writes the Linux kernel, he also likes a good mailing list flamewar, not least because he has a very sarcasatic wit. Here he is, writing about various topics.
On fair use:
> When you start thinking that you have absolute control over the content or programs you produce, and that the rest of the worlds opinions doesn't matter, you're just _wrong_.
> Me, personally, I think the RIAA and the MPAA is a shithouse. They are immoral.
On virtualization:
> I think what you're seeing is virtualization proponents being absolutely _desperate_ for any reason to use virtualization.
On userspace binary drivers:
> No user-space ass-hattery here.
On turning off interrupt requests:
> You cannot have a generic kernel driver that doesn't know about the low- level hardware (not with current hardware - you could make the "shut the f*ck up" a generic thing if you designed hardware properly, but that simply does not exist in general right now).
On those arguing for userpace interrupt request handlers:
> You may be a bit simple. But I think it's more polite to call you "special". Or maybe just not very used to how hardware works.
On C++ :
> In fact, in Linux we did try C++ once already, back in 1992. It sucks. Trust me...
> C++ is a horrible language. It's made more horrible by the fact that a lot of substandard programmers use it, to the point where it's much much easier to generate total and utter crap with it. Quite frankly, even if the choice of C were to do nothing but keep the C++ programmers out, that in itself would be a huge reason to use C.
> So I'm sorry, but for something like git, where efficiency was a primary objective, the "advantages" of C++ is just a huge mistake. The fact that we also piss off people who cannot see that is just a big additional advantage.
On Linux Kernel version 2.6.19:
> It's one of those rare "perfect" kernels. So if it doesn't happen to compile with your config, you can rest easy knowing that it's all your own d*mn fault, and you should just fix your evil ways.
On Intel's inventions:
> The fact that ACPI was designed by a group of monkeys high on LSD, and is some of the worst designs in the industry obviously makes running it at _any_ point pretty damn ugly. And the fact that MB vendors don't test it with anything else than Windows (and sometimes you wonder whether they do even that) doesn't help.
> EFI is this other Intel brain-damage (the first one being ACPI). It's totally different from a normal BIOS, and was brought on by ia64, which never had a BIOS, of course. Sadly, Apple bought into the whole "BIOS bad, EFI good" hype, so we now have x86 machines with EFI as the native boot protocol.
On Apple OS X:
> OS X in some ways is actually worse than Windows to program for. Their file system is complete and utter crap, which is scary.
1 [Fake] Linus Torvalds says...
Posted at 10:09 p.m. on April 16, 2008
2 Andrew West says...
Whilst I have to admit Linus is a better programmer than I'll ever be you have to take some of this quotes in context. Particularly the C++ one. For context; http://emonk.debianuruguay.org/?p=42 His quote is in reply to someone surprised that GIT is written in C rather than C++. His ire at C++ seems to be; 1) OO is generally a bad idea C++ is a multi-paradigm language, OO/procedural or both take your pick. Actually the fact that it is multi-paradigm is usually one of the main criticisms of C++. 2) STL et al aren't really cross platform Maybe so but so far I haven't seen anything to this end.. and considering he's replying to a thread about GIT which only just works on Windows itself, well it doesn't seem that relevant a point.
I suppose from his point of view, once you strip out all the things that he dislikes about C++ (which you are free do to with the language) he's left with pretty much C anyway.
Posted at 10:42 p.m. on April 16, 2008
3 Brendan says...
Linus is a smart guy and good coder, but I have to seriously question anyone who believes that TABs are always 8 spaces.
Posted at 2:17 a.m. on April 18, 2008
4 Zeth says...
@Brendan indeed, we know that indentation should only ever be four spaces no tabs ;)
Posted at 10:12 a.m. on April 18, 2008
5 Brendan says...
@Zeth No, 2 spaces...errr, can it all! Let's just make use of actual tabs (t), and allow coders to define the width to be whatever makes their eyes/brains function (code) well. Problem solved? Considering the religious nature....I doubt it :-)
Cheers!
Posted at 6:06 a.m. on April 20, 2008
6 Steven says...
What? You don't worship at the throne of Torvalds? Good thing your not a Mac-fan, they kill those who do not worship at the throne of Steve Jobs.
Posted at 5:28 a.m. on June 2, 2008
7 Ronald says...
TAB is 8 spaces!!!
Wikipedia - Linus Torvalds has remarked that "Tabs are 8 characters, and thus indentations are also 8 characters. There are heretic movements that try to make indentations 4 (or even 2!) characters deep, and that is akin to trying to define the value of PI to be 3."
And on this he is REALLY RIGHT (tm)
Brendon ( I have just come upstairs from an argument ) with yet an other naive child with a PhD that believes that because he codes complex things 2 space is an appropriate tab break. Explaining yet again that naive solutions might require mad indented logic, but that _IF_ he knew anything he would be able to solve the problem with 8 space tabs.
RANT OVER
Posted at 12:24 p.m. on August 8, 2008
8 redevel0per says...
I would like to exchange links with your site commandline.org.uk Is this possible?
Posted at 10:40 a.m. on August 14, 2010