...You know, the person who copy-pastes code off the web, until something compiles and passes through the minimal test. In the open source world, the person who responds to bug reports with "it works on my machine, so I'm closing this bug report as invalid".
Which is why I gave up on open source development. Often some dumb Reddit bros with a Linux shell for social skills.
And which is why I do not care how
popular Linux (or any open source project) is, only how civilized/sane/rational the core developer community is.
It would be so nice if people were rational and cared more... but that's an utopia.
He made his bones writing code long before “the web” existed.
Which doesn't change the underlying personality type at all. If you wish, I'll amend my definition into "the person who has learned nothing in the last thirty years, because they believe they've done this long enough to know it all already".
I've met
many people like this, even in universities –– although I prefer to only interact with the ones who like learning and arguing rationally, and are not swayed by arguments from authority, and most importantly,
know and admit when they are beginners outside their domain of expertise.
Just so you know. He wrote a significant part of Windows
Ah, that explains a lot.
a lot of his code like Task manager and disk formatter are still on your computer many years later.
No, they aren't. The first and last Windows machine I ever had used Windows 98. Guess why? It just isn't a good OS at all. It is popular, but for reasons completely different to code quality or robustness.
I tihnk he has a video talking about his biggest commit was after he went through all of the windows source to add unicode support
Which is another thing Windows never got right. In particular, Unicode code points range from 0 to 1114111, inclusive. Windows' wide character support isn't unicode, it's actually UTF-16, and many Windows programs don't deal with code points 65536..1114111 correctly because of that or other related issues.
You know, because "65536 glyphs is enough to cater for all languages". Except it isn't.
LMAO at how insanely incorrect you are.
You have, with certainty asymptotically approaching 100%, used software he wrote. As others said, he wrote some significant parts of Windows.
You have, with certainty asymptotically approaching 100%, used software I've contributed to, so essentially used software I've "written".
Doesn't that make you insanely incorrect, by your own argument?
I know I've offended your Coding Guru, but fact is, a lot of popular code, open source or not, is utter crap because most developers just don't care about the engineering part enough. Things like robustness and security must be designed in, they cannot be added on top later on, yet most coders are absolutely fine with writing something that works, and leaving the "rest" –– like buffer overrun checks in C –– for "later".
These people work on both proprietary and open source code. They are common. They are successful, because the actual quality of their work product is unrelated to their popularity or career development. You are utterly, horribly misguided if you think their long careers or popularity of their work product is somehow an indicator of the quality or sanity of their work product: the world does not work that way. In essence, you are looking at the
brand the person has built, instead of the actual work product.
Shame on you.