From ... From: Erik Naggum Subject: Re: CMU CL vs. CLISP? Date: 1999/07/28 Message-ID: <3142136699904733@naggum.no>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 506093574 References: <37947b4a.0@news.smith.edu> <933040775.19174@fire-int> <933112748.73829@fire-int> mail-copies-to: never Organization: Naggum Software; +47 8800 8879; http://www.naggum.no Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp * bernardp@cli.di.unipi.it (Pierpaolo Bernardi) | Reporting bugs to Franz has not worked for me in the past. how do you define "work" for reporting a bug? | Surely I hope that they fix this. If reporting bugs in ACL in this | newsgroup makes Franz fix them, I'll report here any new bug that I find. I wish you wouldn't. by reporting a bug to Franz Inc, you will learn whether it has already been reported and what the status is, you report a bug in the interest of having it fixed in your product, i.e., you have a reason the bug impacts you that is not mere frustration, and you let Franz Inc take part in your problems. all of this is constructive. by reporting it here, you would likely report bugs that have been fixed or have a known workaround, it is unlikely that the bug makes a business difference to you since USENET is not used to divulge business sensitive information, meaning that the bug would be a "disassociated bug" that it doesn't make any sense to provide workarounds for, you would most likely report the bug in a similarly hostile way to what you have done so far, which can only hurt Franz Inc for no reason at all, and finally, you get to decide what is a bug or not, and Franz Inc would have a hard time defending the expenditure of time and effort countering your misguided views of what constitutes bugs. all of this is destructive. you concede that it is, too, the way you formulate the above. your ardent defense of the CLISP implementation no matter what the criticism and your destructiveness towards other players in the Common Lisp market indicate that you are not driven by principle or by a desire to see good Common Lisp implementations, but by something else that ignores problems in one implementation and exaggerates problems in another. a "something else" that fits is "not being of a particularly rational mind". you may wish to alter your behavior so at least to give a different impression. #:Erik -- suppose we blasted all politicians into space. would the SETI project find even one of them?