Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
No such thing as a small change
 
PerlMonks  

Re^9: capturing output of system call inside a thread

by BrowserUk (Pope)
on Sep 03, 2015 at 23:20 UTC ( #1140944=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^8: capturing output of system call inside a thread
in thread capturing output of system call inside a thread

I doubt anyone can teach you anything. Especially not what a sense of humour is!

I was gonna let this slide; but f*** it. You need to learn a lesson.

There is nothing funny in your post; unless you consider ignorance, funny.


With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". I knew I was on the right track :)
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
I'm with torvalds on this Agile (and TDD) debunked I told'em LLVM was the way to go. But did they listen!
  • Comment on Re^9: capturing output of system call inside a thread

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^10: capturing output of system call inside a thread
by 1nickt (Abbot) on Sep 04, 2015 at 01:00 UTC

    Well yes, of course ignorance is funny. Consider the classic gag in everything from Buster Keaton, to Tom and Jerry, to Clouseau and Kato ... the whole point is that neither of them know that there's another guy around the corner, but the audience does. That's why it's funny when they both surprise each other.

    In my post that you found so offensive, I was poking fun at the fact that you and the OP had gone back and forth a bunch of times without getting what the other was saying, even though it appeared clear on both sides to me.

    Some people just can't be the butt of a joke. Noted.

    The way forward always starts with a minimal test.

      Did it ever cross your mind that maybe I was trying to make a point to the OP? Trying to draw out the distinction between a thread and a process perhaps?

      Your (at best) puerile interjection in an exploratory, and perfectly polite, subthread was unnecessary, unwarranted, and unhelpful.

      And you continuing to try and wrap your puerility as humour is just sad.


      With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
      Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
      "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". I knew I was on the right track :)
      In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
      I'm with torvalds on this Agile (and TDD) debunked I told'em LLVM was the way to go. But did they listen!

        Since you asked . . . it not only crossed my mind, but was quite plain, that you were "trying to draw out the distinction between a thread and a process" -- by being pedantic and deliberately obtuse about the OP's language.

        He used quotation marks to indicate that he didn't mean a formal process - twice! - and explained himself clearly enough that several other monks, and even I, were able to understand his question and follow-up remarks. I'm sure you had, also.

        The original motivation for my post was to bring the question and answer together. I would have just said something like "answer his damn question already," but I took into account your prickliness and modified what I was going to say to (a) broaden the scope and include the OP's failure to really answer your questions; and (b) wrap the post in light-heartedness by use of smilies, "Geez" and other cues. I also upvoted the post in which you finally provided the answer. None of this could apparently prevent you from feeling slighted and wronged and outraged.

        Well, have fun with that, and have no fear -- this will be the last time there is any "interjection" from me: in future when I see you haranguing someone because they haven't asked for your knowledge in an acceptable way, I'll leave you to it. I am no Sisyphus.

        The way forward always starts with a minimal test.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://1140944]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others musing on the Monastery: (4)
As of 2019-07-17 02:26 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found

    Notices?