[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: Length-unaware sorting algorithm
- From: Peter Aronoff <telemachus@...>
- Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 14:43:25 -0400
Martin <email@example.com> wrote:
> You're the second person who mentions this. I have no intention to raise
> "men are stronger and smarter than women!11" (or wymen?) flame. This is
> just silly and boring, especially in such list. For me this reaction
> looks like oversensitivity and exploitable via smart trolling. Anyone may
> have their own point of view.
I’ll be the third. Your intention matters very little. What matters far
more is the effect of your words. Using ‘any CS girl can implement it’ as
a measure of how easy something is is certainly sexist in effect.
> Lua is great, some algorithms are sexy in imagination and implementation
> (as some girls). No offense.
I have no idea what this says, but here’s a tip: if you find yourself
writing “no offense”, something’s gone wrong. You probably need to remove
whatever caused you to add that, and then you can drop the (usually false)
addition of “no offense”.
We have not been faced with the need to satisfy someone else's
requirements, and for this freedom we are grateful.
Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson, The UNIX Time-Sharing System