Re^10: capturing output of system call inside a thread

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.

Comment on Re^10: capturing output of system call inside a thread

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^11: capturing output of system call inside a thread by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Sep 04, 2015 at 07:22 UTC
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!	[reply]
Re^12: capturing output of system call inside a thread by 1nickt (Canon) on Sep 04, 2015 at 12:07 UTC
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.	[reply]
Re^13: capturing output of system call inside a thread by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Sep 04, 2015 at 12:50 UTC
this will be the last time there is any "interjection" from me Good. Perhaps the OP will come back (now this pointless and completely unnecessary subthread is (hopefully) finally done with) and he and I can get back to solving his problem that is currently only half answered. Most likely because he couldn't be bothered to fight his way through the noise you created. 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!	[reply]