Don't worry, my code is present on more devices than grsecurity. I don't need personal validation from a random person on Twitter ;)
-
-
Great, then don't get too heated. I mean no disrespect when I state that your comments about testing show lack of experience
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @lazytyped @marcan42 and
(or you have experience, but you are trying to pursue an agenda, which is IMHO a bit worse, but understandable)
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @lazytyped @bleidl and
arguments that ppl just came to exactly same solution ∗after∗ having read someone else's are disturbing
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @bsdaemon @lazytyped and
We're talking about things like noticing a particular random value isn't properly random due to a bug and fixing it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
*Nobody* has read *all* of grsecurity. The person who found that bug had *no clue* it was fixed in grsec too. (the non-grsec fix was better)
4 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
I can accept that as true. But it is fixed there. It is been read. Credits must be given.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
That's not how attribution works. If you independently come up with an idea, you don't have to give credit to someone else.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
I'm pretty sure thousands of developers have written
#define MAX(a,b) ((a)>(b)?(a):(b)) before me, and I don't have to give credit to them.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
That macro has side effects, don't use it. And you're clearly now spiraling into an agenda
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Replying to @lazytyped @bsdaemon and
Yes, I know it doubly evaluates the arguments; it's an example. What agenda?
6:52 AM - 5 Jun 2017
0 replies
0 retweets
0 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.