This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-talk@cygwin.com
mailing list for the cygwin project.
Re: Serious performance problems (malloc related?)
- From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-no-personal-reply-please at cygwin dot com>
- To: Talk Amongst Yourselves <cygwin-talk at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 22:12:16 -0400
- Subject: Re: Serious performance problems (malloc related?)
- References: <20050531213812.GC9672@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <20050531233916.62E6213C9D9@cgf.cx>
- Reply-to: Talk Amongst Yourselves <cygwin-talk at cygwin dot com>
- Reply-to: cygwin-talk at cygwin dot com
On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 06:39:03PM -0500, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
>>You got that right. Imagine what would happen if we were to get too
>>deeply into my behavioral problems.
>
>Better yet, imagine what would happen if you suddenly decided to behave
>in a mature and at least semi-professional manner.
Yeah, there's certainly no fun there.
>>My bed wetting might return and then I'd have to add my wife's name to
>>the 99.99% of the people in the cygwin community who hate my guts.
>
>I think that one's called a "persecution complex".
That's #3 today for the psychological assessments. That may be a daily
record for you.
>Nobody in the Cygwin community hates you Chris. I certainly don't. I
>just want you to behave yourself, much like any sixth-grader is able
>and expected to do.
Gee, I have to stop feeding you straight lines. You really hit that
one out of the park!
>>You know I'd expect a lot more sympathy from someone who was sincerely
>>trying to help...
>
>You expect sympathy, but refuse to give any? Interesting.
You really do have my sympathy Gary. I'm truly sorry that I haven't
made that clear before. And, believe it or not, I say this with no
humorous intent. I really mean it.
>>Btw, I think that's #2 for the term "behavioral problems". We're
>>currently stalled at 5 for the term "flame-off".
>
>Does counting the number of times I use particular terms or phrases
>somehow help you cope with your issues, Chris?
Yes. It does. Categorizing someone's needs to compulsively repeat
observations really does help me. So, I guess you really are helping me
after all. In your own way.
On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 10:40:21AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>So, he (Gary) was assuming that a message that you sent at 9AM EDT on
>Thursday was going to see some sort of harsh response more than twelve
>hours later.
On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 06:39:03PM -0500, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
>This seems very similar to how you were (are?) so enamored with the
>number of hours between the time somebody posted a question and the
>time I posted a response.
cgf