"Open letter" to jake

[Sarah Wren]

Give it up. You do not have the time.

[jacob navia]

Le 27/05/12 12:26, Sarah Wren a écrit :

> Give it up. You do not have the time.
>
>

Hi "Sarah"

I am profoundly touched by your interest in the time I have.

Thanks a lot but I have to confess you something: I decide
what do I do with my time.

Pathetic...

"Jake"

[Sarah Wren]

"jacob navia" <ja...@spamsink.net> wrote in message
news:jpu1l8$ubn$1...@speranza.aioe.org...

I am or you are? Explain.

[Sarah Wren]

"jacob navia" <ja...@spamsink.net> wrote in message
news:jpu1l8$ubn$1...@speranza.aioe.org...

> Le 27/05/12 12:26, Sarah Wren a écrit :
>> Give it up. You do not have the time.
>>
>>
> Hi "Sarah"
>
> I am profoundly touched by your interest in the time I have.

I'll tell Jesus about that. Remember him? He died for your sins.

>
> Thanks a lot but I have to confess you something:

You mistake me for your priest.

> I decide
> what do I do with my time.

That is a lie, and you know it.

[Sarah Wren]

"jacob navia" <ja...@spamsink.net> wrote in message
news:jpu1l8$ubn$1...@speranza.aioe.org...

I see you flail wildly. That said, I see you noted in a book as some stupid
fuck that helped another write a book!? You would not be happy if I offered
you a job, and I wouldn't do that even if I had the budget.

I am bad at math. (I reject the second chapter of compiler books). I do a
little and then some more, isn't that the hardest part? Don't you want to be
that and don't I fuck up your plans of such celebrity at every step. I said
5 years. It's been 2 now or 3? But you were all on about the imminence of
your inventions. Did you invent anything? Don't come back at me and say
"read my paper", I read it. It would cost you a lot of money for me to
critique, but of course I won't do that.

Are you playing on the lost scribes? What did you invent Mr. Navia?
(rhetorical).

I am suggesting that maybe if you stop "shooting from the hip" (yes, at your
age), well I'm not suggesting that at all, because of course I am much older
and wiser than your. Save for that, you can't put leggos together in a
meanigful way, but I, of course, can...

Anyway, what the fuck are you crying about Jacob Navia? You got your name in
a book. What the fuck else you want? Hmm?

[Keith Thompson]

"Sarah Wren" <sw...@ameritech.net> writes:
[...]

*plonk*

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks...@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Will write code for food.
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <ln4nqyi...@nuthaus.mib.org>,

Keith Thompson <ks...@mib.org> wrote:
>"Sarah Wren" <sw...@ameritech.net> writes:
>[...]
>
>*plonk*

Keith, Keith, Keith...

How many times I gotta tell ya? Like Fight Club, ya don't *talk* about yer
killfile - or who's in it or who's not in it. Spoils the whole effect.

--
> No, I haven't, that's why I'm asking questions. If you won't help me,
> why don't you just go find your lost manhood elsewhere.

CLC in a nutshell.

[Quentin Pope]

What puzzles me is the thinking behind Mr Navia's obsession with re-
inventing C++ badly.

Judging from his behavior in this group, he is mainly interested in
making as much money for himself as possible. Maybe he has a secret
patent on his "containers library" and his hope is to get it standardized
then sue other compiler vendors? It's a delusional plan, but his posts in
this group suggest he is a delusional person in many respects.

Or maybe it's just an eccentric hobby for him.

//QP

[Eric Sosman]

On 5/30/2012 2:15 PM, Quentin Pope wrote:
> [... stupid strawman smear ...]
> //QP

Quickly Plonked.

--
Eric Sosman
eso...@ieee-dot-org.invalid

[James Kuyper]

On 05/30/2012 02:15 PM, Quentin Pope wrote:
...

> What puzzles me is the thinking behind Mr Navia's obsession with re-
> inventing C++ badly.

I have to agree.

> Judging from his behavior in this group, he is mainly interested in

> making as much money for himself as possible. ...

I've seen no evidence to support that judgment. His compiler is
available free to non-commercial users. Others have occasionally talked
about such things as the responsibilities he bears toward his paying
customers - to which he has responded by vehemently denying having any
paying customers. I pointed out that this logically implies that he has
never actually succeeded in convincing anybody to actually pay for a
commercial license. He responded with scatology and an assertion that he
does have customers, but failed to address the issue of whether or not
he has any paying customers. I assume that he does have some paying
customers, and was exaggerating when he claimed to have none.

> Or maybe it's just an eccentric hobby for him.

I think he honestly considers the language compiled by lcc-win to be an
improvement over both C and C++, and is promoting it for that reason,
and not for his own monetary advantage.

[jacob navia]

Le 30/05/12 21:46, James Kuyper a écrit :

> I've seen no evidence to support that judgment. His compiler is
> available free to non-commercial users. Others have occasionally talked
> about such things as the responsibilities he bears toward his paying
> customers - to which he has responded by vehemently denying having any
> paying customers. I pointed out that this logically implies that he has
> never actually succeeded in convincing anybody to actually pay for a
> commercial license. He responded with scatology and an assertion that he
> does have customers, but failed to address the issue of whether or not
> he has any paying customers. I assume that he does have some paying
> customers, and was exaggerating when he claimed to have none.

I do not see any point in giving to this group a detailed list of my
customers so that they can start sending them email messages denigrating
me, telling them lies, and trying to destroy me as they try in this
group to destroy me.

This "Sarah Wren" troll speaks about me in the worst terms, but you
do not deemed necesssary to answer that, why would you?

It is just OK to insult jacob navia, the "evil doer". since he
is not GNU, refuses to pass to C++ and insists that C is a worthwhile
programming language.

I am not reinventing C++. I am proving that C is as good as C++
to program a container library, and I am proving it by doing it,
not just speaking about it.

[Noob]

Stefan Ram wrote:

> If you have some kind of "competition", then it's called "Objective-C"

Thanks to the Apple lemmings. Meaning the popularity of Objective-C
is just a fad.

[Keith Thompson]

Quentin Pope <qp1...@hotmail.NOSPAM.com> writes:
[...]

> What puzzles me is the thinking behind Mr Navia's obsession with re-
> inventing C++ badly.

[...]

Quentin, even assuming there's some validity to what you write
about jacob, you lose a great deal of credibility by posting it as
a followup to an obvious troll.

(Not that your thoughts about jacob were either particularly credible
or relevant here in the first place.)

[Malcolm McLean]

בתאריך יום רביעי, 30 במאי 2012 20:46:04 UTC+1, מאת James Kuyper:

>
> I think he honestly considers the language compiled by lcc-win to be an
> improvement over both C and C++, and is promoting it for that reason,
> and not for his own monetary advantage.
>

I think Jacob likes to eat occasionally. Maybe even likes the odd beer. So he's decided to do that by selling compilers. The problem is, he has to compete with high quality free offerings, even from Microsoft. So one option is to offer extensions to the language that no-one else has. Then commercial users will possibly pay for a licence, and he can have those beers.
The extensions don't have to be better than standard C in any absolute sense. They just have to offer an advantage to enough people to form a customer base, for Jacob's strategy to be reasonable.

[James Kuyper]

On 05/31/2012 01:03 AM, Malcolm McLean wrote:
...

> I think Jacob likes to eat occasionally. Maybe even likes the odd
> beer. So he's decided to do that by selling compilers. The problem
> is, he has to compete with high quality free offerings, even from
> Microsoft. So one option is to offer extensions to the language that
> no-one else has. Then commercial users will possibly pay for a
> licence, and he can have those beers. The extensions don't have to be
> better than standard C in any absolute sense. They just have to offer
> an advantage to enough people to form a customer base, for Jacob's
> strategy to be reasonable.

What you're suggesting is called "niche marketing", and it can be
profitable, but only if the niche you're trying to exploit is big
enough. Producing random extensions in the vague hopes that someone
might like them would be a good way to go broke fast. Possibly that is
exactly what is going on, which would explain his foul moods, but I
don't think so. The fact that he's still in business implies that he's
meeting at least some people's needs; of course, the fact that it has
remained a one-man operation for so long implies an upper limit on how
profitable the business has been.

I don't get the impression that jacob is targeting any specific niche;
he seems to believe that everyone should want to use his extensions. He
could be lying, but I think he honestly believes that.
--
James Kuyper

[Quentin Pope]

On Wed, 30 May 2012 15:06:21 -0700, Keith Thompson wrote:
> Quentin Pope <qp1...@hotmail.NOSPAM.com> writes: [...]
>> What puzzles me is the thinking behind Mr Navia's obsession with re-
>> inventing C++ badly.
> [...]
>
> Quentin, even assuming there's some validity to what you write about
> jacob, you lose a great deal of credibility by posting it as a followup
> to an obvious troll.
>
> (Not that your thoughts about jacob were either particularly credible or
> relevant here in the first place.)

Keith

A fair point. In fact I was hoping to steer the thread, albeit a thread
started with a trollish post, into a more constructive direction.

I'm genuinely interested to understand Mr Navia's motivations. He is
obviously an intelligent person, yet sometimes he comes across as someone
living in an alternate reality, so delusional is his view of his own role
in the development of C.

It's similar to the way a large number of otherwise sensible and
reasonable people claim to believe in christianity or other religious
hocus-pocus. I find that willful self-delusion is also fascinating to
study.

//QP

[Keith Thompson]

Quentin Pope <qp1...@hotmail.NOSPAM.com> writes:
[...]

> A fair point. In fact I was hoping to steer the thread, albeit a thread
> started with a trollish post, into a more constructive direction.
>
> I'm genuinely interested to understand Mr Navia's motivations. He is
> obviously an intelligent person, yet sometimes he comes across as someone
> living in an alternate reality, so delusional is his view of his own role
> in the development of C.

Any reasonable person would take that as a personal insult. I have
to seriously doubt that you're trying to elicit information.

> It's similar to the way a large number of otherwise sensible and
> reasonable people claim to believe in christianity or other religious
> hocus-pocus. I find that willful self-delusion is also fascinating to
> study.

I am now nearly certain that you're not trying to engage in any kind
of constructive discussion -- or, if you are, that you're very bad
at it.

My suggestion: Take a few minutes to step away from your keyboard
and consider whether insulting people's deeply held beliefs on a
topic that has absolutely nothing to do with C can possibly lead
to anything useful. (I have no objection to discussing religion,
but this is not the place for it.)

Are you trying to engage in constructive discussion, or are you
just showing off how reasonable you think you are?

(I may have opinions on some or all of the points you raise; I
will not discuss them here, nor will I continue this discussion
for much longer.)