???

[Brian Gladman]

Joerg Arndt wrote:

> * NightStrike <nightstrike at gmail.com> [Jun 02. 2008 16:17]:
>> Replying off-list
> 
> Well, you didn't.

Yes, he made a mistake, one that you are evidently not prepared to 
forgive since you insist on responding to a message not intended for 
you.  Such disrespect seems to be the norm here (both ways).

>> so I thought I'd email you.  Right now, the
>> "Gcc on Win64" team consists of myself, and Kai (Kai does 99.999% of
>> the coding work).  What can we do to get to a viable solution for GCC
>> on this platform?  How can we work with Torbjorn to get GMP fixed?
> 
> ***Again*** a suggestion the GMP is "broken".
> Could you kindly explain what you consider broken?

 From _his_ perspective it is broken because it doesn't work on win64 
systems.  From _your_ persepctive it is not broken.  These are his and 
your _opinions_, they are not facts.

The only fact here is that Torbjorn's 'proper' GMP doesn't work on win64 
systems, something that he has admitted.  Moreover he has been very 
honest about the very low priority he attaches to getting GMP to work on 
win64.  This is hardly a surprise given his intense dislike for 
Microsoft and users of Microsoft products.

As a Windows user I have a total disinterest in his position on all of 
this.  If he wants to see the GMP community split into Windows friendly 
and Windows unfriendly components, as he evidently does, that's fine 
with me, albeit not the decision that I would take.

But what this means is that those who want GMP to have a long term 
future on Windows have _no_option_ but to fork GMP.

This should please the zealots here as they won't have to interact with 
Windows users at all.

However, the more thoughtful people on this list, those who see the 
dangers of such a split, have good reason to fear the wider damage that 
this might easily cause.

But when people shout at each other 'like angry ghosts passing in the 
night', reason and common sense are the very first things to suffer.

    Brian Gladman