From owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org  Thu Jun 25 08:02:03 2009
Return-Path: <owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org>
X-Original-To: sc22wg5-dom7
Delivered-To: sc22wg5-dom7@www2.open-std.org
Received: by www2.open-std.org (Postfix, from userid 521)
	id B3E78C4596C; Thu, 25 Jun 2009 08:02:03 +0200 (CET DST)
X-Original-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org
Delivered-To: sc22wg5@open-std.org
Received: from ns.nag-j.co.jp (218-42-159-107.cust.bit-drive.ne.jp [218.42.159.107])
	by www2.open-std.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 700E5C3BB09
	for <sc22wg5@open-std.org>; Thu, 25 Jun 2009 08:01:37 +0200 (CET DST)
Received: from 218-42-159-108.cust.bit-drive.ne.jp ([218.42.159.108] helo=[127.0.0.1])
	by ns.nag-j.co.jp with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
	id 1MJi1W-0005lk-GE
	for sc22wg5@open-std.org; Thu, 25 Jun 2009 15:01:26 +0900
Message-ID: <4A4312C7.2020500@nag-j.co.jp>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 15:01:43 +0900
From: Malcolm Cohen <malcolm@nag-j.co.jp>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 3.0a1pre (Windows/2008022014)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: sc22wg5 <sc22wg5@open-std.org>
Subject: Re: [ukfortran] (SC22WG5.4028) (j3.2006)     LOCK/UNLOCK question
References: <4A38A3BB.9090208@nag-j.co.jp><4A38B917.8080202@llnl.gov>	<4A391682.8060208@cray.com>	<061720091627.18164.4A39196C000C05A4000046F422230703729B0A02D29B9B0EBF02019C050C079D0B020A08D2050C070B@att.net>	<4A3930E3.8070505@cray.com>	<061720091851.25112.4A393B4100015BA20000621822228869349B0A02D29B9B0EBF02019C050C079D0B020A08D2050C070B@att.net>	<4A397E50.9010406@nag-j.co.jp>	<Prayer.1.3.1.0906221229130.26720@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk>	<4A3F9897.8010103@llnl.gov>	<4A3FA25D.1050507@cray.com>	<4A3FF921.9070703@llnl.gov>	<20090622221248.1FEF4C178E5@www2.open-std.org>	<20090623084602.88A3EC178E5@www2.open-std.org>	<20090624020300.8EE77C178E5@www2.open-std.org>	<20090625033421.31AAEC3BB09@www2.open-std.org> <20090625041351.94A5AC3BB09@www2.open-std.org>
In-Reply-To: <20090625041351.94A5AC3BB09@www2.open-std.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-sc22wg5@open-std.org
Precedence: bulk



Bill Long wrote:
> I certainly never even thought of Nick in the class of "hapless 
> beginners", nor in the class of "really good programmers".  I don't 
> have enough experience to put him in any level.  I'm stunned that 
> anyone would have come to this conclusion.
You message replied to Nick's complaints of difficulty, and followed 
Van's tale of finding it incredibly difficult to get right.  By saying 
that only some hapless beginners have trouble with these it is difficult 
to avoid any conclusion but that you wish to express extreme disrespect 
for their abilities and opinions.
>
>
> What I do object to is Nick's frequent declarations that other 
> programmers are hopeless and incompetent.

I am truly surprised that you read his statements about certain things 
being extremely difficult - so difficult that even the experts have 
trouble with them - as being about other programmers' competency at all.

> This is what I meant by "imperious condescension", which I thought 
> would be obvious to everyone.
Quite the reverse in fact.

Nick can speak for himself, but when he says that some facility is
   "error-prone even for the experts"
there is no doubt in my mind that he is meaning exactly what he has written.

I will happily write it myself:
   "Low level parallel facilities are error-prone even for the experts."

> I think it is generally wrong based on my experience, and I think that 
> is what is out of place on an international mailing list.

I think you have seriously misunderstood his message and owe him an apology.

Cheers,
-- 
............................Malcolm Cohen, Nihon NAG, Tokyo.


