piscisaureus

> However I'm now in situations where the world is divided and asking questions (in order to make my own mind up) is considered some kind of admission of guilt for being part of the "other". For example: Asking someone why they think immigration is good/bad. If it's a belief they hold, I'm interested in knowing the thought process and making my own conclusions based on something I might not have known. But the act of asking the question makes the person, who may not have put too much original thinking in; quite defensive.

It may be a matter of knowing when to stop. My personal experience is that most people will try to answer even sensitive questions when you approach them with genuine interest and make some effort to formulate questions in a way that doesn't imply some sort of value judgement. If this is difficult, just be explicit and explicitly say you're not trying to judge or offend them.

Sure enough, you'll hear people make an argument that you find unconvincing, or they may not answer the exact question that you asked, and some people will even admit they don't know why they believe something. When that happens, you'll have to accept that as their answer (and draw your own conclusions in silence).

People do get hostile when you keep "nagging" - asking more and more questions - when it's clear that they aren't interested in the subject or haven't thought about it much. To the other person it feels like you're either trying to make them feel stupid or change their mind. And you're getting none the wiser anyway because those who do not get offended will just make up their "reasons" on the spot.

Obviously avoid the mistake to ask someone for their opinion, and then immediately returning the "favor" by giving your opinion on the matter.

This is the first time I've heard about a language called C--, thank you for that.

The concept is not so unique as you might think tho; the more commonly used term is "tail call".

Ecma-402 support (the 'Intl' object, locale dependent number and date formatting, etc.) requires linking with the ICU library.

We expect to support that in a future release.

Admittedly I didn't actually read the mailing list discussion. It's entirely possible that The Register made up a big drama where there was none.

I understand that reviewing 27k LoC is daunting and probably not very fun.

But unlike most patches that draw a similar response it's not a narrowly useful patch that mostly serves the submitter. Proper NTFS support benefits a large proportion of Linux users (the jab from the article that there are more advanced file systems out there seems out of place; there are no signs that windows is about to switch its default FS to something else).

Additionally this code has been used in production for years now (e.g. my 2015 router runs the closed source version of this driver in order to support NTFS formatted external drives) so most likely a lot of quality issues have already been found and addressed.

So I feel it's a bit unreasonable to respond with so much negativity to this contribution.

If PayPal says it is not a security issue, the researcher should just publish the details of how it's done.