> Заголовок, как будто убийца KVM вышел. Кто-нить хоть в код то смотрел?
> Явно пацанчик просто учится. Там полный фарш: сравнения unsigned с -1, кривые
> "кроссплатформенные" дефайны, которые по-разному ведут себя на винде и линуксах, кривые
> спецификаторы форматов в printf, какие-то дикие касты несовместимых типов, ворнинги компилятора
> ваще игнорируются, они ж для слабаков...
> Про статический анализ разработчик явно не слышал ни разу.
> Максимум можно для экспериментов использовать как заготовку для какого-то своего инструмента
> и понимания принципов работы гипервизоров, не более того.Your argument is really stupid and the fact that you don't even understand why these warnings are ignored _SPECIFICALLY_ ON Microsoft Compiler (CL) makes it a lot more ignorant and fundamentally wrong and thus stupid. The Microsoft Compiler throws spurious warnings that are simply harmless, the warnings are even substandard, some of which are strict standard compliant, yet still the NTDDK also ignores the same warnings (the native one!), "Wild cast of incompatible types", lol, please go and understand the incompatible types meaning in C first, then argue about it. So that's one thing. I'd assume that you looked at the travis build but haven't even looked at how these warnings come from, right? You're stupid.
Another thing is that you're saying it can be used to learn from only, that's also one stupid argument and is not backed by ANY facts in the slightest, where are your premises? it's actually EXTREMELY stable and has been stressed tested under both Windows and Linux, and it has been used in other productivity software that I won't go through here, and that proves that it is extensible and stable. So, frankly, I'd assume you tried to use it and failed, that's what made you argue about this, so get over it and admit your failure, asking for help via e-mail or github issues is not embarassing, don't worry, nobody cares.
So, quite frankly, your argument is shit, and it's made even more shit by the fact that you have provided 0 premises to back them up.
Sure, I wouldn't argue that I did some mistakes with it, some are horrible, but still, I always fix them immediately when I notice, but still, that doesn't validate your arguments.
