Re: Not going beyond symbolic links

[Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>]

On Fri, 8 Aug 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> 
> Seeing that you applied my arch/powerpc/.gitignore patch to the kernel
> (Yaay, I now have a short-log entry in the kernel history ;-), you have
> seen the message with some benchmarks I am replying to as well?

Yes, I just felt that closed the discussion.

I only brought up the issue in the first place because I worried about the 
performance impact. And I was unhappy about how that worry was dismissed 
as being less important than some specious "correctness" issue (for the 
last 3+ years, performance has mattered a _lot_, and the claimed big 
"correctness" issue has not mattered one whit).

The thing is, sometimes "pi = 3.14" is (a) infinitely faster than the 
"correct" answer and (b) the difference between the "correct" and the 
"wrong" answer is meaningless. And this is why I get upset when somebody 
dismisses performance issues based on "correctness".

The thing is, some specious value of "correctness" is often irrelevant 
because it doesn't matter. While performance almost _always_ matters. And 
I absolutely _detest_ the fact that people so often dismiss performance 
concerns so readily.

But once the performance numbers are in and they don't show any issues, I 
think that simply settles the original query, and I'm happy.

		Linus