[147410] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: [Cryptography] encoding formats should not be committee'ized
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (James A. Donald)
Tue Oct 1 13:35:26 2013
X-Original-To: cryptography@metzdowd.com
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2013 02:28:50 +1000
From: "James A. Donald" <jamesd@echeque.com>
To: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>,
"cryptography@metzdowd.com" <cryptography@metzdowd.com>
In-Reply-To: <2A0EFB9C05D0164E98F19BB0AF3708C711D6DEB588@USMBX1.msg.corp.akamai.com>
Reply-To: jamesd@echeque.com
Errors-To: cryptography-bounces+crypto.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@metzdowd.com
On 2013-10-01 22:08, Salz, Rich wrote:
>> Further, google is unhappy that too-clever-code gives too-clever programmers too much power, and has prohibited its employees from ever doing something like protobufs again.
> Got any documentation for this assertion?
The google style guide prohibits too-clever code. protobufs and gmock
is too-clever code.
_______________________________________________
The cryptography mailing list
cryptography@metzdowd.com
http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
