“So leave locking to the pro's. They _also_ got it wrong, but they got it wrong several years ago, and fixed up their sh*t.”
Code review: Anonymous reviewer on Patch to an operating system kernel
Johan de Groot
74 published quotes. Member since October 2026.
“The fact is, any time anybody makes up a new locking mechanism, THEY ALWAYS GET IT WRONG. Don't do it.”
Code review: Anonymous reviewer on Patch to an operating system kernel
“there really is *not* a highly coveted prize for having the most different indentation in the fewest possible lines of code!”
Code review: Anonymous reviewer on Patch to an operating system kernel
“Code can't look this bad and still be fine.”
Code review: Anonymous reviewer on Patch to an operating system kernel
“I hate code that has #ifdef's. It's a major design mistake, and shows that the person who coded it didn't think of it as _one_ problem, but as two.”
Code review: Anonymous reviewer on Patch to an operating system kernel
“AND USING VLA'S IS ACTIVELY STUPID! It generates much more code, and much _slower_ code (and more fragile code), than just using a fixed key size would have done.”
Code review: Anonymous reviewer on Patch to an operating system kernel
“The above code is sh*t, and it generates shit code. It looks bad, and there's no reason for it.”
Code review: Anonymous reviewer on Pull request to an operating system kernel
“But legal reasons do not make for good technology, or good patches that I should apply.”
Code review: Anonymous reviewer on Patch to an operating system kernel
“And by "garbage" I really mean it. This is stuff that nobody should ever send me, never mind late in a merge window.”
Code review: Anonymous reviewer on Pull request to an operating system kernel
“NAK NAK NAK NAK! QAK! HAK! Crap code! Stop adding undocumented interfaces. Just stop it. Now. Geeze.”
Code review: Anonymous reviewer on Patch to an operating system kernel
“I interpret this as evidence that the PI is an excellent networker but that he does not have sufficient required scientific expertise and capacity to successfully execute the project.”
Peer review: Anonymous reviewer on Grant proposal
“Maybe this paper could be suitable for a journal with readers in statistical genetics or medical mathematics, if such journals exist.”
Peer review: Anonymous reviewer on Manuscript under review
“I cannot imagine any physician or scientist who has a job, who will have the time to read this paper.”
Peer review: Anonymous reviewer on Manuscript under review, A journal in medicine
“Finally, it is impossible for the reader to keep track of the hundreds (thousands?) of acronyms in the paper. If there ever is an award for most acronyms in a paper, this one would win it hands down.”
Peer review: Anonymous reviewer on Manuscript under review
“The arguments in the paper are compelling but not convincing.”
Peer review: Anonymous reviewer on Manuscript under review
“the authors seem to be reinventing the wheel and a flat tire to go along with it.”
Peer review: Anonymous reviewer on Manuscript under review
“Your model is a black hole from which no light escapes.”
Peer review: Anonymous reviewer on Manuscript under review
“The author writes like a drunken after-dinner speaker.”
Peer review: Anonymous reviewer on Manuscript under review, A journal in the social sciences
“Season’s Greetings! I apologise for my slow response but a roast goose prevented me from answering emails for a few days.”
Peer review: Anonymous reviewer on Manuscript under review, A journal in microbiology
“The lack of negative controls … results in the authors being lost in the funhouse. Unfortunately, I do not think they even realize this.”
Peer review: Anonymous reviewer on Manuscript under review, A journal in microbiology