suckless gets TOLD after inducing a licensing shitfest

"I feel bad that this whole discussion ended up being about
legal matters. Because some people seem unable to simply
copy-paste 200 lines of code when it does not have a
license, I put one in the Github repo.

I think I'm starting to understand __20h__'s "copy me if you
can", maybe it should be "copy me if you dare".

To be honest I feel a bit stupid putting a license on four
glorified while loops. I'm not sure what is the limit for
requiring a license, do we need to license awk one-liners
when we paste them on IRC? If not, what was the problem
with my repository. The four files provided as source are
really almost one-liners.

I wonder if the people who just complained about (lack of)
licensing are really concerned about it or are just of the
same kind of people that find it unacceptable to write
(x - 'a') in C.

Hopefully we can now talk about what I submitted.

Cheers,

-- mpu"

or are just of the
same kind of people that find it unacceptable to write
(x - 'a') in C.

Considering that I would complain about both, yes.

it unacceptable to write
(x - 'a') in C.

but that is not standard. alphabet characters can be non-sequential

>>3

but that is not standard. alphabet characters can be non-sequential

I propose that whenever we find a computing system that has non-sequential alphabet characters, we kill its creators, their immediate families (up to but not including cousins) and salt their land if they own any.

This will make the code effectively correct. If that's not enough, we can also send rotting horse heads to the C standard committee, sort of subtly hinting that they might want to include the part about sequential alphabet in.

>>3
Both POSIX 2001 and C11 mandate UTF-8.

>>5

Both POSIX 2001

But this is not true you kikecoon.

and C11

But this is not true you fucking sandnigger.

I AM DA STANDARDMAN
FUCK YOUR BITCH
ITS NOT X - 'a' IT'S TO_FUCKING_ALPHABETID (X)