> A hash table that compares hashes instead of keys, doesn't support deletion, doesn't distribute keys evenly etc.
I agree, that implementation is definitely flawed. Probably the author do not consider that important a proper hashtable.
> looks like the immature and arrogant opinion of someone completely unaware of his ignorance.
This is what I'm referring to when I say "harsh" criticism. Maybe he is wrong, but I think there are better ways of saying it: "Hey, maybe a proper hashtable is not that easy.. have you consider [insert here improvement proposal]?"
> I would hate to be the creator of Hare and get so much crap for simply daring to exist.
Certainly.
Since the announce of Hare I've seen __too__ much criticism IMHO.
I think the authors have stated clearly the intentions and the features of the language: They just want a slightly better C. Of course you may not like it, but no need to be that harsh...
I agree, that implementation is definitely flawed. Probably the author do not consider that important a proper hashtable.
> looks like the immature and arrogant opinion of someone completely unaware of his ignorance.
This is what I'm referring to when I say "harsh" criticism. Maybe he is wrong, but I think there are better ways of saying it: "Hey, maybe a proper hashtable is not that easy.. have you consider [insert here improvement proposal]?"