ur mum's face might even be able to slice butter

you can't disagree with contracts that require such sequential processing.

ur mum's face often conduct arguments at a 2nd-grade level with figments of your imagination

sanitization of the sanitation.

you're still talking about input sanitation... further demonstrating my point that MOST DEVELOPERS DON'T UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE.

the tradeoffs are trivial... quality of signal vs everything else

you're wrong... codecs help with latency using throttling. you might argue, as many do, that the side effects and increased state data requirements aren't worth it... others would argue, as many do, that the decreased latency is vital.

i don't care either way, as i stated before i have no need for this, and if a need ever did arrive, like bruce said, i can just type "make on linux".

right now i broadcast 24/7 from my home full 720p with rich audio and there is about .3 seconds delay on the signal. all free codecs.

i'm talking about a specific issue: changing the finite state machine the drives the data model. when you have 1000 conditional triggers and they can all trigger 1000s of other conditional triggers, and now you want to drastically change a single reaching procedure which will conditionally trigger 1000s of triggers.

now you're asked to update that procedure drastically uprooting the order and correctness of all existing triggers... are you going to trace all those triggers to edit them, or would you rather have blocks of procedural code driving the entire process in one place?

who did regression testing on the regression test architects? i've built systems in and out of lead roles using both methodologies... the problem isn't your way won't work... it's that you don't understand any better ways to do the same thing easier with equal or better results in any measurable category. i do understand such ways.

how many CAN i have?

you are NOTHING

ur mum's face can chill the fuck out.

you are NOTHING

the sad part is, these exploit paths are pretty much everywhere... my coworkers and i used to have contests about who could get javascript executing on some arbitrary domain first while we had lunch... only stumped maybe a few times... almost never, with dozens and dozens of successes. of course our own domains were bulletproof. i'm still convinced perhaps we were the only developers at the time that respected the potential of the problem. now people are arguing against HTML5 because it does nothing to remove this very same potential for cross site attacks... and idiot developers would have you belief that is "an issue", when the real issue is idiot developers not doing anything to not be idiot developers.

when you reveal yourself, i will kill you.

is your inability to not cower behind anonymity or provide any factual insight to any conversation some sort of hypocritical idiot thing, or are you genuinely ignorant?

you are NOTHING

wrong again, idiot. no meds, ever. no allergies. no illnesses. no disorders. none of the nonsense you idiots create to justify your ignorance and lack of potential.

is ur mum's face as presumptuous and historically inaccurate as you?

you are NOTHING

you're wrong. you can't even make your recommendation with a misspelling... i believe you meant "debug once" as your next sentence was "test once"... but i guess i'll have to wait for your ever powerful regression testing engineers to finish their test case implementations before i can test my assertion.

you just created a job! perhaps an entire department! great idea! well, for people that need jobs... not for people that need to pay to get something implemented correctly done for a price, or developers that take pride in the the perfection of their work and require no such additional external verification or confirmation.