Certainly the publisher at least proof-reads a book, right? I mean, you can't just print whatever comes into your hands..
In doing this, they should also ask for the author's references for non-fiction work. If they did so, they could catch such an obvious plagiarism very easily. Obviously the author didn't ask for references from the third parties either.
If you're in a restaurant and have a heart attack, surely someone will call 911 thru the landline. i.e. don't pay the tab until you are confident enough to walk into cell phone coverage if you're so concerned:)
People can learn to live without cell phones. Filtering against those who don't know it yet won't be as profitable and simple blocking is much less offensive than telling the customer to STFU.
The argument I put forward was that brackets are only needed for inner expressions (not outermost ones).
If your argument is so shallow (pun intended) it's not worth discussing. I still don't see the advantage of making such a change other than self-satisfaction. As we all know there are already good languages for self-satisfiers. No point in making Java one.
Syntactic sugar looks like clutter until you consider error recovery. Sure, you can do away with it but humans need sugar.
Yeah, I'm sure he doesn't; especially as the change suggested hasn't already been used in languages far superior in expressiveness for at least the last 30-odd years...
We were discussing how impossible it is to make the said change to the Java language, but thanks for chipping in with your irrelevant func-prog fanboism.
Of course LISP is much more expressive because it doesn't have a syntax. Alas, we were not really discussing LISP here.
None of your precious little languages can ever solve the ambiguity problem. Observe:
I'd suggest learning a little haskell
map (dosomething [1 2 3]) [1 2 3]
This wouldn't be the same thing as
map dosomething [1 2 3] [1 2 3]
would it?
lisp and smalltalk (in that order)
I'd really love to see you implement a LISP dialect without using brackets to group stuff together. Really. What are you gonna do?
print "Hello World"
?
Whatever you put side by side in LISP is a separate argument since it doesn't use infix notation. So, your comma argument doesn't work either. The comma operator is relevant only to infix languages.
As for smalltalk, I'll look at it when I come across a real-world program written in it, but thanks for the advice.
I'll never understand why people expect "free tech support" when it comes to computers. I'd really like to know where on earth you get your car, dishwasher or a simple lamp get fixed for free.. We don't let people drive a simple car with only 3 controls without giving them a 6 months+ training and yet accept the "fact" that they are experts with no training at all when they are using a computer.
If something is broken you take it to an expert and pay him. Expecting grandma to correctly set up a secure network results in events like this; it doesn't happen.
Slashdot Mirror
Simple, you get mono playback. Next question.
Certainly the publisher at least proof-reads a book, right? I mean, you can't just print whatever comes into your hands..
In doing this, they should also ask for the author's references for non-fiction work. If they did so, they could catch such an obvious plagiarism very easily. Obviously the author didn't ask for references from the third parties either.
If you're in a restaurant and have a heart attack, surely someone will call 911 thru the landline. i.e. don't pay the tab until you are confident enough to walk into cell phone coverage if you're so concerned :)
People can learn to live without cell phones. Filtering against those who don't know it yet won't be as profitable and simple blocking is much less offensive than telling the customer to STFU.
Nice going, 4 posts down the top of thread and we already have a vi/emacs war in our hands. Thank you.
You mean this time, or the previous one?
If your argument is so shallow (pun intended) it's not worth discussing. I still don't see the advantage of making such a change other than self-satisfaction. As we all know there are already good languages for self-satisfiers. No point in making Java one.
Syntactic sugar looks like clutter until you consider error recovery. Sure, you can do away with it but humans need sugar.
G'day.
We were discussing how impossible it is to make the said change to the Java language, but thanks for chipping in with your irrelevant func-prog fanboism. Of course LISP is much more expressive because it doesn't have a syntax. Alas, we were not really discussing LISP here.
None of your precious little languages can ever solve the ambiguity problem. Observe:
map (dosomething [1 2 3]) [1 2 3] This wouldn't be the same thing as map dosomething [1 2 3] [1 2 3] would it? I'd really love to see you implement a LISP dialect without using brackets to group stuff together. Really. What are you gonna do? print "Hello World" ?Whatever you put side by side in LISP is a separate argument since it doesn't use infix notation. So, your comma argument doesn't work either. The comma operator is relevant only to infix languages.
As for smalltalk, I'll look at it when I come across a real-world program written in it, but thanks for the advice.
Never mind the GP, man. He doesn't have a clue.
If you consider a language such as C++, it's possible to write function/method parameters that can have default values. Those are problematic too.
foo bar 3 4
foo(bar(3,4)) or foo(bar(3),4) ??
I don't get sick often either. Once every couple of yeras at most. However, when I do catch a cold, it develops very rapidly and is quite intense.
It's a sample size of one but I guess it's an argument supporting yours.
And I was thinking, "It should be Optical Sex Press!"
Such an appropriate nickname..
Umm, you don't happen to work for a certain international telecomms company. Do you?
Then she asked me whether we could try the pigeon principle.
I told her "It'll take more mathematicians than you think, baby".
I'd love to get that kind of money. I could buy a negative brand-new sports car, a negative nice house..
Heh, I could even lose a girlfriend with that kind of money.
If you're driving a car made out of this, you just go so fast that the rain doesn't touch it..
Now we have portable thief magnets? Nobody would believe it ten years ago.
And Imaginary Geeks recognize what?
That depends on the printer. I'd submitted quite a number of blue homeworks back at school with an HP Deskjet 610.
I'll never understand why people expect "free tech support" when it comes to computers. I'd really like to know where on earth you get your car, dishwasher or a simple lamp get fixed for free.. We don't let people drive a simple car with only 3 controls without giving them a 6 months+ training and yet accept the "fact" that they are experts with no training at all when they are using a computer.
If something is broken you take it to an expert and pay him. Expecting grandma to correctly set up a secure network results in events like this; it doesn't happen.