I don't need that pretentious macro language,
i'm more efficient with my obsolete procedural
language, and I'm less ignorant about what
really goes on inside the machine the so-called
"proprietary" crew try to hide. Each time I
install my Linux system on a new computer, I
review the code of *all* the new drivers.
When I learned to program, I think reading a lot of source code from different open source projects I was interested in helped me a lot. I usually picked up small enough programs. You don't need to understand the whole program either, if you're bored, you can satisfy yourself with only a piece of the code. You'll have to do that and read books too, because sometimes you will come upon programming constructs that you don't know but which are commonly used and documented in books. For example, once I discovered a linked list implementation and tried hard to figure out how the hell it worked, then later I read about linked lists in a textbook. Reading source code shows you how to write clean code (or at least recognize clean code from dirty code), lets you pick up coding styles you like, and above all shows you how scores of programming tricks and methods are used in the language of your choice. Things that you may only know from one lonely poor example or exercice, you will get them in the real code, with a more practical and significant context and purpose.
Personally as a non-native English speaker, I was always amused and interested by the common errors made by native English writers when they write too quickly.
I think it has to do with your levels of various hormones, such as dopamine or serotonine. I never exactly recall what they exactly do, but IIRC an important notion is the sequence of pleasure first and after that satisfaction.
I for one think that the welfare of humankind may require
to draw economical resources from whatever dead rock happens
to be in its way, would it be economically viable, something
i doubt since i heard from that from a friend who is extremely
knowledgeable in that matter. If and only if the technological
progress allows us to make the moon an viable economical resource,
i'd see no objection to its exploitation. But in the depth of
my heart, i'd still feel some pain, possibly the pain that i know
how far we have to go to maintain ourselves as a thriving species,
and make the beautiful moonscape disappear in a cloud of dust.
Well well well.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't need that pretentious macro language, i'm more efficient with my obsolete procedural language, and I'm less ignorant about what really goes on inside the machine the so-called "proprietary" crew try to hide. Each time I install my Linux system on a new computer, I review the code of *all* the new drivers.
When I learned to program, I think reading a lot of source code from different open source projects I was interested in helped me a lot. I usually picked up small enough programs. You don't need to understand the whole program either, if you're bored, you can satisfy yourself with only a piece of the code. You'll have to do that and read books too, because sometimes you will come upon programming constructs that you don't know but which are commonly used and documented in books. For example, once I discovered a linked list implementation and tried hard to figure out how the hell it worked, then later I read about linked lists in a textbook. Reading source code shows you how to write clean code (or at least recognize clean code from dirty code), lets you pick up coding styles you like, and above all shows you how scores of programming tricks and methods are used in the language of your choice. Things that you may only know from one lonely poor example or exercice, you will get them in the real code, with a more practical and significant context and purpose.
The GNU C library and its manual are a good introduction to Linux programming.
Food for thought or care to assist?
But it's awesome.
Personally as a non-native English speaker, I was always amused and interested by the common errors made by native English writers when they write too quickly.
I would do it gladly since you ask but I've run out of mod points.
I for one would like to have a choice. As far as I know, for a moderate use of tabs, Firefox uses up less memory after all.
I think it has to do with your levels of various hormones, such as dopamine or serotonine. I never exactly recall what they exactly do, but IIRC an important notion is the sequence of pleasure first and after that satisfaction.
A good browseable documentation. CHM rules.
My bad. I read the abstract and didn't notice the article.
See also this link. There's a picture. http://www.newsroom.ucr.edu/cgi-bin/display.cgi?id=1730
I for one think that the welfare of humankind may require to draw economical resources from whatever dead rock happens to be in its way, would it be economically viable, something i doubt since i heard from that from a friend who is extremely knowledgeable in that matter. If and only if the technological progress allows us to make the moon an viable economical resource, i'd see no objection to its exploitation. But in the depth of my heart, i'd still feel some pain, possibly the pain that i know how far we have to go to maintain ourselves as a thriving species, and make the beautiful moonscape disappear in a cloud of dust. Well well well.
It turns out they won http://www.pubpat.org/monsantorejections.htm/
Does Radiohead make the CD themselves too?
I had a look at the FF code and I got the impression that it would be a full-time hobby.
I'm just wondering.