It's about damn time... My first vote goes for No Time to Explain.
Which is a Kickstarter funded game that's better in quality and humour than many games on Steam, but was rejected for some unknown reason -- I can only assume the Steam folks are intractable morons: This game is awesome, and I know of many indie devs with the same story, "Everyone likes my game, except Steam reviewers." I've met folks who only buy games if they are on Steam, I've also met folks who only shop at Walmart... Neither situation is all that good for creators of content, or their intended audiences.
No, democracy works because we (I'm still a US citizen and can't vote in all elections) remember who supported a bill/proposal we didn't like and we don't elect them again. After the first few people don't get elected again, the politicians take the hint.
Protip: Your understanding of "democracy" is completely fucked, and so is "The Republic For Which It Stands"...
I am still waiting for all the games I like to run on Apple or Linux. I think I still have to wait a very long time for that.
Some of us indie game devs hear you loud and clear, mate. No Wine wrappers for my code -- Native Linux support all the way.
What's odd is that it takes no extra effort code wise, and only a little effort testing wise to support Lin/Win/Mac -- Just choose a cross platform toolchain from the outset -- Oh, I think I see the AAA's problem...
IMHO, there's no reason for new titles to ignore marketshare (money) needlessly. More studios are coming around to this line of thinking..... Crap! I better hurry and get my games done before then!
You're fogetting the part where I don't waste time proofreading my worthless comments. I've got other things that are far more important than spelling and grammar to spend time on. If you get the gist of the message, then my job is done -- I've effectively communicated the idea. Humans are NOT computers! Our brains are fabulous at understanding what folk meant, even when they accidentally a whole word out of a sentence. Furthermore, I find English grammar lacking especially when writing about code: There's no "escape codes" for quotes within strings, for example.
I'd rather be considered an idiot by grammar Nazis than actually be a fool for wasting my time because of them...
I can't figure out from your description what the problem is. What do you mean by the "junction of two scopes"? Are the scopes adjacent or nested? Are you intending two blocks to combine into one, or for a level of nesting to be removed?
Yes. Any and all of these. There is no one specific example, it's just an issue that wouldn't otherwise exist if the end scope tokens existed, instead of giving the whitespace syntactic meaning. For an example, place your cursor at the end of any line of text, and press the delete key until the next line is concatenated with the current line. This situation can arise from various block edit movements as well, Eg: Holding down shift, and pressing the up or down arrow to highlight text. Just editing text in general. No example is needed, you've illustrated that you know perfectly well what I'm talking about.
Once in said situation, it can be further exacerbated by pressing Enter/Return which typically indents the text after the cursor in line with the indention used on the prior line. I am not the only one editing this code. Sure, I've made the mistakes sometimes too, but I've also found many bugs that were due to other people incorrectly indenting code after removing a section of it -- It's not just me: If you don't know what I'm talking about at this point, you're just trolling.
In languages where } or "End If" or "fi" or some close scope token is used, the situation can be rectified quickly. Fix the following run-ons:
say( "hi" ); } txt = "goodbye"; vs say "hi" txt = "goodbye"
In Python, the lack of a close block token makes you evaluate the surrounding code to determine which indention should be used, whereas, I can hit the "auto indent" key to fix the situation when using other languages.
If you accidentally deleted the "close block" token in languages that have them it often results in a syntax error (unclosed block), whereas in Python it often results in a runtime error.
Everyone's a noob at something.
No, that's typically a derisive term. To me that's like saying: Everyone's a moron sometimes. It's not true. One can be an inexperienced newbie (newby or newb), without the negative connotations associated with "noob" or "n00b"... Being a slang word its meaning may have changed over the years, but some folk still remember the terms' original meanings...
If you are a function over form person, you should count braces / if & endif / what ever you like.
No need to count them, my code editor does this for me. It generates the matching ending symbols and can even warn me in real time of unclosed blocks...
If you prefer indentation as syntactical sugar "and" prefer making the code consistent and follow some agreed upon rules, Python is for you. For your example, I would suggest proposing a change to the current PEP for indentation.
In any other language I can choose to use indention to denote syntax as well. "Making the code consistent" is the job of my code formatter utility, why waste human life on such trivial things? My issue is with wasting human life on trivial things -- Like hunting down bugs that wouldn't otherwise exist except for Python's use of whitespace. No, really, Python would be more useful to more people (and waste less time) if the language maintainers (and thus fans), weren't so die hard fanatical over this retarding issue of syntax.
The essence of nesting with whitespace is to make the code do what it looks, and the issue you noted is that of editor, not the language.
C style code can achieve the same whitespace nesting ala the Lisp indent style.
As a scientist I apply the Scientific Method: I say it's an issue with the language. I use several other languages to test my Hypothesis. It appears to be an issue with the language -- I don't have the issue with any other language.
I don't think I should have to switch editors just to use a language effectively. I have a similar issue with the Whitespace programming language -- Ie: To effectively use the language it's suggested one use a special editor (one that colors tabs and spaces differently). Screw that. The language is being ridiculous.
Your "function over form" complaint is a nonsense. How the code "looks", determining code block nesting, is a FUNCTION.
Three things:
0) It wasn't a complaint, it was a statement of fact.
1) "looks" is what "form" means.
2) determining code block nesting is a function of the parser, true, but giving whitespace meaning is an arbitrary choice designed to affect the FORM of the code written in the language, and would otherwise have no effect on the FUNCTION of the code -- Eg: If Python had used C style braces for scoping it wouldn't affect the function of the code you write -- It would only affect its form.
The more people who buy and take drugs solely because they saw an ad on TV the higher the production of that drug.
That's not always true. You've jumped to conclusions. The production of controlled substances frequently outpaces demand.
You failed to realise that the government puts limits on the amounts of some drugs that can be made. Therefore, advertising drives up demand, Hence the price goes up because supply is limited, and poorer people who actually need the damn drug can either no longer afford it, or it becomes yet another tax funded burden.
you might tend to be a bit on the edgy side yourself. A car engine backfire will incite you to grab your assault rifle and empty the clip in all directions, to defend yourself.
Hmm, that's doubtful. Wouldn't that just lead to waves of scared people taking up arms against the stray bullets of their neighbours?
. . . all because the fear of terror has devoured their souls.
FDR said it best, "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself." So, we're afraid of the fear, as we should be?
I'd say it's impossible for fear to have "devoured their souls", those spirits have been gone a long time. That's why they couldn't tell the difference between People and Corporations.
It's almost like they didn't really mean it when they repeated the quote with zeal, "Give me Liberty or give me death!" -- I mean, they've hardly any damn liberty left, WTF do they expect?
There are various calculations on the Internet for how much paper you can get from a tree.... I propose we start measuring large proceedings in square kilometres of northern Amazon, just to emphasize how drastic they are.
Wait, why are you inventing a new system? Just use the established unit of measure everyone is already familiar with: Libraries of Congress.
Worse still, ask any random noob to debug a program on paper, and they'll go "wut?". Not that I'm elite or anything (far from it), but it was common in my time (not long ago) for students to debug or trace the state changes of (sometimes pretty large) programs on paper. That was one hell of a way to replace the "magic happens here" with concrete cause/effect examples on how instructions change state. You rarely see that anymore (unless you are very lucky to have a good professor or you are in a pretty damn good CS school.)
Just to be perfectly clear, what you're saying is that the software can't be patented because it can be executed on paper using nothing more than your mind?
People who bring up the whitespace issue are noobs.
Blanket statements like this are typically false. Perhaps they're experienced with other languages, and thus see no need to waste time with Python or its whitespace issues?
For example: I know several languages and have authored a few of my own as well. I'm not gloating, just being clear: I've been coding for over two decades, and Python is a language which I do know. I don't use Python unless it's absolutely required (maintaining existing code). Following is one issue I have with the use of whitespace for scoping -- which I ran into while learning Python; That is to say, if it's immediately apparent to a "beginner" then maybe it is a problem?
When I delete code at the junction between two scopes, sometimes it's suddenly not clear if the current line of code belongs with the deeper scope or more shallow scope -- Esp. when two lines have become concatenated at the cursor. If I insert a newline, my code editor will place the line automatically with the preceding scope. Without constant diligence one may mistakenly include code in the wrong scope. Thus the use of whitespace for scoping is wasting my time in multiple ways over just this one issue.
Even BASIC's End If allows for better clarity when maintaining and manipulating code. Eg: In C, Pascal, JavaScript, Perl, BASIC, BASH, Java, etc: The 'end scope' token allows me to quickly correct the indention in this instance without requiring additional thought be given to the surrounding instructions.
After having chased down many bugs due to the aforementioned whitespace issues I've lost my patience with Python. None of the other languages I use have the issue, so I use them instead. I'm a Function over Form kind of guy who's not impressed by the "look" of the code -- I quickly adapt to existing coding styles of the project I'm on for consistency. If coding style was important to me, I'd use a source code formatting utility. I maintain Python code, but I don't ever start a new project in Python... I just can't justify the known waste of time that will occur over something as trivial as scope delimiting.
Additionally, here's something else to reflect on: I haven't ever been called a "noob" except by a newb.
I have always been the disruptive influence, everywhere I've worked. I don't like answers like, "that's just the way we've always done it", they've never gone over well with me.
That said, you have to learn how to do it politely. You are still going to annoy people, but generally people feel good doing the best job they can. The folks that really don't like you...well, they aren't worth worrying about.
I agree to a point. First off: It's human nature to shun the outsiders (evolutionary benefit of earning trust, and all that), but this doesn't mean you should just accept that you're going to annoy people with your "disruptive" ways. In my experience disruption doesn't have to happen at all. You just have to show the right people what you're made of... which, hopefully, is not dicks.
It's the same everywhere. I even ran into this when I was 16 working as an apprentice electrician -- (Bending conduit? Ah, it's a 3D version of a Pipe Dream game). My middle aged coworkers had seen other lazy helpers, and were quick to dismiss anything I suggested out of hand. The trick is to get your superior(s) to take credit for your helpful idea as if it was their own, or to fool them into thinking it was their own idea. Don't try to rush things, it'll become evident who's doing what eventually (Hey, everywhere we put the new kid, good stuff happens...). Being a snot about it and rubbing it in everyone's face is a good way to get put on ditch digging detail or some other equivalent low-man-on-the-totem-pole task.
Sure, THIS TIME it was something easy to spot like UEFI BIOS setting, but next time it could be some obscure "feature" of the legacy system you weren't privy too; Then it's their turn to rub your nose in the fact you didn't realize something simple. I agree, it's best not to get into petty pissing contests; Politeness is key. We're all in this rat race together.
Speaking from experience: It only takes one of your "brilliant" innovative ideas turning out to be a "harebrained cluster fcsk" to mark your "disruptive influence" as inexperienced zeal. When that time comes, you may want/need your coworkers to help cover your ass a bit and/or show some mercy. You get them to do that by not being a dick about it when you show them up.
TL;DR: there is no "I" in team, but there is an "I" in pie. And there's an "I" in meat pie. Anagram of meat is team...
Let's not forget, you don't use assembly to create the initial compiler for these "dynamic" languages... Most use C.
I dropped from C++ back down to C for my projects because I realized I only used a very small subset of C++ -- The rest was handled by my scripting language modules (which were written in C).
It was actually harder to hijack C++'s OOP model for the dynamic scripting language than to just write my own basic OOP in C that had the features I needed. I truly tried to NOT use C, boy that was a waste of time...
Additionally, compiling my code in C is 64x faster than compiling it in C++
Look, I still use C++ for when I want to do a one off little project, and can use their powerful STL and OOP and Templating, but when I get tired of working around C++ paradigms, and want to manhandle the system the way I want, I use C.
Don't even get me started on ABI compatibility that supports different compilers...
C is here to stay, why? Because that's what the OS is written in. Once the OS is written in something else, I might think of using it instead.
Not providing the source code either suggests you have something bad to hide, or are more obsessed with yourself than those who wish to use your project, whether its profits, fame, or protection of your so-called "intellectual property"
You are an arrogant, moronic, small-minded fool. That is a false dichotomy if I've ever seen one.
What If I release the source code for the past versions, but for the current version I distribute my game software as binary only (closed source) because all security IS obscurity, and it actually does help curb the online cheating a fair degree?
Look, blanket statements like yours are almost always wrong. There are two or more sides to every coin. Personally, I'd just LOVE to give everyone all the source code they could possibly want, but the truth is that a significant percentage of people just can't help being assholes to everyone else. For multi-player online games I either go fully open source and give the trolls the tools they need to chase off the community, or I distribute closed source binaries until the next release cycle and actually have people to play games with.
Oh please! You say trojan to the average user and the want to know why their PC needs a rubber,
You'd suffocate in a large rubber horse though, also it would be very hot. Besides, it would have to be Vulcanized to work, and Vulcans weren't invented until TV & StarTrek.
I have curtains on my windows not because I just want to stop the government seeing what I do in private, but because I want to stop everyone else seeing what I do in private.
But if you have nothing to hide, then you have no reason to have curtains!
"They look nice", is a valid reason to me. Also, I like the way guns smell.
Every fault you mentioned comes with a valuable tradeoff. PHP's tradeoff for its faulty design is that it gets morons programming faster... This is only beneficial if you twist that word along the ridiculous dimension.
People are buying phones like mad. RIM didn't keep up with the times - they figured they've got Business Users all tied up, and why would business users want a shiny new iPhone? Well, at ${LARGE_COMPANY} where I work, us peons have been asking for iPhones forever and been told no, never gonna happen. Then the managers started wanting them, and the rest is history.
...
Wait a minute... this isn't the story I clicked on...
So you're saying it would have been easier to serve Julian Assange with an Extradition Notice if the British Police's management demanded iphones?
Slashdot Mirror
It's about damn time... My first vote goes for No Time to Explain.
Which is a Kickstarter funded game that's better in quality and humour than many games on Steam, but was rejected for some unknown reason -- I can only assume the Steam folks are intractable morons: This game is awesome, and I know of many indie devs with the same story, "Everyone likes my game, except Steam reviewers." I've met folks who only buy games if they are on Steam, I've also met folks who only shop at Walmart... Neither situation is all that good for creators of content, or their intended audiences.
No, democracy works because we (I'm still a US citizen and can't vote in all elections) remember who supported a bill/proposal we didn't like and we don't elect them again. After the first few people don't get elected again, the politicians take the hint.
Protip: Your understanding of "democracy" is completely fucked, and so is "The Republic For Which It Stands"...
I am still waiting for all the games I like to run on Apple or Linux. I think I still have to wait a very long time for that.
Some of us indie game devs hear you loud and clear, mate. No Wine wrappers for my code -- Native Linux support all the way.
What's odd is that it takes no extra effort code wise, and only a little effort testing wise to support Lin/Win/Mac -- Just choose a cross platform toolchain from the outset -- Oh, I think I see the AAA's problem...
IMHO, there's no reason for new titles to ignore marketshare (money) needlessly. More studios are coming around to this line of thinking..... Crap! I better hurry and get my games done before then!
You're fogetting the part where I don't waste time proofreading my worthless comments. I've got other things that are far more important than spelling and grammar to spend time on. If you get the gist of the message, then my job is done -- I've effectively communicated the idea. Humans are NOT computers! Our brains are fabulous at understanding what folk meant, even when they accidentally a whole word out of a sentence. Furthermore, I find English grammar lacking especially when writing about code: There's no "escape codes" for quotes within strings, for example.
I'd rather be considered an idiot by grammar Nazis than actually be a fool for wasting my time because of them...
Where's the control group of people who abstain from social networks?
I can't figure out from your description what the problem is. What do you mean by the "junction of two scopes"? Are the scopes adjacent or nested? Are you intending two blocks to combine into one, or for a level of nesting to be removed?
Yes. Any and all of these. There is no one specific example, it's just an issue that wouldn't otherwise exist if the end scope tokens existed, instead of giving the whitespace syntactic meaning. For an example, place your cursor at the end of any line of text, and press the delete key until the next line is concatenated with the current line. This situation can arise from various block edit movements as well, Eg: Holding down shift, and pressing the up or down arrow to highlight text. Just editing text in general. No example is needed, you've illustrated that you know perfectly well what I'm talking about.
Once in said situation, it can be further exacerbated by pressing Enter/Return which typically indents the text after the cursor in line with the indention used on the prior line. I am not the only one editing this code. Sure, I've made the mistakes sometimes too, but I've also found many bugs that were due to other people incorrectly indenting code after removing a section of it -- It's not just me: If you don't know what I'm talking about at this point, you're just trolling.
In languages where } or "End If" or "fi" or some close scope token is used, the situation can be rectified quickly. Fix the following run-ons:
say( "hi" ); } txt = "goodbye";
vs
say "hi" txt = "goodbye"
In Python, the lack of a close block token makes you evaluate the surrounding code to determine which indention should be used, whereas, I can hit the "auto indent" key to fix the situation when using other languages.
If you accidentally deleted the "close block" token in languages that have them it often results in a syntax error (unclosed block), whereas in Python it often results in a runtime error.
Everyone's a noob at something.
No, that's typically a derisive term. To me that's like saying: Everyone's a moron sometimes. It's not true. One can be an inexperienced newbie (newby or newb), without the negative connotations associated with "noob" or "n00b"... Being a slang word its meaning may have changed over the years, but some folk still remember the terms' original meanings...
If you are a function over form person, you should count braces / if & endif / what ever you like.
No need to count them, my code editor does this for me. It generates the matching ending symbols and can even warn me in real time of unclosed blocks...
If you prefer indentation as syntactical sugar "and" prefer making the code consistent and follow some agreed upon rules, Python is for you. For your example, I would suggest proposing a change to the current PEP for indentation.
In any other language I can choose to use indention to denote syntax as well. "Making the code consistent" is the job of my code formatter utility, why waste human life on such trivial things? My issue is with wasting human life on trivial things -- Like hunting down bugs that wouldn't otherwise exist except for Python's use of whitespace. No, really, Python would be more useful to more people (and waste less time) if the language maintainers (and thus fans), weren't so die hard fanatical over this retarding issue of syntax.
The essence of nesting with whitespace is to make the code do what it looks, and the issue you noted is that of editor, not the language.
C style code can achieve the same whitespace nesting ala the Lisp indent style.
As a scientist I apply the Scientific Method: I say it's an issue with the language. I use several other languages to test my Hypothesis. It appears to be an issue with the language -- I don't have the issue with any other language.
I don't think I should have to switch editors just to use a language effectively. I have a similar issue with the Whitespace programming language -- Ie: To effectively use the language it's suggested one use a special editor (one that colors tabs and spaces differently). Screw that. The language is being ridiculous.
Your "function over form" complaint is a nonsense. How the code "looks", determining code block nesting, is a FUNCTION.
Three things:
0) It wasn't a complaint, it was a statement of fact.
1) "looks" is what "form" means.
2) determining code block nesting is a function of the parser, true, but giving whitespace meaning is an arbitrary choice designed to affect the FORM of the code written in the language, and would otherwise have no effect on the FUNCTION of the code -- Eg: If Python had used C style braces for scoping it wouldn't affect the function of the code you write -- It would only affect its form.
The more people who buy and take drugs solely because they saw an ad on TV the higher the production of that drug.
That's not always true. You've jumped to conclusions. The production of controlled substances frequently outpaces demand.
You failed to realise that the government puts limits on the amounts of some drugs that can be made. Therefore, advertising drives up demand, Hence the price goes up because supply is limited, and poorer people who actually need the damn drug can either no longer afford it, or it becomes yet another tax funded burden.
P.S. Your "asshole" stinks.
you might tend to be a bit on the edgy side yourself. A car engine backfire will incite you to grab your assault rifle and empty the clip in all directions, to defend yourself.
Hmm, that's doubtful. Wouldn't that just lead to waves of scared people taking up arms against the stray bullets of their neighbours?
. . . all because the fear of terror has devoured their souls.
FDR said it best, "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself."
So, we're afraid of the fear, as we should be?
I'd say it's impossible for fear to have "devoured their souls", those spirits have been gone a long time. That's why they couldn't tell the difference between People and Corporations.
It's almost like they didn't really mean it when they repeated the quote with zeal, "Give me Liberty or give me death!" -- I mean, they've hardly any damn liberty left, WTF do they expect?
"Land of the Brave" my ass!
I was hoping for some double-slit experiment...
Well, that would have been nice except it was an experiment involving a single atom, not a pair of hypothetical lesbians.
There are various calculations on the Internet for how much paper you can get from a tree. ... I propose we start measuring large proceedings in square kilometres of northern Amazon, just to emphasize how drastic they are.
Wait, why are you inventing a new system? Just use the established unit of measure everyone is already familiar with: Libraries of Congress.
My F5 key hasn't moved in years. Not sure about yours.
Hardly a valid point then, eh? You either don't use the reload function, or activate it via the GUI since you haven't pressed the key in years...
Worse still, ask any random noob to debug a program on paper, and they'll go "wut?". Not that I'm elite or anything (far from it), but it was common in my time (not long ago) for students to debug or trace the state changes of (sometimes pretty large) programs on paper. That was one hell of a way to replace the "magic happens here" with concrete cause/effect examples on how instructions change state. You rarely see that anymore (unless you are very lucky to have a good professor or you are in a pretty damn good CS school.)
Just to be perfectly clear, what you're saying is that the software can't be patented because it can be executed on paper using nothing more than your mind?
People who bring up the whitespace issue are noobs.
Blanket statements like this are typically false. Perhaps they're experienced with other languages, and thus see no need to waste time with Python or its whitespace issues?
For example: I know several languages and have authored a few of my own as well. I'm not gloating, just being clear: I've been coding for over two decades, and Python is a language which I do know. I don't use Python unless it's absolutely required (maintaining existing code). Following is one issue I have with the use of whitespace for scoping -- which I ran into while learning Python; That is to say, if it's immediately apparent to a "beginner" then maybe it is a problem?
When I delete code at the junction between two scopes, sometimes it's suddenly not clear if the current line of code belongs with the deeper scope or more shallow scope -- Esp. when two lines have become concatenated at the cursor. If I insert a newline, my code editor will place the line automatically with the preceding scope. Without constant diligence one may mistakenly include code in the wrong scope. Thus the use of whitespace for scoping is wasting my time in multiple ways over just this one issue.
Even BASIC's End If allows for better clarity when maintaining and manipulating code. Eg: In C, Pascal, JavaScript, Perl, BASIC, BASH, Java, etc: The 'end scope' token allows me to quickly correct the indention in this instance without requiring additional thought be given to the surrounding instructions.
After having chased down many bugs due to the aforementioned whitespace issues I've lost my patience with Python. None of the other languages I use have the issue, so I use them instead. I'm a Function over Form kind of guy who's not impressed by the "look" of the code -- I quickly adapt to existing coding styles of the project I'm on for consistency. If coding style was important to me, I'd use a source code formatting utility. I maintain Python code, but I don't ever start a new project in Python... I just can't justify the known waste of time that will occur over something as trivial as scope delimiting.
Additionally, here's something else to reflect on: I haven't ever been called a "noob" except by a newb.
No.
Working link for subject. In other news, How hot is vehicle theft is your area?
"No." is the correct answer. That headline is just wrong.
I have always been the disruptive influence, everywhere I've worked. I don't like answers like, "that's just the way we've always done it", they've never gone over well with me.
That said, you have to learn how to do it politely. You are still going to annoy people, but generally people feel good doing the best job they can. The folks that really don't like you...well, they aren't worth worrying about.
I agree to a point. First off: It's human nature to shun the outsiders (evolutionary benefit of earning trust, and all that), but this doesn't mean you should just accept that you're going to annoy people with your "disruptive" ways. In my experience disruption doesn't have to happen at all. You just have to show the right people what you're made of... which, hopefully, is not dicks.
It's the same everywhere. I even ran into this when I was 16 working as an apprentice electrician -- (Bending conduit? Ah, it's a 3D version of a Pipe Dream game). My middle aged coworkers had seen other lazy helpers, and were quick to dismiss anything I suggested out of hand. The trick is to get your superior(s) to take credit for your helpful idea as if it was their own, or to fool them into thinking it was their own idea. Don't try to rush things, it'll become evident who's doing what eventually (Hey, everywhere we put the new kid, good stuff happens...). Being a snot about it and rubbing it in everyone's face is a good way to get put on ditch digging detail or some other equivalent low-man-on-the-totem-pole task.
Sure, THIS TIME it was something easy to spot like UEFI BIOS setting, but next time it could be some obscure "feature" of the legacy system you weren't privy too; Then it's their turn to rub your nose in the fact you didn't realize something simple. I agree, it's best not to get into petty pissing contests; Politeness is key. We're all in this rat race together.
Speaking from experience: It only takes one of your "brilliant" innovative ideas turning out to be a "harebrained cluster fcsk" to mark your "disruptive influence" as inexperienced zeal. When that time comes, you may want/need your coworkers to help cover your ass a bit and/or show some mercy. You get them to do that by not being a dick about it when you show them up.
TL;DR: there is no "I" in team, but there is an "I" in pie. And there's an "I" in meat pie. Anagram of meat is team...
Not only could no one else get it, they all moaned and complained "we never had to do that before" after he showed them.
So not only are they unwilling to adapt on their own, they seem to take umbrage at being shown something new.
The question you should be asking yourself is: Do they actually exist...
Let's not forget, you don't use assembly to create the initial compiler for these "dynamic" languages... Most use C.
I dropped from C++ back down to C for my projects because I realized I only used a very small subset of C++ -- The rest was handled by my scripting language modules (which were written in C).
It was actually harder to hijack C++'s OOP model for the dynamic scripting language than to just write my own basic OOP in C that had the features I needed. I truly tried to NOT use C, boy that was a waste of time...
Additionally, compiling my code in C is 64x faster than compiling it in C++
Look, I still use C++ for when I want to do a one off little project, and can use their powerful STL and OOP and Templating, but when I get tired of working around C++ paradigms, and want to manhandle the system the way I want, I use C.
Don't even get me started on ABI compatibility that supports different compilers...
C is here to stay, why? Because that's what the OS is written in. Once the OS is written in something else, I might think of using it instead.
Not providing the source code either suggests you have something bad to hide, or are more obsessed with yourself than those who wish to use your project, whether its profits, fame, or protection of your so-called "intellectual property"
You are an arrogant, moronic, small-minded fool. That is a false dichotomy if I've ever seen one.
What If I release the source code for the past versions, but for the current version I distribute my game software as binary only (closed source) because all security IS obscurity, and it actually does help curb the online cheating a fair degree?
Look, blanket statements like yours are almost always wrong. There are two or more sides to every coin. Personally, I'd just LOVE to give everyone all the source code they could possibly want, but the truth is that a significant percentage of people just can't help being assholes to everyone else. For multi-player online games I either go fully open source and give the trolls the tools they need to chase off the community, or I distribute closed source binaries until the next release cycle and actually have people to play games with.
TL;DR: parent poster only thinks inside boxes.
Oh please! You say trojan to the average user and the want to know why their PC needs a rubber,
You'd suffocate in a large rubber horse though, also it would be very hot. Besides, it would have to be Vulcanized to work, and Vulcans weren't invented until TV & StarTrek.
But if you have nothing to hide, then you have no reason to have curtains!
"They look nice", is a valid reason to me. Also, I like the way guns smell.
Every fault you mentioned comes with a valuable tradeoff. PHP's tradeoff for its faulty design is that it gets morons programming faster... This is only beneficial if you twist that word along the ridiculous dimension.
Right... because nothing could be safer than a Heroine addict that has no money because they can not keep a job due to their addiction.
When's the last time you heard of people buying booze from the Maffia? Do you live in fear of recreational alcohol users?
People are buying phones like mad. RIM didn't keep up with the times - they figured they've got Business Users all tied up, and why would business users want a shiny new iPhone? Well, at ${LARGE_COMPANY} where I work, us peons have been asking for iPhones forever and been told no, never gonna happen. Then the managers started wanting them, and the rest is history.
Wait a minute... this isn't the story I clicked on...
So you're saying it would have been easier to serve Julian Assange with an Extradition Notice if the British Police's management demanded iphones?