For this case a static constraint on method implementation would give you a way of saying "this must be statically implemented", but it wouldn't make any functional difference - you could just call a static method from the implemented one. Right?
I've heard a lot of arguments against static abstract methods, mainly gotchas that would supposedly make such a feature more trouble than it was worth. I'd be very interested to hear you elaborate on some use-cases for us.
The whole science-as-faith idea was beaten to death long before any of us were born. Buy the books, take the philosophy classes, but please stop arguing. The author's a troll, and this is a classic troll topic. None of this is worth debate.
I'll say it again: large projects tend to get screwed up because of what happens when you exceed a certain number of people, not the engineering itself. Yes the shuttle is a harder project, but the same issues arise at all levels of engineering difficulty, and they cut across all disciplines; my experience makes me skeptical of your assertion that public/private makes any difference.
You know, maybe the problem isn't that there's something unsafe about nuclear power, but rather there's something unsafe about letting private industry run nuclear power
Look at what they did with two space shuttles when cost was no issue and they paid $10K for every fastener.
Any engineering project that gets beyond a certain size inevitably becomes a farce, because the simple laws that govern us (stupid primate behavior) begin to dominate the system. I see it all the time in both public and private sectors, always always always - that the wrong people claw themselves into management and make bad decisions.
Not only does the author not know what he's talking about, he's deliberately trolling to get attention from the type of programmers he's looking for. Free publicity from a flame war targeted squarely at/.
Oh and read the job description -
"Who We Need......An incredibly hard worker, even when it's not so fun. There is a ton of work to do, and a lot of it downright sucks..."
It's a running joke among experienced developers about the startup that bleeds the very life out of you in exchange for empty promises.
You missed the part where the application needs to work just as well with javascript turned off.
When you're legally bound to that standard, for all intents and purposes that means no javascript at all.
I have yet to see a WCAG 2.0 project where the customer has opted to increase development effort and effectively double the testing cost to go passed covering the no-js requirement.
I'm currently working on a couple of government projects that must adhere to the latest accessibility standards, and they include this little doozy: no javascript.
Think about that. No javascript.
HTML was never designed for applications. We have javascript to get around this. No matter how sophisticated the "toolkit" or "framework", it's all still a stupid, ugly hack. But it works.
HTML alone though? Someone needs to pull these people aside and tell them that they've gone batshit insane.
In any event, I don't think "But he's doing it too!" has ever been considered a valid legal defense.
But there's a kernel of truth in the sentiment. I've always wondered what "parity laws" would be like, and if they could ever be practically implemented.
The math shouldn't be that hard for bright enough individuals. A university degree is just as much a test as it is an education.
The problem is, many of us have been reduced to the lowest form of code monkey. Being a business owner, I know that the vast majority of coding work is just the most mind-numbing stupid shit you could possibly imagine. Not only are there few positions that actually require you to know any math at all, but no matter how talented you are, you're often forced to work shoulder to shoulder with people that would be better off flipping burgers.
That the need for math is questioned comes from a big mismatch between what the CS degree trains you for, and what 95% of people with a CS degree do with it.
Slashdot Mirror
For this case a static constraint on method implementation would give you a way of saying "this must be statically implemented", but it wouldn't make any functional difference - you could just call a static method from the implemented one. Right?
I've heard a lot of arguments against static abstract methods, mainly gotchas that would supposedly make such a feature more trouble than it was worth. I'd be very interested to hear you elaborate on some use-cases for us.
I would give you a +1 informative if I could.
Wow, Harvard looks harder.
Maybe it's because MIT turned 8 that year, while Harvard was 233.
(re: video)... you show that you're not affiliated with MIT in any way if you screw that up.
The arithmetic section isn't that impressive. I wonder what MIT's entrance exam looked like back then.
See how long it takes? It ain't the quick sort, son.
The whole science-as-faith idea was beaten to death long before any of us were born. Buy the books, take the philosophy classes, but please stop arguing. The author's a troll, and this is a classic troll topic. None of this is worth debate.
Sorry, thought you said "anti-social gizmos" there for a second.
"New care plans and strategies" sounds like HMO-speak for "cut off people before they cost us more than we soak in from them".
This gets at the heart of why a for-profit model may be inappropriate for some industries.
Come on, guys, you should know better even if forgot most of your calculus; there's a big difference between a genius and a barking seal.
I'll say it again: large projects tend to get screwed up because of what happens when you exceed a certain number of people, not the engineering itself. Yes the shuttle is a harder project, but the same issues arise at all levels of engineering difficulty, and they cut across all disciplines; my experience makes me skeptical of your assertion that public/private makes any difference.
You know, maybe the problem isn't that there's something unsafe about nuclear power, but rather there's something unsafe about letting private industry run nuclear power
Look at what they did with two space shuttles when cost was no issue and they paid $10K for every fastener.
Any engineering project that gets beyond a certain size inevitably becomes a farce, because the simple laws that govern us (stupid primate behavior) begin to dominate the system. I see it all the time in both public and private sectors, always always always - that the wrong people claw themselves into management and make bad decisions.
What's wrong with Visual Studio? I've been pretty happy with VS 2008, and there's ReSharper and a few others for .NET.
What's your favorite IDE? Flashback to college... if you say EMACS I'm gonna roll my eyes.
Not only does the author not know what he's talking about, he's deliberately trolling to get attention from the type of programmers he's looking for. Free publicity from a flame war targeted squarely at /.
Oh and read the job description - ...An incredibly hard worker, even when it's not so fun. There is a ton of work to do, and a lot of it downright sucks..."
"Who We Need...
It's a running joke among experienced developers about the startup that bleeds the very life out of you in exchange for empty promises.
Been there, done that. Fuck that.
Nothing to see here, move along...
So would a god bashing app be allowed?
Yes, but not an Allah-bashing one. Because you know, that's different for some reason.
Some populations will always grow to their absolute limit, more food is not the solution. We already have way too many people.
how it will deal with a Scottish accent .
Actually, if time is shifting into a spacelike dimension, than perhaps this is the origin of all spacelike dimensions.
In that case I would predict that they will not discover a gravity wave cutoff at high energies.
This isn't the first theory about the dimensionality of the universe changing over time. A while back it was proposed that time itself is shifting into a spacelike dimension.
You missed the part where the application needs to work just as well with javascript turned off.
When you're legally bound to that standard, for all intents and purposes that means no javascript at all.
I have yet to see a WCAG 2.0 project where the customer has opted to increase development effort and effectively double the testing cost to go passed covering the no-js requirement.
If you want applications stop fucking doing them in a web browser. Write a real application.
Business is about what the customer wants, not what I want. And they all want web, every last one of them.
Especially for the larger projects, web is a foregone conclusion. I'm not saying it's right, but that's just the way it is.
these times, they are a changin'
I'm currently working on a couple of government projects that must adhere to the latest accessibility standards, and they include this little doozy: no javascript.
Think about that. No javascript.
HTML was never designed for applications. We have javascript to get around this. No matter how sophisticated the "toolkit" or "framework", it's all still a stupid, ugly hack. But it works.
HTML alone though? Someone needs to pull these people aside and tell them that they've gone batshit insane.
In any event, I don't think "But he's doing it too!" has ever been considered a valid legal defense.
But there's a kernel of truth in the sentiment. I've always wondered what "parity laws" would be like, and if they could ever be practically implemented.
The math shouldn't be that hard for bright enough individuals. A university degree is just as much a test as it is an education.
The problem is, many of us have been reduced to the lowest form of code monkey. Being a business owner, I know that the vast majority of coding work is just the most mind-numbing stupid shit you could possibly imagine. Not only are there few positions that actually require you to know any math at all, but no matter how talented you are, you're often forced to work shoulder to shoulder with people that would be better off flipping burgers.
That the need for math is questioned comes from a big mismatch between what the CS degree trains you for, and what 95% of people with a CS degree do with it.