I don't see the Condition System as an alternative: it's actually an extension of the rigid exception handling systems of popular languages (the new concept is the signal/restart-bind protocol).
Speaker efficiency is db/W/m, IOW 92 means "that at a power level of 1 W, they will produce 92 dB of sound" at a distance of one metter of the speaker.
He said : "If your trying to be a semi-serious news site, then do it, which means keeping crap like that out of the headlines. If you just want to be a community of Microsft haters, that's fine, but get rid of your grandiose tagline because it doesn't apply."
GNU/Linux distros don't come with firewall enabled cause they don't need it : with no (stupid backdoor) service started like 135 139 445 etc. there is no need to.
* ; ; ; h e l m e r . . . | I have been slowly learning lisp over the past year and have had someone | mention to me that I should learn perl, for jobs etc.
the unemployed programmer had a problem. "I know", said the programmer,
"I'll just learn perl." the unemployed programmer now had two problems.
having a job is not unimportant, but if knowing perl is a requirement for
a particular job, consider another one before taking that one. this is
true even if you know perl very well. life is too long to be an expert
at harmful things, including such evilness as C++ and perl.
I once studied perl enough to read perl code and spot bugs in other
people's programs (but later gained the wisdom that this was not an
accomplishment -- spotting a bug in a perl program is like spotting the
dog that brought the fleas), but I don't write in it and I don't ever
plan to use it for anything (part of my new position is quality assurance
for the systems I'm inheriting responsibility for, and part of any
serious QA is removing perl code the same way you go over a dilapidated
building you inherit to remove chewing gum and duct tape and fix whatever
was kept together for real). also, very much unlike any other language I
have ever studied, perl has failed to stick to memory, a phenomenon that
has actually puzzled me, but I guess there are some things that are so
gross you just have to forget, or it'll destroy something with you. perl
is the first such thing I have known.
this is your brain. this is perl. this is your brain on perl. any
questions?
| If I learn lisp well will I be able to do what people do with perl[?]
no, you won't. however, there is a very important clue to be had from
this: what people do with perl is wrong. perl makes a whole lot of tasks
easy to do, but if you look closely, you will see that those tasks are
fundamentally braindamaged, and should never have been initiated. perl
is perhaps the best example I can think of for a theory I have on the
ills of optimization and the design choices people make. most people,
when faced with a problem, will not investigate the cause of the problem,
but will instead want to solve it because the problem is actually in the
way of something more important than figuring out why something suddenly
got in their way out of nowhere. if you are a programmer, you may reach
for perl at this point, and perl can remove your problem. happy, you go
on, but find another problem blocking your way, requiring more perl --
the perl programmer who veers off the road into the forest will get out
of his car and cut down each and every tree that blocks his progress,
then drive a few meters and repeat the whole process. whether he gets
where he wanted to go or not is immaterial -- a perl programmer will
happily keep moving forward and look busy. getting a perl programmer
back on the road is a managerial responsibility, and it can be very hard:
the perl programmer is very good at solving his own problems and assure
you that he's on the right track -- he looks like any other programmer
who is stuck, and this happens to all of us, but the perl programmer is
very different in one crucial capacity: the tool is causing the problems,
and unlike other programmers who discover the cause of the problem sooner
or later and try something else, perl is rewarding the programmer with a
very strong sense of control and accomplishment that a perl programmer
does _not_ try something else.
it's not that perl programmers are idiots, it's that the language rewards
idiotic behavior in a way that no other language or tool has ever done,
and on top of it, it punishes conscientiousness and quality
Re:Nice, which brings me too....
on
Fault Tolerant Shell
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Slashdot Mirror
I don't see the Condition System as an alternative: it's actually an extension of the rigid exception handling systems of popular languages (the new concept is the signal/restart-bind protocol).
in Python, http://docs.python.org/library/turtle.html, which is a much nicer first language than basic, .... or java
the GP should be noted funny, not insightful
informative ? there's a fair share of mis-information in this post, for sure.
mod this up !
WTF ? Insightful ??
The reality is that the french state budget dispatch for transport is something like 80 % road, 12 % rail.
How many HP marketroïds does it take to screw a light bulb ? And to look like a bunch of idiots ?
In french we say "bla", which is a clearly superior in terms of signal/noise ratio.
(slightly edited)
o uille.htm
http://www.splorp.com/critique/
Spirals all come from Ubu Roi's dread Gidouille :
http://expositions.bnf.fr/utopie/pistes/grand/gid
Speaker efficiency is db/W/m, IOW 92 means "that at a power level of 1 W, they will produce 92 dB of sound" at a distance of one metter of the speaker.
AFAIK the quality is top, the price correct, and it plays very nice with any OS (espacially p'n'p under linux with xsane).
>In 1950, the top 10% of people owned more than 90%
...and they really controlled the companies.
>of listed companies' shares! Insane, but true.
>Now, the number is more like 50%.
Do you believe the new 40% have real control ? I'd bet control is still in the hands of the 10%.
AFAIK the term "third world" is derived from the french "tiers-monde" which in turn was derived from the notion of "tiers-état".
The "tiers-état" designated, back in the feodal (pre 1789) regime most of the population but the Nobles and the Church men.
It was standardized (ANSI) in 1995, not 1984.
1984 was the year of the first Common Lisp draft and then it lacked the object system (CLOS) and the Condition System.
Yes, now Jacques Chirac is a socialist that think money grows on tree :)
----
Dionysus (12737) est un trou du cul.
Have you tried Common Lisp, then ?
It will allow you to forget about C++ annoyances and get top performance out of the compilers.
aurelien@backup2:~$ clisp -q
... :)
[1]> (/ 4 7)
4/7
[2]>
ahhhhh
> And I, as a consumer,
You are not a consumer. You are the very food the slashdot site owners sell to the advertisers.
He said : "If your trying to be a semi-serious news site, then do it, which means keeping crap like that out of the headlines. If you just want to be a community of Microsft haters, that's fine, but get rid of your grandiose tagline because it doesn't apply."
You must be new, there, you insensitive clod !
Something wrong with Fedora ? With debian/sid on a 700 Mhz duron, OOfice takes off in less than 25s.
Then, Debian is not mainstream ?
What help is a firewall when using apache, amule or bittorrent ? Please tell me, I must be so clueless... and a troll too, obviously !
GNU/Linux distros don't come with firewall enabled cause they don't need it : with no (stupid backdoor) service started like 135 139 445 etc. there is no need to.
http://www.underlevel.net/jordan/erik-perl.txt
it stands for itself...
* ; ; ; h e l m e r . . .
| I have been slowly learning lisp over the past year and have had someone
| mention to me that I should learn perl, for jobs etc.
the unemployed programmer had a problem. "I know", said the programmer,
"I'll just learn perl." the unemployed programmer now had two problems.
having a job is not unimportant, but if knowing perl is a requirement for
a particular job, consider another one before taking that one. this is
true even if you know perl very well. life is too long to be an expert
at harmful things, including such evilness as C++ and perl.
I once studied perl enough to read perl code and spot bugs in other
people's programs (but later gained the wisdom that this was not an
accomplishment -- spotting a bug in a perl program is like spotting the
dog that brought the fleas), but I don't write in it and I don't ever
plan to use it for anything (part of my new position is quality assurance
for the systems I'm inheriting responsibility for, and part of any
serious QA is removing perl code the same way you go over a dilapidated
building you inherit to remove chewing gum and duct tape and fix whatever
was kept together for real). also, very much unlike any other language I
have ever studied, perl has failed to stick to memory, a phenomenon that
has actually puzzled me, but I guess there are some things that are so
gross you just have to forget, or it'll destroy something with you. perl
is the first such thing I have known.
this is your brain. this is perl. this is your brain on perl. any
questions?
| If I learn lisp well will I be able to do what people do with perl[?]
no, you won't. however, there is a very important clue to be had from
this: what people do with perl is wrong. perl makes a whole lot of tasks
easy to do, but if you look closely, you will see that those tasks are
fundamentally braindamaged, and should never have been initiated. perl
is perhaps the best example I can think of for a theory I have on the
ills of optimization and the design choices people make. most people,
when faced with a problem, will not investigate the cause of the problem,
but will instead want to solve it because the problem is actually in the
way of something more important than figuring out why something suddenly
got in their way out of nowhere. if you are a programmer, you may reach
for perl at this point, and perl can remove your problem. happy, you go
on, but find another problem blocking your way, requiring more perl --
the perl programmer who veers off the road into the forest will get out
of his car and cut down each and every tree that blocks his progress,
then drive a few meters and repeat the whole process. whether he gets
where he wanted to go or not is immaterial -- a perl programmer will
happily keep moving forward and look busy. getting a perl programmer
back on the road is a managerial responsibility, and it can be very hard:
the perl programmer is very good at solving his own problems and assure
you that he's on the right track -- he looks like any other programmer
who is stuck, and this happens to all of us, but the perl programmer is
very different in one crucial capacity: the tool is causing the problems,
and unlike other programmers who discover the cause of the problem sooner
or later and try something else, perl is rewarding the programmer with a
very strong sense of control and accomplishment that a perl programmer
does _not_ try something else.
it's not that perl programmers are idiots, it's that the language rewards
idiotic behavior in a way that no other language or tool has ever done,
and on top of it, it punishes conscientiousness and quality
Any good Common Lisp implementation ?
Learn OO with CLOS and you shall see the candle that emits the light... (CLOS == Common Lisp Object System)
like www.cl.cam.ac.uk/Research/SRG/netos/xen/index.html ?