Do you ever contribute anything useful? I mean, really. Just bullshit scenarios with no basis in fact and useless hyperbole. That's all I ever see from you.
That's an incredibly ironic statement considering the source.
I always assumed the weight given to the passage was directly related to the point you were trying to make. If you use a bible passage to justify your actions, it does not matter whether or not you consider it historically accurate.
My bible tells me that god ruined Job's life in order to win a bet with the devil. That seems to have set the precedent for the upbringing that was described.
Selling Google+1 "likes" is gradually becoming a rather lucrative business, helped by cheap labour and ever-falling internet access worldwide; the trend is not unlike what we saw previously with Twitter & Digg during the days except that this has a more widespread implication for SEO and could turn the nascent social networking service into a massive headache for Google as many try to game the system.
That rumbling you hear is a million deceased writing teachers digging out of their graves to make siliconbits diagram that "sentence."
Good developers define a process that confirms to their bias of what 'good' is.
True. If the developers are truly good, instead of merely claiming to be good, the outcome will reflect that.
Ask any of them and they will tell you they are better then 90% of the others.
The problem is that most developers are wrong when they say this.
I have heard hundreds of excuse on why code isn't bad, or that sloppy code was all they had time for. It's never really true, it just comes does to lazy developers writing lazy code.
Most developers are lazy. The bad developer cuts corners and generates sloppy code. The good developer automates. The good developer gets help from someone with more experience. The good developer works hard to get things right the first time, because doing otherwise only creates more work.
No, the needs define the process. The needs dictate good process or bad process.
The needs shape the process, but they don't have to shape the implementation of the process.
Letting just the developer develop the process means it will be inconsistent and most likely useless in the long run.
I agree. There are a lot of other players with investments in the process. The developers do not work in a vacuum. However, if "the business" is pushing processes that are useless or disruptive, developers need to treat the processes like they would bad software requirements. Demonstrate the flaws. Offer alternatives. The pride a developer has in his code should extend all the way to the product sitting in front of the customer. This means that the good developer has to take responsibility for more than the code he commits. He has to be invested in the whole software development process. When he does that, he will not blindly accept bad processes.
I'm an experienced developer, I don't need any of these new-fangled practices to make my code good.
I'm glad I don't have to maintain this guys crap.
Developers in general won't accept processes that amount to busy work. You can tell when you have this kind of process because your manager is constantly harping on it but eventually gives up. Good developers define the processes.
Slashdot Mirror
It seems to me that hook expressed the sentiments of many soldiers in the Vietnam War.
Do you ever contribute anything useful? I mean, really. Just bullshit scenarios with no basis in fact and useless hyperbole. That's all I ever see from you.
That's an incredibly ironic statement considering the source.
Obama's predecessor could even spell "hypotheticals".
Though I suspect he wouldn't have any problem using an adjective as a noun.
Myth. Exception, Don't they really mean the same thing?
Maybe you're setting the bar a little high for the summary writers.
I have never bent over and taken anything, but I'm sure it's nothing like having someone read the list of songs I listen to.
In my experience, there is a high correlation between "girlfriend" and "psycho".
I'm not sure if that's the porn or the video games talking.
Mark Hamil has been in so many block buster films
As long as everyone is OK with a land speeder that looks like a Corvette.
But PETP (People for the Ethical Treatment of Plumbers) think that Mario is a badass!
I always assumed the weight given to the passage was directly related to the point you were trying to make. If you use a bible passage to justify your actions, it does not matter whether or not you consider it historically accurate.
My bible tells me that god ruined Job's life in order to win a bet with the devil. That seems to have set the precedent for the upbringing that was described.
"Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate"
Sanka... you dead?
Ya, mon.
What is "closeness"? Is it some kind of backlash against cloud computing?
I have not seen grammatical flubs with this density since teaching english abroad.
You must be new here.
Good point.
But maybe engineers realized further improvements would be undetectable to humans ears.
Or maybe its the quality of the sound delivered by digital media that has deteriorated, rather than the quality of the equipment.
Or maybe you dad just had better music to listen to.
Just sayin'
Selling Google+1 "likes" is gradually becoming a rather lucrative business, helped by cheap labour and ever-falling internet access worldwide; the trend is not unlike what we saw previously with Twitter & Digg during the days except that this has a more widespread implication for SEO and could turn the nascent social networking service into a massive headache for Google as many try to game the system.
That rumbling you hear is a million deceased writing teachers digging out of their graves to make siliconbits diagram that "sentence."
They wanted to name it "All your * are belong to google!", but google+ sounded less evil.
Judging by their overreaction to what was NOT said, I don't think they are guys.
Good developers define a process that confirms to their bias of what 'good' is.
True. If the developers are truly good, instead of merely claiming to be good, the outcome will reflect that.
Ask any of them and they will tell you they are better then 90% of the others.
The problem is that most developers are wrong when they say this.
I have heard hundreds of excuse on why code isn't bad, or that sloppy code was all they had time for. It's never really true, it just comes does to lazy developers writing lazy code.
Most developers are lazy. The bad developer cuts corners and generates sloppy code. The good developer automates. The good developer gets help from someone with more experience. The good developer works hard to get things right the first time, because doing otherwise only creates more work.
No, the needs define the process. The needs dictate good process or bad process.
The needs shape the process, but they don't have to shape the implementation of the process.
Letting just the developer develop the process means it will be inconsistent and most likely useless in the long run.
I agree. There are a lot of other players with investments in the process. The developers do not work in a vacuum. However, if "the business" is pushing processes that are useless or disruptive, developers need to treat the processes like they would bad software requirements. Demonstrate the flaws. Offer alternatives. The pride a developer has in his code should extend all the way to the product sitting in front of the customer. This means that the good developer has to take responsibility for more than the code he commits. He has to be invested in the whole software development process. When he does that, he will not blindly accept bad processes.
I'm an experienced developer, I don't need any of these new-fangled practices to make my code good.
I'm glad I don't have to maintain this guys crap.
Developers in general won't accept processes that amount to busy work. You can tell when you have this kind of process because your manager is constantly harping on it but eventually gives up. Good developers define the processes.
You don't say? What an interesting take on modern society. Do you, perhaps, have some sort of periodical I might subscribe to?
My guess is that it is called "Whoosh! Entertainment for men."
The only thing worse than a grammar Nazi is a grammar Praetorian.
Tat. Doctor. Sinite illos filii tantum.
If you are not fucking swearing at your god damn, piece of shit computer, you're fucking doing it wrong!
Asshole!