Nobody handles cards like that anymore. So. Let's put an ad on Craigslist in the "gigs" section. Then we can have some guy who says he has a work permit (honestly) drive them over to his mama's house on the East side of town. He'll scan them with her XP machine so they can get onto the network.
digital has leeway before it fully breaks; but analog has to be done right or performance will suffer.
Huh? This is exactly the opposite of my experience. Analog TV shows snowy but watchable video from distant stations. Digital TV goes all to hell if the signal is disturbed in even the slightest way.
Software crashes due to single bit flips. Many analog systems tolerate values being slightly out of spec and roll on just fine. Resistors even have the tolerance color-coded right on them.
OK, scratch that. Interrupt service routine... it's been a long time since I've done that kind of thing; but I seem to recall that even full-blown PCs have that kind of issue. It looked like some kind of scripting language to me. There are so many lame scripting environments out there, I just kind of assumed. So. I apologize.
I was skimming the text and code of course and not doing a lot of deep thinking about it. You can't do deep thinking with stuff like this you read online. You have to triage. Given that globals are a notorious anti-pattern, you might want to throw in a line (of prose) explaining why you have to do that.
OK then, it's the environment that's stupid. Hardware and memory are cheap. Get something just a bit more expensive that permits better design. You'll be happy in the long run.
I mentally shut this out when I realized debounce() and tilted() were sharing a global variable called "ignore". Yeah, let's see what happens when feature creep sends this beyond 70 lines.
Can't be. What next? PEU-Dem (Public-Employee Union-Democratic party relationship) found to be one party rule? Nah. A judge actually shedding light on Calfornia's corrupted system. It's got to be April. I'm sweating like a pig, it's 8 PM and the Sun ain't gone down yet though. Something ain't right. Damned pranksters.
And years later, when we are gone and monkeys evolve again, these new intelligent animals will piece together the fact that there was once intelligent life here based on structures such as this.
No, years later when dinosaurs evolve again they'll assume that the substance is derived from dead mammals. Then the ultra-intelligent and efficient reptiles will dominate for another few million years, living lightly off the land such that vast swamps of plants that were never cut down produced oil so that the next mammal cycle has something to burn..
Proprietary was the best word I could find to describe these corporate languages. True, they are often Open Source, and thus not proprietary in the usual sense. OTOH, they are defined (initially at least) by their corporate implementation which is owned by the corporation. Compare and contrast with languages that have a standards organization. Corporations may hold seats with such an organization, but when it's a healthy org, no one firm has full control.
OK, this got me curious about Java, which definitely started as this kind of language... turns out it has the "Java Community Process" which was established in 1998, 3 years after the first public release of Java in 1995. OTOH, you don't hear much about it--people don't seem to discuss Java standards the way they discuss C standards. I haven't heard people say things like, "Java '12" whereas "C99" is something people say all the time.
Anyway, so if "proprietary" isn't the right word, I don't know what is. You see what I'm driving at here?
There's nothing to stop a corporate language from becoming standards-driven of course; I'd look at it as part of the maturity process. OK, maybe "corporate" would be a better word than "proprietary", but it may still not be the best way to describe it since "corporate" is a bit vague...
Apple is the king of vertical integration and proprietary standards. The only thing that surprises me is that it took them this long. MS beat them with C# by how many years? Google has two of these things (Go and Dart) AFAIK.
Now I just need to finish my universal cross-compiler that never quite takes advantage of all the features in these languages because it's too damn difficult and they are moving targets.
That's it. We need a language called "Target" that's constantly moving.
The pedo's problem is easy. He has no right to be forgotten. When you commit a crime and are properly convicted, you give up some rights. At least that's how it is in the US. If you're a felon you lose the right to vote, bear arms, etc. even after you're out of prison. You might be able to get them back, but they're no longer rights. You have to work to get them back.
So. If Europe has any laws about sex offender notification they should trump the right to be forgotten. If they don't have such laws, they should fix their (legal) code fast.
"Players, players, players..."; but he'll charge them $3000 to see the contract. Chair-throwing at every game of course. Best of all, slightly different and inferior version of plays used by the Lakers. Also, brown uniforms.
OK. I'm done now. No, wait. Spy devices embedded in every ticket, which may or may not get you into the arena due to various glitches.
Advanced civilizations coming to Earth for scarce resources is a great sci-fi plot device. That's about as far as it goes. Any civilization that could send ships the size of cities could almost certainly harvest any resource it wants without attacking an inhabited world.
Liquid water is plentiful in comets. Minerals are in asteroids. Of course I suppose the aliens could waste energy pulling that stuff out of Earth's gravity well out of spite so... yeah. Let's hide.
Since their slogan was "don't be Evil" I always figured they'd end up as one of the most evil companies on the planet. That's just the way humanity is. Anything idealistic tends to get perverted. The more idealistic it is, the more perverse it tends to be. Hence, "don't be Evil" is likely to get about as perverse as it comes. This is only the beginning. The ultimate Google UI to be placed in the browser, your car, and just about anything else will be reduced to a single button marked "Submit".
Oh crap... I'm using Chrome on Slashdot and it's already happening. Oh well... no choice but to push it...
Why not have an "Independents Only" or "Ballot qualified Third Party Only" option? AFAIK, candidates would still have to meet petition requirements to get on the ballot in their district so you shouldn't have to worry about dividing up the money between too many fringe candidates.
It's been noted that Bluetooth did wonders for the mentally ill--the schizophrenic talking to himself or imaginary creatures is now presumed to be using the headset on the other side of his head. This allowed them to fit in better with the rest of society.
Now we have the possibility that you can talk to a wall or a lamp post and be regarded as perfectly sane and normal.
It isn't really done though, until we come up with a way to interface with technology that requires screaming at the top of your lungs and urinating in random directions. Get on that right away.
That is funny, because now it sounds like he went too far in the opposite direction. I'd concede that he could at least prove that a program written in a pure functional language was correct, that the pure functions in the program were correct. Of course any useful program tends to have impure functions. This whole thing reminds me of the other story about the Haskell guy who thought the Holy Grail came from shoving impure constructs into the type system. IMHO, no. They're still doing evil, they're just doing it in the type system instead of the functions.
Then he shouldn't have said "good". He should have said "perfect". Yeah, sure. He "created a system for teaching how to do it". Does the Golden Gate Bridge come with that book?
Hmmm... now that I come to think of it, proving him wrong actually requires a significant number of programmers to start with BASIC and then go on to become "good programmers". Or perhaps, another way of looking at it is for a significant number of teachers to notice that un-teaching bad habits previously learned isn't all that hard. I think that is indeed the case. Once again, it's subjective. He leaves himself some wiggle room in that quote; but I stand firm in my conviction: It's wrong.
How many bugs are there in your programs? If the answer is non-zero, then no, you haven't proven him wrong, because that's what he was talking about
No it wasn't.
The quote in question is:
It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students that have had a prior exposure to BASIC: as potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration.
Proving him wrong doesn't require me to produce zero-defect code. It simply requires me to learn "good programming", which is subjective but I doubt he meant to imply it mean zero-defect production, which is an extraordinary bar to hurdle.
Slashdot Mirror
Nobody handles cards like that anymore. So. Let's put an ad on Craigslist in the "gigs" section. Then we can have some guy who says he has a work permit (honestly) drive them over to his mama's house on the East side of town. He'll scan them with her XP machine so they can get onto the network.
digital has leeway before it fully breaks; but analog has to be done right or performance will suffer.
Huh? This is exactly the opposite of my experience. Analog TV shows snowy but watchable video from distant stations. Digital TV goes all to hell if the signal is disturbed in even the slightest way.
Software crashes due to single bit flips. Many analog systems tolerate values being slightly out of spec and roll on just fine. Resistors even have the tolerance color-coded right on them.
Everybody knows that only your closest cronies will do the airport pickup. It's the sign of a true crony.
OK, scratch that. Interrupt service routine... it's been a long time since I've done that kind of thing; but I seem to recall that even full-blown PCs have that kind of issue. It looked like some kind of scripting language to me. There are so many lame scripting environments out there, I just kind of assumed. So. I apologize.
I was skimming the text and code of course and not doing a lot of deep thinking about it. You can't do deep thinking with stuff like this you read online. You have to triage. Given that globals are a notorious anti-pattern, you might want to throw in a line (of prose) explaining why you have to do that.
OK then, it's the environment that's stupid. Hardware and memory are cheap. Get something just a bit more expensive that permits better design. You'll be happy in the long run.
I mentally shut this out when I realized debounce() and tilted() were sharing a global variable called "ignore". Yeah, let's see what happens when feature creep sends this beyond 70 lines.
Can't be. What next? PEU-Dem (Public-Employee Union-Democratic party relationship) found to be one party rule? Nah. A judge actually shedding light on Calfornia's corrupted system. It's got to be April. I'm sweating like a pig, it's 8 PM and the Sun ain't gone down yet though. Something ain't right. Damned pranksters.
What do you want?
What else could you expect from a country, reigned by the QUEEN?
SLURM. It's highly addictive.
And years later, when we are gone and monkeys evolve again, these new intelligent animals will piece together the fact that there was once intelligent life here based on structures such as this.
No, years later when dinosaurs evolve again they'll assume that the substance is derived from dead mammals. Then the ultra-intelligent and efficient reptiles will dominate for another few million years, living lightly off the land such that vast swamps of plants that were never cut down produced oil so that the next mammal cycle has something to burn..
If they required a sarcasm tag, I'd put it on everything just to be safe. Or would I?
Proprietary was the best word I could find to describe these corporate languages. True, they are often Open Source, and thus not proprietary in the usual sense. OTOH, they are defined (initially at least) by their corporate implementation which is owned by the corporation. Compare and contrast with languages that have a standards organization. Corporations may hold seats with such an organization, but when it's a healthy org, no one firm has full control.
OK, this got me curious about Java, which definitely started as this kind of language... turns out it has the "Java Community Process" which was established in 1998, 3 years after the first public release of Java in 1995. OTOH, you don't hear much about it--people don't seem to discuss Java standards the way they discuss C standards. I haven't heard people say things like, "Java '12" whereas "C99" is something people say all the time.
Anyway, so if "proprietary" isn't the right word, I don't know what is. You see what I'm driving at here?
There's nothing to stop a corporate language from becoming standards-driven of course; I'd look at it as part of the maturity process. OK, maybe "corporate" would be a better word than "proprietary", but it may still not be the best way to describe it since "corporate" is a bit vague...
Apple is the king of vertical integration and proprietary standards. The only thing that surprises me is that it took them this long. MS beat them with C# by how many years? Google has two of these things (Go and Dart) AFAIK.
Now I just need to finish my universal cross-compiler that never quite takes advantage of all the features in these languages because it's too damn difficult and they are moving targets.
That's it. We need a language called "Target" that's constantly moving.
The pedo's problem is easy. He has no right to be forgotten. When you commit a crime and are properly convicted, you give up some rights. At least that's how it is in the US. If you're a felon you lose the right to vote, bear arms, etc. even after you're out of prison. You might be able to get them back, but they're no longer rights. You have to work to get them back.
So. If Europe has any laws about sex offender notification they should trump the right to be forgotten. If they don't have such laws, they should fix their (legal) code fast.
"Players, players, players..."; but he'll charge them $3000 to see the contract. Chair-throwing at every game of course. Best of all, slightly different and inferior version of plays used by the Lakers. Also, brown uniforms.
OK. I'm done now. No, wait. Spy devices embedded in every ticket, which may or may not get you into the arena due to various glitches.
OK. I'm done... I think.
Advanced civilizations coming to Earth for scarce resources is a great sci-fi plot device. That's about as far as it goes. Any civilization that could send ships the size of cities could almost certainly harvest any resource it wants without attacking an inhabited world.
Liquid water is plentiful in comets. Minerals are in asteroids. Of course I suppose the aliens could waste energy pulling that stuff out of Earth's gravity well out of spite so... yeah. Let's hide.
No, I think you mean, "How virtual reality literally became virtually real virtually overnight". Also, don't forget to work "cyber" in somewhere.
Since their slogan was "don't be Evil" I always figured they'd end up as one of the most evil companies on the planet. That's just the way humanity is. Anything idealistic tends to get perverted. The more idealistic it is, the more perverse it tends to be. Hence, "don't be Evil" is likely to get about as perverse as it comes. This is only the beginning. The ultimate Google UI to be placed in the browser, your car, and just about anything else will be reduced to a single button marked "Submit".
Oh crap... I'm using Chrome on Slashdot and it's already happening. Oh well... no choice but to push it...
Why not have an "Independents Only" or "Ballot qualified Third Party Only" option? AFAIK, candidates would still have to meet petition requirements to get on the ballot in their district so you shouldn't have to worry about dividing up the money between too many fringe candidates.
It's been noted that Bluetooth did wonders for the mentally ill--the schizophrenic talking to himself or imaginary creatures is now presumed to be using the headset on the other side of his head. This allowed them to fit in better with the rest of society.
Now we have the possibility that you can talk to a wall or a lamp post and be regarded as perfectly sane and normal.
It isn't really done though, until we come up with a way to interface with technology that requires screaming at the top of your lungs and urinating in random directions. Get on that right away.
Miles per Gallon equivalent is my guess, since there is no direct application of "gallons" when running as a pure EV.
That is funny, because now it sounds like he went too far in the opposite direction. I'd concede that he could at least prove that a program written in a pure functional language was correct, that the pure functions in the program were correct. Of course any useful program tends to have impure functions. This whole thing reminds me of the other story about the Haskell guy who thought the Holy Grail came from shoving impure constructs into the type system. IMHO, no. They're still doing evil, they're just doing it in the type system instead of the functions.
Then he shouldn't have said "good". He should have said "perfect". Yeah, sure. He "created a system for teaching how to do it". Does the Golden Gate Bridge come with that book?
Hmmm... now that I come to think of it, proving him wrong actually requires a significant number of programmers to start with BASIC and then go on to become "good programmers". Or perhaps, another way of looking at it is for a significant number of teachers to notice that un-teaching bad habits previously learned isn't all that hard. I think that is indeed the case. Once again, it's subjective. He leaves himself some wiggle room in that quote; but I stand firm in my conviction: It's wrong.
How many bugs are there in your programs? If the answer is non-zero, then no, you haven't proven him wrong, because that's what he was talking about
No it wasn't.
The quote in question is:
It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students that have had a prior exposure to BASIC: as potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration.
Proving him wrong doesn't require me to produce zero-defect code. It simply requires me to learn "good programming", which is subjective but I doubt he meant to imply it mean zero-defect production, which is an extraordinary bar to hurdle.