And if it were actually used for this purpose you could simply download a list of plates whose registrations have expired or been revoked into each scanner, and have the scanner report it when it saw one of those plates. In other words the LAPD's monitoring goes way beyond what is necessary to enforce the law, which is (or used to be) strongly frowned on by the courts.
It won't mean a thing that you have a car that can run.
Where did I say it did? I simply pointed out that "CME will fry your car" is a myth. CME will fry the electric grid is not a myth, and that's a monster of a problem. Many of the things you mention follow from that.
Otherwise, you'd have to run your program, and discover that type error at runtime.
Don't be absurd. Type problems don't show up during testing - they show up 3 weeks after the code has been released, and then only in situations that are practically impossible to reproduce. That makes debugging more interesting. Any idiot can find type problems when the compiler does it for you.
So do you rely on implicit or automagical type conversions? That doesn't do much for error checking. No, I don't do web programming, but I've worked on code that had to do a lot of string to whatever conversions. The biggest pain, but one of the most important things, is detecting errors in the string format. You need an explicit function to do that right, and a way to handle the errors. Once you have the explicit function, what's so hard about declaring that it returns an object of class ObiWan?
when I work with dynamically typed languages I tend to spend similar amounts of times if not more figuring out what really is and is not supported with this dynamic object in front me
Much worse than writing dynamically typed code is reading it. If I write function foo in a dynamically typed language, I know it's supposed to return an integer. If I'm reading somebody else's code, I often winding up guessing that an integer makes sense. Of course it may return a float or a string on odd Tuesdays when the moon is full. Much nicer for it to explicitly say it returns an integer, and have the compiler check that that's the truth.
Haskell's NIH version of SQL is tedious. Why didn't they just implement SQL?
I haven't tried SQL, but in general Haskell's libraries are one of its weaknesses.
Also, closures seem to me to violate the premise of static variables and fixed variable scoping. When you introduce closures into a language they are bound to cause all the same problems as global variables.
I don't agree. A closure should produce a new pure function (some languages allow otherwise, but not Haskell). With functions as first class objects, you can just pass and return them like data. There is nothing about that that suggests the evils of globals.
I get sick of spending half my time dicking around with static types, casts, etc and spinning my wheels chasing down type errors
If you spend half, or any appreciable part of your programming time dealing with static typing issues, then you're doing something seriously wrong. Occasionally the compiler will be a pain in the ass about it, but most of the time static typing should require nary a thought. If it's otherwise, you're not thinking about types clearly. The static typing is there to catch you when you screw up. It also serves as useful documentation for the next poor schmuck that has to look at your code, and for good measure the compiler enforces the accuracy of this type of "documentation". If you're really too lazy to type "int" or "double", try a language with type inference.
Then I tried Haskell and my mind was duly blown. Now I'm a huge proponent of static typing, even if I still can't stand Java and avoid C++ unless necessary.
While I have mixed feelings about Haskell as a whole, it's got the best damned type system I've ever seen. My advice to designers of new languages is just copy Haskell's type system.
However, if the CME trashes the power grid (a likely effect) you'll have a problem pumping gas for the car because the gas station pumps are electric. I experienced that problem first hand after Hurricane Sandy. IIRC there was talk of a law requiring at least some gas stations to have backup generators, but I don't know what happened to it. You could also just get a hand pump or something, but it'll be slow. There may also be problems with the rest of the delivery network (a problem after Sandy was that some of the fuel barge docks were trashed), and I don't think a loss of the power grid would help refineries, pipelines (they need pumping stations) or possibly even wells very much.
Hey, remember the Great Blizzard of '88? (1888 - but that was a Northeast thing. I'm sure there are plenty of good Midwestern stories though). Now we have computers, so we can more easily analyze it in excruciating statistical detail, complete with color charts. You obviously don't appreciate all the wonderful improvements that computers have made in our lives.
He knew the game was rigged. How else could the @#$%! Seahawks win? He also knew that if he said anything he'd find himself at the bottom of Puget Sound. Paul Allen is way more vicious than any mafioso.
I sure hope you don't consider yourself brighter than average, because you can't even make an elementary argument. You've done nothing except cite demographics, as though by itself that meant something.
There is a wonderful saying, though unfortunately I forget the original Yiddish (things always sound pithier in Yiddish, even if you don't speak it). Anyway, the gist of it is that brains to the lazy are a waste.
I'm glad you understand that. There are too many people here who seem to base their fragile egos on their supposedly superior intellect, but play the victim instead of taking responsibility for their own actions (or lack thereof). Given that lack of initiative people, no matter how bright they are, will never accomplish much. Even Einstein had to work his ass off - his theories didn't just fall out of the sky.
Ironically these are often the same people who decry the (exaggerated) trend of education towards giving everybody "self esteem" instead of challenging them. Apparently that's a bad thing for the "masses", but the way superior intellects should be treated.
Those of us who read fiction (instead of how-to books) out of boredom, and who didn't get pointed in a more useful direction by teachers (or worse, got in trouble for not paying attention to the "new" material that we'd figured out 3 years earlier), didn't have the same outcome.
So? With that attitude and victim mentality, I doubt you would have accomplished much more anyway.
When I was in grade school in a rural area, we did get the bookmobile coming by every other week for a couple hours.
I remember bookmobiles. I also remember you could order books they didn't normally carry and they would bring them the next time they came. If you really need something fancy, there is the Inter-library Loan program. If your local library didn't let you do those things, it's not my fault that you had a lousy library. That's a local government function, and should be addressed by the people living there. It's a hell of a lot cheaper than providing special classes to coddle everybody who thinks they're so terribly bright, and whose parents choose to live in the ass end of nowhere.
Those are nice hypotheticals, but I've never known anyone that had serious problems because of that. Maybe a little frustration and a few lost points, but that's about it. If you can't deal with that, then you'll never accomplish anything.
I more than agree that Common Core sucks. It's a disservice both to students who are appreciably brighter than average and those less bright. I doubt it helps the average either.
Oh, you're bright, well, you should do fine no matter what; ergo we need to assign 3-teachers per kid to those less advantaged than you. so that they can grow up to live in a group-home and run the fryer at the fast-food joint
That sounds about right, because if you're so bright, you shouldn't need a lot of handholding. If you do, then you're not that bright. Or you're whining because you weren't coddled and stroked and constantly told how smart and special you were because you managed to pass a few AP classes.
Slashdot Mirror
It's the Republicans that want to make sure that engineers make as little money as possible.
Guess which party gets the largest donations from the tech industry.
So if you have invalid stolen plates ...
Big deal. Just use a white list instead of a black list.
the existing system has a near-infinite upgrade path ... [your system is] a hardware locked-down system with limited utility.
That's the point.
And if it were actually used for this purpose you could simply download a list of plates whose registrations have expired or been revoked into each scanner, and have the scanner report it when it saw one of those plates. In other words the LAPD's monitoring goes way beyond what is necessary to enforce the law, which is (or used to be) strongly frowned on by the courts.
It won't mean a thing that you have a car that can run.
Where did I say it did? I simply pointed out that "CME will fry your car" is a myth. CME will fry the electric grid is not a myth, and that's a monster of a problem. Many of the things you mention follow from that.
Instead of listening to your argument, they just dismiss you for being old (you know, early 30s) and not understanding the "new" technology.
You could point out that dynamic typing was introduced one year after static typing. Dynamic typing is state-of-the-art, circa 1958.
Otherwise, you'd have to run your program, and discover that type error at runtime.
Don't be absurd. Type problems don't show up during testing - they show up 3 weeks after the code has been released, and then only in situations that are practically impossible to reproduce. That makes debugging more interesting. Any idiot can find type problems when the compiler does it for you.
So do you rely on implicit or automagical type conversions? That doesn't do much for error checking. No, I don't do web programming, but I've worked on code that had to do a lot of string to whatever conversions. The biggest pain, but one of the most important things, is detecting errors in the string format. You need an explicit function to do that right, and a way to handle the errors. Once you have the explicit function, what's so hard about declaring that it returns an object of class ObiWan?
when I work with dynamically typed languages I tend to spend similar amounts of times if not more figuring out what really is and is not supported with this dynamic object in front me
Much worse than writing dynamically typed code is reading it. If I write function foo in a dynamically typed language, I know it's supposed to return an integer. If I'm reading somebody else's code, I often winding up guessing that an integer makes sense. Of course it may return a float or a string on odd Tuesdays when the moon is full. Much nicer for it to explicitly say it returns an integer, and have the compiler check that that's the truth.
Haskell's NIH version of SQL is tedious. Why didn't they just implement SQL?
I haven't tried SQL, but in general Haskell's libraries are one of its weaknesses.
Also, closures seem to me to violate the premise of static variables and fixed variable scoping. When you introduce closures into a language they are bound to cause all the same problems as global variables.
I don't agree. A closure should produce a new pure function (some languages allow otherwise, but not Haskell). With functions as first class objects, you can just pass and return them like data. There is nothing about that that suggests the evils of globals.
I get sick of spending half my time dicking around with static types, casts, etc and spinning my wheels chasing down type errors
If you spend half, or any appreciable part of your programming time dealing with static typing issues, then you're doing something seriously wrong. Occasionally the compiler will be a pain in the ass about it, but most of the time static typing should require nary a thought. If it's otherwise, you're not thinking about types clearly. The static typing is there to catch you when you screw up. It also serves as useful documentation for the next poor schmuck that has to look at your code, and for good measure the compiler enforces the accuracy of this type of "documentation". If you're really too lazy to type "int" or "double", try a language with type inference.
Then I tried Haskell and my mind was duly blown. Now I'm a huge proponent of static typing, even if I still can't stand Java and avoid C++ unless necessary.
While I have mixed feelings about Haskell as a whole, it's got the best damned type system I've ever seen. My advice to designers of new languages is just copy Haskell's type system.
Actually that sounds a lot like Haskell.
BTW, why is it called Ceylon instead of Sri Lanka?
the reason Scala is so sweet is that it does type inference
Haskell also does type inference.
Old and Modern cars will be unaffected by a CME.
Shhh. You'll ruin the fun - it makes a great urban legend. However, even survivalists don't think it will be a problem (that link also has links to serious studies).
However, if the CME trashes the power grid (a likely effect) you'll have a problem pumping gas for the car because the gas station pumps are electric. I experienced that problem first hand after Hurricane Sandy. IIRC there was talk of a law requiring at least some gas stations to have backup generators, but I don't know what happened to it. You could also just get a hand pump or something, but it'll be slow. There may also be problems with the rest of the delivery network (a problem after Sandy was that some of the fuel barge docks were trashed), and I don't think a loss of the power grid would help refineries, pipelines (they need pumping stations) or possibly even wells very much.
He's becoming a bookie..
From the New Devil's Dictionary:
bookie (noun), a statistician who has decided to make some real money.
Talking about the weather is something new?
Hey, remember the Great Blizzard of '88? (1888 - but that was a Northeast thing. I'm sure there are plenty of good Midwestern stories though). Now we have computers, so we can more easily analyze it in excruciating statistical detail, complete with color charts. You obviously don't appreciate all the wonderful improvements that computers have made in our lives.
He knew the game was rigged. How else could the @#$%! Seahawks win? He also knew that if he said anything he'd find himself at the bottom of Puget Sound. Paul Allen is way more vicious than any mafioso.
I sure hope you don't consider yourself brighter than average, because you can't even make an elementary argument. You've done nothing except cite demographics, as though by itself that meant something.
There is a wonderful saying, though unfortunately I forget the original Yiddish (things always sound pithier in Yiddish, even if you don't speak it). Anyway, the gist of it is that brains to the lazy are a waste.
I'm glad you understand that. There are too many people here who seem to base their fragile egos on their supposedly superior intellect, but play the victim instead of taking responsibility for their own actions (or lack thereof). Given that lack of initiative people, no matter how bright they are, will never accomplish much. Even Einstein had to work his ass off - his theories didn't just fall out of the sky.
Ironically these are often the same people who decry the (exaggerated) trend of education towards giving everybody "self esteem" instead of challenging them. Apparently that's a bad thing for the "masses", but the way superior intellects should be treated.
Those of us who read fiction (instead of how-to books) out of boredom, and who didn't get pointed in a more useful direction by teachers (or worse, got in trouble for not paying attention to the "new" material that we'd figured out 3 years earlier), didn't have the same outcome.
So? With that attitude and victim mentality, I doubt you would have accomplished much more anyway.
When I was in grade school in a rural area, we did get the bookmobile coming by every other week for a couple hours.
I remember bookmobiles. I also remember you could order books they didn't normally carry and they would bring them the next time they came. If you really need something fancy, there is the Inter-library Loan program. If your local library didn't let you do those things, it's not my fault that you had a lousy library. That's a local government function, and should be addressed by the people living there. It's a hell of a lot cheaper than providing special classes to coddle everybody who thinks they're so terribly bright, and whose parents choose to live in the ass end of nowhere.
Those are nice hypotheticals, but I've never known anyone that had serious problems because of that. Maybe a little frustration and a few lost points, but that's about it. If you can't deal with that, then you'll never accomplish anything.
I more than agree that Common Core sucks. It's a disservice both to students who are appreciably brighter than average and those less bright. I doubt it helps the average either.
In my grade school they discouraged students from learning outside the classroom.
They only need to learn three words to deal with that: go to hell.
Oh, you're bright, well, you should do fine no matter what; ergo we need to assign 3-teachers per kid to those less advantaged than you. so that they can grow up to live in a group-home and run the fryer at the fast-food joint
That sounds about right, because if you're so bright, you shouldn't need a lot of handholding. If you do, then you're not that bright. Or you're whining because you weren't coddled and stroked and constantly told how smart and special you were because you managed to pass a few AP classes.