obviously the only way to deal with the problem of moving my hand from the keyboard is to use my desk chair as the mouse...
or as I like to call it the "ButtMouse"... (it's not like that you sick fucks! besides, that's an urban legend)
The ButtMouse works on the principle that the butt is the only free appendage that will ensure your hands never leave your nose... er, keyboard.... (my feet are already busy peddling power into my UPS), other available appendages refused to comment on my proposals.
Note, my other idea is that the whole desk, being already on rollers, could be used as a mouse...
I am not saying this with the authority of someone really knowing the detailed version, I've known many people working for HP and whatnot over the years and HP was legendary for good reason not just for good engineering but for having a company philosophy that GENERATES GOOD ENGINEERING... think about that software engineers who watch good ideas totally get screwed over and over because the company philosophy doesn't jibe with how good engineering happens.
Anyway... my simplistic but accurate simplification: old HP, chugging along, struggled to have that flashy experience... when the 90s came along they watched this internet boom and remembered their own growth days and thought, why can't we have that action--- holy hell look at them returns---- look at that darling technol--- no there! flashy lights!" And they couldn't handle it and they knew their old quality ridden ways wouldn't do it... slapdash was the way to go! rapid innovation and a million buzzword theories to justify it. Just enough grain of truth in the idea that there were some new approaches developing to justify a much more radical thing.
They wanted the 90s and got it, they wanted the internet boom experience and got it... a lot of heat and motion and ultimately failure of stupid promises with many things of value trashed forevermore.
I've read a bunch of the comments... is this fucking news to you?
hey, it's great, well written, clarifying, but this was obvious about Carly for a fucking ever.
the fucking HP way... it's like Buddha died bastards! Fine a fucking Hewlett before it's too late and the hula is lost forever!
HP is one of the single reasons why America OWNED TECH... yeah they are already dead, but bullshit on that... Fiorina is gone! Maybe she's discredited the non-HP way. HP was about great engineering, often meaning inexpensive too! quality for the dollar was a part of that, much more than IBM in its golden years. Fiorina was obviousoly killing it day one, and not in the "well things have to change way" but like pissing all over profitable things to do cheesy marketing MBA-head things...
if she runs the world bank, she will screw that up too... the emotional loss won't be as serious as with HP, but the world wide depression will be.
I could only loathe Fiorina more if they actually had pictures of that time she ate a baby.
but damnit when is Push Computing going to take off... I'm still sitting on half a billion dollars of PointCast stock!
Re:The Problem With XML
on
Effective XML
·
· Score: 1
well, there are a lot of possible examples like that... Ant seems like one of the more defensible ones though... I don't use Ant, but the parsing of Ant config files has to be a minimal part of the cost of the build.
The thing that makes XML appear cool (assuming one want to try) is just the fact that it's HTML where you can make your own tags. But that is pretty cool.
Re:The Problem With XML
on
Effective XML
·
· Score: 1
that is a good point and xml is an interchange format... if you are going to load information regularly from disk then you very likely do want to consider a binary format better indexed and pre-parsed to address the issues you mention.
Re:The Problem With XML
on
Effective XML
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
one of the original ideas of XML was that a simple (SAX like) parser can be written by "a graduate student in two weeks".
The validation etc is more difficult, but then it's not a matter of parsing the XML in the first place.
It matters what you mean, but in general XML is easily parsed by machines... and easily represented in internal datastructure which are however efficient you make them.
I have always liked while(!done)... that reads to me... "while not done" and seems really clear to me that somewhere in that clause will be ways of setting done=true.
I've had that corrected by respected colleagues to "while (done == false)"... is that really any more clear?
I remember when the if (!ptr) thing looks confusing, so I understand, but I had been programming only a couple months at the time, quite long ago, and is it bad for that to make sense? Don't get me wrong, obviously this is different from my while example because strictly speaking, NULL does not have to equate to "false"... it just happens to on about every architecture made. The "while" version is more defensible, because !done really is the same as (done == false), even if false is not (int)0.
Slashdot Mirror
anytimes EDS says something pretend you are hearing it in Ross Perot's voice.
problem solved!
all you need is the ability to run processes... which I do right here.... on this abacus...
you're stuck deep in a hole... climb out! climb out!
actually, it looks like a manufactured troll...
evolution is still a crapshoot... that's what I found last I installed it... so I've never tried again.
they'll probably get it right eventually.
mark my words!
people don't know what they are missing.
flamebait! flamebait?!?! oh, sure, this is flamebait... but what a sad sad day that such a sentiment should be flamebait.
first person to compare C++ to coding directly in Machine Language gets a special prize.
obviously the only way to deal with the problem of moving my hand from the keyboard is to use my desk chair as the mouse...
or as I like to call it the "ButtMouse"... (it's not like that you sick fucks! besides, that's an urban legend)
The ButtMouse works on the principle that the butt is the only free appendage that will ensure your hands never leave your nose... er, keyboard.... (my feet are already busy peddling power into my UPS), other available appendages refused to comment on my proposals.
Note, my other idea is that the whole desk, being already on rollers, could be used as a mouse...
I am not saying this with the authority of someone really knowing the detailed version, I've known many people working for HP and whatnot over the years and HP was legendary for good reason not just for good engineering but for having a company philosophy that GENERATES GOOD ENGINEERING... think about that software engineers who watch good ideas totally get screwed over and over because the company philosophy doesn't jibe with how good engineering happens.
Anyway... my simplistic but accurate simplification: old HP, chugging along, struggled to have that flashy experience... when the 90s came along they watched this internet boom and remembered their own growth days and thought, why can't we have that action--- holy hell look at them returns---- look at that darling technol--- no there! flashy lights!" And they couldn't handle it and they knew their old quality ridden ways wouldn't do it... slapdash was the way to go! rapid innovation and a million buzzword theories to justify it. Just enough grain of truth in the idea that there were some new approaches developing to justify a much more radical thing.
They wanted the 90s and got it, they wanted the internet boom experience and got it... a lot of heat and motion and ultimately failure of stupid promises with many things of value trashed forevermore.
I've read a bunch of the comments... is this fucking news to you?
hey, it's great, well written, clarifying, but this was obvious about Carly for a fucking ever.
the fucking HP way... it's like Buddha died bastards! Fine a fucking Hewlett before it's too late and the hula is lost forever!
HP is one of the single reasons why America OWNED TECH... yeah they are already dead, but bullshit on that... Fiorina is gone! Maybe she's discredited the non-HP way. HP was about great engineering, often meaning inexpensive too! quality for the dollar was a part of that, much more than IBM in its golden years. Fiorina was obviousoly killing it day one, and not in the "well things have to change way" but like pissing all over profitable things to do cheesy marketing MBA-head things...
if she runs the world bank, she will screw that up too... the emotional loss won't be as serious as with HP, but the world wide depression will be.
I could only loathe Fiorina more if they actually had pictures of that time she ate a baby.
but damnit when is Push Computing going to take off... I'm still sitting on half a billion dollars of PointCast stock!
well, there are a lot of possible examples like that...
Ant seems like one of the more defensible ones though... I don't use Ant, but the parsing of Ant config files has to be a minimal part of the cost of the build.
The thing that makes XML appear cool (assuming one want to try) is just the fact that it's HTML where you can make your own tags. But that is pretty cool.
that is a good point and xml is an interchange format... if you are going to load information regularly from disk then you very likely do want to consider a binary format better indexed and pre-parsed to address the issues you mention.
one of the original ideas of XML was that a simple (SAX like) parser can be written by "a graduate student in two weeks".
The validation etc is more difficult, but then it's not a matter of parsing the XML in the first place.
It matters what you mean, but in general XML is easily parsed by machines... and easily represented in internal datastructure which are however efficient you make them.
.
this part is especially funny... roflmao.
it was an honor to be your straight man!
I want to say something funny about XML, but there is nothing.
good point
"I wanted to shit on his desk and set his car on fire."
that was a sample of one of the comments in your code, isn't it?
I find that really funny.
I know where it comes from but... I can just imagine novels written in C.
Then what happens?...?!
first, I like the old "bad" version.
the argument against it that I know is that NULL is not nec cast to false, and NEITHER have to be (int)0.
then again, I can't think of any platform that wasn't arranged so that false = 0 = NULL...
funny...
and I know languages where they are not optimized away!
comments can be misleading, but the code never lies, it always works exactly as written.
I have always liked while(!done)... that reads to me... "while not done" and seems really clear to me that somewhere in that clause will be ways of setting done=true.
... is that really any more clear?
I've had that corrected by respected colleagues to "while (done == false)"
I remember when the if (!ptr) thing looks confusing, so I understand, but I had been programming only a couple months at the time, quite long ago, and is it bad for that to make sense? Don't get me wrong, obviously this is different from my while example because strictly speaking, NULL does not have to equate to "false"... it just happens to on about every architecture made. The "while" version is more defensible, because !done really is the same as (done == false), even if false is not (int)0.
jesus.
misleading !
I expect better of the new york time-=-- what? where am I?
except one of the sides has the data on their side.
so it's really just the other side that will not respect the data. right?
no problem, just reboot.