a = 56; b = System.Date; c = Time.Now; a = Time.Now + a/2; g = a.ToString a = g.Left(a,4) b = a.Right(2) g = a.ToString etc.....
e.g. thinking about how to do it nicely, but with a bit of verbosity (I wouldn't really do the first, I'd usually do it tidier) is much more preferable to worrying about wordyness verbosity, because your just writing what your thinking as you go along (well some people do think like that) and not actually working out how to do it in a nice clean way.
Ideally both the code and the logic and structure should be pretty obvious, even in Java. [do one thing and do it well, be that a class, interface, function, loop, if statement, naming convention, whatever] (I suppose there are some very rare mitigating circumstances for some possible performance requirements etc...)
Now if you want a real bitch, immutable data types!!!! slow as hell, written for people who can't code (especially as there are no mutable ones in there)
The real coding difference is really a nice obvious saving the type at the correct point, as and when and if required. Over fucking around with the immutable data-types that don't give you much flexibility.
ah it's called blind typing. Touch typing is a subset of blind typing where you use touch instead of sight. Though you can blind type without touch typing.
touch typing is where you feel where the keys are (touch) I use a different type of typing where I don't have to know where the keys are or look at them either and use, well pretty much anything.
I find this much better for programming than when I've tried to use touch typing, as I can type with one hand and hold a phone or use a mouse and also because a lot of the keys are pretty far away from the traditional touch typing bumps on the keyboard I don't have that restraint either.
There is a name for it (basically typing in a trained intuitive manner rather than by touch) but I can't find it. (maybe on the touch typing discussion page on wikipedia as I think I raised it their once. but it appears to have gone.
ah.. if typing is slower than thinking (which it should be) it's an ideal opportunity to think ahead. Thus planning what you are going to do next and how.
Then you just have to type that out, so not thinking too much about it or typing, and can continue to think ahead or have a conversation with someone whilst coding at the same time.
Americans who kill Afghan people in Afghanistan = Terrorists.
American people who propagate a philosophy contra to that of the Muslim [or whatever] philosophy outside America = Terrorist.
I think the saying goes, people in glass skyscrapers shouldn't throw money around. Or something like that. Or was it 'let no man buy nor sell less he have the mark of the beast'
The actual definition of a Terrorist is if they attack the civilian population or the army. The former apparently being a campaign of terror and not a political movement. [though quite frankly I'd rather not have any political movements, they fill me with terror!]
That definition was made, unsurprisingly, by politicians or their ilk.
So next time you see a police officer on the street being a bit nasty to a civilian, think to yourself. Are my government fighting for my freedom, or are they terrorists, terrorising civilians?
I can only assume that they can't make that distinction, because they've never actually known anything. (don't know what closure is) so can't make any meaningful comparison.
some people don't learn or think that way. When dealing with the general population you have to teach to the lowest common denominator. Not surprisingly those that reach the top of this 'lowest common demonator' system, appear to fall quite nicely into that group of people. For instance choosing majority vote over truth, and that really is the lowest common denominator of rationality.
I'd agree too, it's all theory. Something that's exceptionally overlooked.
In some way axioms up approach may be a better one. Along with some stuff on three state logic systems and triangulation opposed to the more black and white mathematical axioms.
that's the point I was making. though I can't see the 'person?' who replied to me making that point in a similar counter objective manner to the way I was. Infact he appeared to be trying to re-enforce the prejudice I was countering. (that's redundant)
the point, which seems to go un-noted though it's widely documented. is that some people (sociopath/psychopath genus) don't have an inbuilt sense of morality, and instead have to have it taught to them. It's about 1/25 people, probably according to people who are like that and like to be taught things and control others.
If someone says for instance 'bad parenting' then that's a sure sign they don't have natural morality but had to have it taught to them. More over, they don't even understand that it's possible because it's not part of their reality, they can't think that way so ultimately can't understand it. (AKA 'theory' of mind)
Your having a laugh right? just like drugs, alcohol etc...
and what does legality have to do with it? So if some freedom fighters (I'll call them the IRA cos that's not too controversial) take up arms after being attacked by their government, the law making them terrorists is OK is it? and it's going to stop them.
laws don't stop anything of that nature, you can't stop something once it's happened. They just end up putting people in prison.
There are a few quite strong far right groups in the UK, and I expect the KKK is still going.
and MPs not knowing what they are talking about, except censorship, is a bad idea too.
I'm a worried about all the Gay stuff on the internet, I don't want my good white Anglo Saxon Catholic kids reading the poof-tattle. They'll grow up to be Nancy boys.
Slashdot Mirror
oh yeh, there's a difference.
sudo to give the jist.
CompanyEvent = Company.Management.Calander.GetEvent(OliverTheRed.System.Date.Time.Now.Format("YYYYDDMM HH:MM:SS")
is preferable to:
a = 56; /2;
b = System.Date;
c = Time.Now;
a = Time.Now + a
g = a.ToString
a = g.Left(a,4)
b = a.Right(2)
g = a.ToString
etc.....
e.g. thinking about how to do it nicely, but with a bit of verbosity (I wouldn't really do the first, I'd usually do it tidier) is much more preferable to worrying about wordyness verbosity, because your just writing what your thinking as you go along (well some people do think like that) and not actually working out how to do it in a nice clean way.
Ideally both the code and the logic and structure should be pretty obvious, even in Java. [do one thing and do it well, be that a class, interface, function, loop, if statement, naming convention, whatever] (I suppose there are some very rare mitigating circumstances for some possible performance requirements etc...)
Now if you want a real bitch, immutable data types!!!! slow as hell, written for people who can't code (especially as there are no mutable ones in there)
The real coding difference is really a nice obvious saving the type at the correct point, as and when and if required. Over fucking around with the immutable data-types that don't give you much flexibility.
shame I can't see that stand.
Was it made from the tree of the knowledge of good and bad, and not just the good that was before it? or forked tongue snake skin, that would be cool.
This is Slashdot,
your allowed to do what you want.
people may not like it, and your IP may get blocked. But that doesn't stop you doing it.
dam junk filter kicked in.
ah it's called blind typing. Touch typing is a subset of blind typing where you use touch instead of sight.
Though you can blind type without touch typing.
touch typing is where you feel where the keys are (touch)
I use a different type of typing where I don't have to know where the keys are or look at them either and use, well pretty much anything.
I find this much better for programming than when I've tried to use touch typing, as I can type with one hand and hold a phone or use a mouse and also because a lot of the keys are pretty far away from the traditional touch typing bumps on the keyboard I don't have that restraint either.
There is a name for it (basically typing in a trained intuitive manner rather than by touch) but I can't find it. (maybe on the touch typing discussion page on wikipedia as I think I raised it their once. but it appears to have gone.
if you have a problem with the amount you have to type, you are obviously not thinking enough about what you are typing.
I prefer overly verbose code to overly verbose logic and patterns.
ah.. if typing is slower than thinking (which it should be) it's an ideal opportunity to think ahead.
Thus planning what you are going to do next and how.
Then you just have to type that out, so not thinking too much about it or typing, and can continue to think ahead or have a conversation with someone whilst coding at the same time.
If you are based in the US but work on Asian servers than Thai ping speed may well matter.
Americans who kill Afghan people in Afghanistan = Terrorists.
American people who propagate a philosophy contra to that of the Muslim [or whatever] philosophy outside America = Terrorist.
I think the saying goes,
people in glass skyscrapers shouldn't throw money around. Or something like that.
Or was it 'let no man buy nor sell less he have the mark of the beast'
The actual definition of a Terrorist is if they attack the civilian population or the army. The former apparently being a campaign of terror and not a political movement. [though quite frankly I'd rather not have any political movements, they fill me with terror!]
That definition was made, unsurprisingly, by politicians or their ilk.
So next time you see a police officer on the street being a bit nasty to a civilian, think to yourself.
Are my government fighting for my freedom, or are they terrorists, terrorising civilians?
Why can't it be better given the caliber of the institutions involved?
Ever wonder why some really successful people didn't stick with those institutions and went it alone.
no not with you with them.
I can only assume that they can't make that distinction, because they've never actually known anything. (don't know what closure is) so can't make any meaningful comparison.
some people don't learn or think that way. When dealing with the general population you have to teach to the lowest common denominator. Not surprisingly those that reach the top of this 'lowest common demonator' system, appear to fall quite nicely into that group of people. For instance choosing majority vote over truth, and that really is the lowest common denominator of rationality.
I'd agree too, it's all theory. Something that's exceptionally overlooked.
In some way axioms up approach may be a better one. Along with some stuff on three state logic systems and triangulation opposed to the more black and white mathematical axioms.
I think there's a distinction to be made between believing and knowing.
well, if they didn't get much of a break in life, may as well give them one whilst locked up, or they won't know what their missing once they get out.
what do you mean win? I'm not fond of team sports.
that's the point I was making. though I can't see the 'person?' who replied to me making that point in a similar counter objective manner to the way I was. Infact he appeared to be trying to re-enforce the prejudice I was countering. (that's redundant)
the point, which seems to go un-noted though it's widely documented. is that some people (sociopath/psychopath genus) don't have an inbuilt sense of morality, and instead have to have it taught to them. It's about 1/25 people, probably according to people who are like that and like to be taught things and control others.
If someone says for instance 'bad parenting' then that's a sure sign they don't have natural morality but had to have it taught to them. More over, they don't even understand that it's possible because it's not part of their reality, they can't think that way so ultimately can't understand it. (AKA 'theory' of mind)
I'm English.
The English and American Armys have done what?
need not I remind you of your hippocratic naturebloody sunday?
"By your own logic people who lay IED's in Afganistan are freedom fighters and to commended."
Yep.
sometimes the obvious needs pointing out, 'Your having a laugh right?'
does a Ferengi consider a woman in traditional Islamic dress porn?
removal from society?
Your having a laugh right? just like drugs, alcohol etc...
and what does legality have to do with it? So if some freedom fighters (I'll call them the IRA cos that's not too controversial) take up arms after being attacked by their government, the law making them terrorists is OK is it? and it's going to stop them.
laws don't stop anything of that nature, you can't stop something once it's happened. They just end up putting people in prison.
There are a few quite strong far right groups in the UK, and I expect the KKK is still going.
its not the feasibility it's the ideas.
and MPs not knowing what they are talking about, except censorship, is a bad idea too.
I'm a worried about all the Gay stuff on the internet, I don't want my good white Anglo Saxon Catholic kids reading the poof-tattle. They'll grow up to be Nancy boys.
darknets and torrents.
well lets see how it comes out in the wash.