Yes decorators are a major wart, but who says you have to use them?
Um, sort of. At some point in the future you are likely to want, or need, to muck with someone else's code, and that someone may have thought decorators were the cat's meow.
I've gotten the impression that Python was designed to ensure that developers didn't do anything too out-of-hand by simply denying the option, from the enforced code formatting to the There's Only One Way To Do It philosophy. So, I tend to think that decorators were added because there is a compelling need for them.
, but the Python one will look more like pseudo-code with real English words
None of my pseudo-code has "self" everywhere, nor frequent use of underbar characters.
I tried Python, and it felt forced, not practical, as if purity were indeed the main point.
Even with the compulsary indentation I find Python hard to read, as there is a lot of syntax one has to read past. Persoanl preference, I guess, but Ruby is easier to read and write.
So, now the rich guy is taxed on only 20% of his income and the nearly-poor guy is taxed on 75%.
This is going to sound like a troll, but...
Why should people who have more, pay more?
It's off-topic, etc., but I'm curious if anyone can answer this without using subjective, ambigious words such as "fair" or "just," because it seems that the general "explanation" for paying taxes as a percentage of income is, "Well, that's only fair." Which explains nothing.
I thought spam (aside from the food) was solely tied to email.
Well, there ya go. I used to think that spam was solely tied to Usenet, until Web newbies hijacked the term. Proabably the same gang that ruined the word "hacker", too.
I am thankful that they didn't mess with it or change it.. It's great the way it is..
Question: Is it easy to change the hard drive and the battery?
Just curious; last I heard, if your battery died, you were sort of screwed, and for that sort of money you should be able to easily swap out/fix stuff on your own, should you care to.
What if the article would be the other way around, would you say the same?
Sure. Either way, it's him relating his experience, and giving an opinionated interpretation. He's not asserting that there are no good programmers who use Java. Just that he personally has yet to meet one. It's a data point.
I don't know who the writer is but if his experience is that then he doesn't know that much programmers.
Well, then, there you go. Why are you offended by his lack of experience? Introduce yourself to him. Then he'll be sure to know at least *one* good programmer who uses Java, no?
But if you don't know who Paul Graham is, then I suspect your experience may be lacking, too.
Graham may be wrong (well, in this case he's not), but he's no fool; if he says something that irks you, try to look past it for the deeper point.
But his statement explicitly said that he's "never met any GOOD Java programmers", and implied that there were none.
Please. His statement implied no such thing; you *infered* that. He's simply reporting personal experience. Others will have different stories to tell.
Don't be so sensitive. You prefer Java? Great. Go use it, and stop worrying what other people think.
Shit, asshole, do you have any idea what rape is? Here's a fucking clue: it is not at all like copyright violation.
Say whatever you like about P2P, but maybe try to pretend that you understand that, for too many people, rape is real and it's more than some cool-shock analogy for ill-expressed opinions.
Eric Raymond is a mediocre programmer at best, a drunkard, and likes guns. Can't you come up with a better example?
I wonder, then, if coding skills per se should not be the measure, but rather the broader intent behind the code?
I've met many people who have great daftng skills; they can draw and paint like anyting, but their work was boring. Then there are those with limited technical ability, but with a much more invigorating vision that somehow managed to come through.
While this is a big matter of taste, I think the Velvet Underground, for example, were far more interesting and influencial than, say, Yes, though Yes had arguably better musicians. The VU were better hackers.
Now, what is your definition of a "computer"? A mp3 file cannot be understood only by a computer. It can be understood by a portable mp3 player, is that a computer too?
Um, yeah. What do you think is converting the mp3 data into sound? Some computers are, like, REALLY small. Yeah, freaky, I know.:)
It can be understood by a car radio system,
WTF? Really?
is that a computer?
Well, it would need one to understand an MP3 data stream. If it's simply relaying radio signals or sound encoded as electrical impulses, well that has nothing to do with Mp3
But here's a question for the class: What if, instead of encoding an audio file as a set of data that requires an external program, the file was itself a program? How might that change the notion of fair use, copyright, deriviative works, and so on?
Get off the cockboat. If you are in love with some language the rest of the world doesn't care about that is fine, but don't talk shit about a language that people actually use.
Sorry, you're quite right. We need to be practical: teach them COBOL.
Oh, and thanks for the Ironic Statement of the Day
I couldn't see a first year comp sci student writing an internet chat room in C++, where as it's easy in Java.
Easy, sure, because the heavy lifting is hidden away. Not very instructional for that comp sci student.
Java(tm) may have its place in CS programs; some vocational training is handy for getting that first job. But, as a language, it's a bit half-assed for learning about computer science.
Just on a guess, I'd say there are a lot more PHP developers out there than Lua or Ruby developers (though Lua looks pretty cool).
Hmm. Well, I suspect there yet even more VB programers, so sites shouldmbe done in VBScript, no?
(Yeah, Im trolling.)
Besides, Ruby developers are all just ex-Pythoneers who thought Python [python.org] was becoming too popular, and don't really count as developers anyway;>)
Oh, but you are so wrong! We're really all just ex-Perlers who thought Pythin was becoming too popular for the wrong reasons.
(Even one who guessed that last comment was a troll, too, raise your hand...)
There are few Ruby jobs, but having it on my resumes almost always leads to a discussion of what it is, why I learned it, and why I use it. It gives me a chance to let the interviewer know more about me, see that I have a genuine interest in CS and software development, beyond simply wanting to know only the marketecture languages and APIs.
Showing that you are self-motivated, and more interested in using the right tool than the "cool" tool, makes an impression
The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) develops interoperable technologies (specifications, guidelines, software, and tools) to lead the Web to its full potential. W3C is a forum for information, commerce, communication, and collective understanding
No mention of standards.
And while membership is not restricted to vendors per se, vendor corporations are the major players.
If it quacks like a standard and walks like a standard, don't believe the people who call it a recommendation, a request for comments or a piece of blue cheese.
Granted, XML has achieved "duck standard" status. But the larger issue is one of language and precision, a problem likely created, but certainly argumented, by marketing.
The W3C has also blessed XML Schemas. Do you buy the idea that one should be using this headache because, after all, it's a 'standard'? Or should you use Relax NG, which is Yet Another Schema Standard?
Developers get pushed into uing inapproriate technolgies because clueless PHBs see the word "standard" attached to something and feel compelled to use it. "Must use [J2EE|Struts|SOAP|XML]; it's a standard."
Slashdot Mirror
Um, sort of. At some point in the future you are likely to want, or need, to muck with someone else's code, and that someone may have thought decorators were the cat's meow.
I've gotten the impression that Python was designed to ensure that developers didn't do anything too out-of-hand by simply denying the option, from the enforced code formatting to the There's Only One Way To Do It philosophy. So, I tend to think that decorators were added because there is a compelling need for them.
None of my pseudo-code has "self" everywhere, nor frequent use of underbar characters.
I tried Python, and it felt forced, not practical, as if purity were indeed the main point.
Even with the compulsary indentation I find Python hard to read, as there is a lot of syntax one has to read past. Persoanl preference, I guess, but Ruby is easier to read and write.
That reminds me: have to upload code deltas from my laptop! (I'm coding Ruby on vacation in Germany)
This is going to sound like a troll, but ...
Why should people who have more, pay more?
It's off-topic, etc., but I'm curious if anyone can answer this without using subjective, ambigious words such as "fair" or "just," because it seems that the general "explanation" for paying taxes as a percentage of income is, "Well, that's only fair." Which explains nothing.
Well, there ya go. I used to think that spam was solely tied to Usenet, until Web newbies hijacked the term. Proabably the same gang that ruined the word "hacker", too.
Makes it harder for competition to enter the market.
Question: Is it easy to change the hard drive and the battery?
Just curious; last I heard, if your battery died, you were sort of screwed, and for that sort of money you should be able to easily swap out/fix stuff on your own, should you care to.Sure. Either way, it's him relating his experience, and giving an opinionated interpretation. He's not asserting that there are no good programmers who use Java. Just that he personally has yet to meet one. It's a data point.
I don't know who the writer is but if his experience is that then he doesn't know that much programmers.Well, then, there you go. Why are you offended by his lack of experience? Introduce yourself to him. Then he'll be sure to know at least *one* good programmer who uses Java, no?
But if you don't know who Paul Graham is, then I suspect your experience may be lacking, too.
Graham may be wrong (well, in this case he's not), but he's no fool; if he says something that irks you, try to look past it for the deeper point.
Then go pick on Lispers
Please. His statement implied no such thing; you *infered* that. He's simply reporting personal experience. Others will have different stories to tell.
Don't be so sensitive. You prefer Java? Great. Go use it, and stop worrying what other people think.
Shit, asshole, do you have any idea what rape is? Here's a fucking clue: it is not at all like copyright violation.
Say whatever you like about P2P, but maybe try to pretend that you understand that, for too many people, rape is real and it's more than some cool-shock analogy for ill-expressed opinions.
I wonder, then, if coding skills per se should not be the measure, but rather the broader intent behind the code?
I've met many people who have great daftng skills; they can draw and paint like anyting, but their work was boring. Then there are those with limited technical ability, but with a much more invigorating vision that somehow managed to come through.
While this is a big matter of taste, I think the Velvet Underground, for example, were far more interesting and influencial than, say, Yes, though Yes had arguably better musicians. The VU were better hackers.
Probay better drunkards, too.
Except that it would be a lot more valuable if it offered precise meanings of the words "open" and "standard."
Ignoring for the moment the definition of "open", which of the following are standards:
I believe an argument can be made for each of these being a "standard," but for different reasons, and reasons that would not sit well with everyone.
Or 15, if you use Ruby.
Sarchasm: The gap between an attempt at clever banter and what results due to a lack of language skills.
Um, yeah. What do you think is converting the mp3 data into sound? Some computers are, like, REALLY small. Yeah, freaky, I know. :)
It can be understood by a car radio system,WTF? Really?
is that a computer?Well, it would need one to understand an MP3 data stream. If it's simply relaying radio signals or sound encoded as electrical impulses, well that has nothing to do with Mp3
But here's a question for the class: What if, instead of encoding an audio file as a set of data that requires an external program, the file was itself a program? How might that change the notion of fair use, copyright, deriviative works, and so on?
Sorry, you're quite right. We need to be practical: teach them COBOL.
Oh, and thanks for the Ironic Statement of the Day
Or go use it now.
Easy, sure, because the heavy lifting is hidden away. Not very instructional for that comp sci student.
Java(tm) may have its place in CS programs; some vocational training is handy for getting that first job. But, as a language, it's a bit half-assed for learning about computer science.
Annoying, I agree, but there are workarounds: http://www.bugmenot.com/
Corporate brass, aka "Blue-Haired's"? Eveyone I know with blue hair is, like, 15.
Hmm. Well, I suspect there yet even more VB programers, so sites shouldmbe done in VBScript, no?
(Yeah, Im trolling.)Besides, Ruby developers are all just ex-Pythoneers who thought Python [python.org] was becoming too popular, and don't really count as developers anyway ;>)
Oh, but you are so wrong! We're really all just ex-Perlers who thought Pythin was becoming too popular for the wrong reasons.
(Even one who guessed that last comment was a troll, too, raise your hand ...)
The problem with DRM is that people who should know better *still* do not call it what it is: Digital Restrictions Management.
So long as this those pushing this can continue to pretend that this is about protecting their so-called rights, the harder it is to argue against it.
Either call DRM what it is, and don't cede the moral high-ground, or just give up now.
Showing that you are self-motivated, and more interested in using the right tool than the "cool" tool, makes an impression
"You've heard it: the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) creates Web standards."
They are quoting what people say about them, not asserting what they are (though also not saying anything to dispell the misconception.)
It is a standards body.
From the front page:
The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) develops interoperable technologies (specifications, guidelines, software, and tools) to lead the Web to its full potential. W3C is a forum for information, commerce, communication, and collective understandingNo mention of standards.
And while membership is not restricted to vendors per se, vendor corporations are the major players.
Granted, XML has achieved "duck standard" status. But the larger issue is one of language and precision, a problem likely created, but certainly argumented, by marketing.
The W3C has also blessed XML Schemas. Do you buy the idea that one should be using this headache because, after all, it's a 'standard'? Or should you use Relax NG, which is Yet Another Schema Standard?
Developers get pushed into uing inapproriate technolgies because clueless PHBs see the word "standard" attached to something and feel compelled to use it. "Must use [J2EE|Struts|SOAP|XML]; it's a standard."