Perhaps it'll taste like grocery-store, refrigerated-truck, warehouse-shelf toppings, but it won't taste anything like my pizza. My pizza, with farm-fresh toppings that have never seen a truck, nor a refrigerator, nor even a shelf, goes bad in about twelve hours -- with visible mould in 24 hours.
Many people have said "it's so bad, even the dog won't eat it". Well I've always said: "if mould doesn't want to eat it, neither do I."
So if your pizza keeps for three years, it lacks any form of nutrition. It's not for me.
yeah, if they can be modelled that way. but most businesses, especially small businesses, have zero consistency because what you're modeling is the will of the will of the owner. It shifts too much to have any structure. So there are no business entities to class, because everything's a class of 1.
That's when OO falls apart, crashes, and burns. When no class gets used more than once, there's no point in having the class. When no method is used on more than one object, there's no reason to tie it to an object. And when no object has more than one instance, there's no point in calling it an object.
When, at execution-time, no line of code is executed more than once, there's no benefit to OO.
And then you're left with only the disadvantages of OO -- code-structure, hard definitions, layers of abstraction, no injection points -- which makes everything an exercise in making it take as long as possible, to be as robust and future proof as possible, even though it'll never be used again and it has no future worth considering.
Umm, yes I did. It is. It's on my tax forms and everything. I'm interested in knowing how the hell you thought that you could dis-authenticate my name simply by reading it here? How the hell would you know what my name is?!
In either case, it's irrelevant. There's no confusion that I'm the same person as I was moments ago. You, on the other hand, I have no way to know if you are the same poster or a different one.
you can lol all you like. I don't believe that you're actually laughing.
I feel your pain. I actually went into, and then out of OO programming. The issue is that while it's a perfect technique for some very specific directions, it's horrible for solving real-world business problems.
You, specifically you, need to look at OO programming much differently. Then you'll find it quite easy to use. It's not actually any different than procedural programming. It's simply a collection of encapsulated procedural mini-programs. That's it. It's exactly the same code, it's just called differently. It's the same function/subroutine, it's just launched/triggered/executed with a different syntax.
The reason it's horrid for most business problems is simply because business problems are solved by figuring out how to sequence individual and often disparate tasks. Whereas OO is designed to solve problems where the same task needs to be solved countless times and the sequence is almost irrelevant.
If you've always tried to use OO for business tasks, then your struggle wasn't with the hammer, it was with how to use the hammer to turn a screw. But if I were to give you a nail, you'd suddenly understand how to use the hammer quite instinctively.
If you still/ever need someone to walk you through it, let me know. I'm happy to help.
If they gave you a computer science degree, and never taught you how to pick up a new language for free in a matter of a few days on your own in today's world of unlimited documentation for the ten-year-old languages that you've listed, then they're useless, you should never have gone in the first place.
You're now talking to a population of people who've picked up dozens of languages, and continue to pick up a handful every year. If you can't learn on your own, then you aren't worth squat to anybody.
C and C++ are among the most complicated and in-depth languages to learn, and even more effortful to comprehend. PHP is probably the simplest, with the shallowest learning curve and the most documentation. If you can't move from sprinting to walking, then you should just lie down now. Learn to bake pizzas; you'll find it challenging.
there will be more students than graduates, both per year and as numbers grow. So you need to charge graduates more money than their education was worth. Interesting.
never need to graduate. can stay in school forever for free. don't need to get a job after graduating. can stay unemployed until the "set number of years" expires.
this discussed "communal benefit" of advanced education existed twenty years ago. I don't believe it does today. It really won't ten year from now. I refer you to the case of too-many-chiefs-not-enough-indians. This modern concept of not entering the work-force until age 25 isn't sustainable without poverty-stricken and war-torn immigrants. And we're running out of those globally.
When your word "maybe" becomes "didn't", your current phone is no longer an entry device, was my point. Entry level has nothing to do with high or low end. I'm actually on a very high end dumbphone. wrap your tiny head around that one.
and when you're done, if you ever are, you might want to put your name to your arguments, it might actually give them some weight.
Another term whose meaning has become useless. "Entry level" used to describe the level at which a person started, and then subsequently grew out of. It's not an entry level device if the consumer buys it and never grows up. I mean it is an entry level device, but calling it one is meaningless since any first is an entry.
Entry level devices, loss-leaders, starters, basics; these all used to be items that a consumer new to the technology would trial. If it worked for them, they'd throw it out and buy the full-fat version. That's just not true anymore.
So stop calling it an entry-level device. It's just a cheap crappy device that makes zero profit for anyone. Call it a useless device.
...and it's not your decision. You don't. You take the job as it is, for what it is, or you leave. You don't get to change the client, and that includes their decision in other persons.
My car, with it's thirty-year old headlight system also has the ability to having greater and brighter operation. They are called high-beams, and they are totally useless when there's another car within three kilometres of me. Modern bright low-beams already blind me, forcing me to swerve two-cars back and high-beam the guy who was low-beaming me until he pulls off the road to ask me why.
It's not common courtesy and it's not common sense -- now it's the law.
Look, I'm on the side of the commenters too. I don't want to be forced to sit on a plane and hear dozens of phone calls. I'd much prefer the silence.
But there's no way in hell that I want to obligate other people to not doing something just for my own convenience!
Laws weren't ever meant to make life easier or more convenient. Laws were meant to stop people from directly harming each other. I've zero interest in telling people what they should be doing in general. This is very much a generational issue "there must be a law or a rule to tell me how I ought to behave" is something right out of a religious text. I don't need help deciding how to behave. I don't want others to have that help either.
Welcome to today's infinite surveillance. It's the only way to enforce these kinds of behavioural restrictions.
This isn't difficult. Employees get paid for their time. Brick-layers and programmers alike. The brick layer doesn't fix the wall for free. The bulider pays the brick layer by the hour to fix the wall. The owner doesn't pay the builder because the builder is contracted by the owner whereas the brick-layer is employed by the builder.
And this all makes sense. Since the choice of brick quality is made by the builder, the builder is accountable for fixing it.
Same goes for the software programmer, whose employer chose the platforms and the deployment schedule. The programmer gets paid to work. The quality of the work doesn't affect the pay at all -- just the odds of future employment.
For the record, I own and operate a web development company, for 21 years now. Bug fixing is always free to the client for the life of the project. I hate it when dumb employees make stupid mistakes. But I don't get to withhold their payment. I do get to fire them though. And I do get to engineer a platform that requires fewer employees. And I do get to choose clients and projects that don't require me to have employees do anything at all.
So, to answer your questions directly, there is no difference between software bugs and wall bricks. The only question is whether or not you contracted the programmer or hired the brick-layer.
Oh yeah. My parents did a huge job of that. I had complete "freedom". Between a bicycle that I'd take out with friends for full-day runs at age 12, and a car at 16, and suburban neighbourhoods throughout, they never held me back.
But man, the sheer number of lectures, and the length of those lectures, in the event that I did anything that they didn't wind up liking. Sheesh. The only discipline was the lecture, and it was always after-the-fact. I'm not talking about an hour in the kitchen either. I'm talking about four hour lectures in chairs and couches with the two of them and me in the sitting area off of their master bedroom.
I can't even count the number of stupid things that I didn't do purely because I didn't want to spend four hours listening to my parents about it after.
Well respected means that they've got other things to do, which is why they aren't working on it anymore, and why you were brought in to the job in the first place. There's a very likely chance that this isn't his best-effort project, but rather was done as a quick-fix, or a really-fast effort. He probably never thought it would last beyond phase 1, which is why it isn't stellar code in the first place. Hey, if a contractor can stick with it, so much the better. But since you can't, and it's not your fault that you can't, it's time to rebuild it.
And contractors are perfect for rebuilding things that already exist. No need for a spec, nor for supervision. Just rebuild it. Ask for the time, and you'll get it. Ask for a quick meeting to discuss possible-future features so you build it properly this time. You'll get that too.
...and then you listed arguments as to why one would care, and then you said "Did I say this particular approach was a good idea?!" -- with an interrobang no less. "I simply explained to you why people want this...".
I asked why would "I" want this. You answered why others would.
You might want to define "preserving their memory or their remains" to discover that it doesn't cover what's being suggested. Not at all. It sounds like it does, hence the marketing of the idea, but it actually doesn't.
Sit, think, and then discover. But hey, it's not like this is the first time you've been fooled by clever marketing. 80% of insurance, mortgages, vitamins, fitness gyms, tanning salons, gadgets. All sorts of things that you've been convinced into buying that don't actually provide the benefits expected by the purchaser. Congrats on another.
So, go ahead, waste your money. I'll enjoy your tax dollars I guess.
We've got a few thousand years of people dying. We don't need any help. Certainly not this kind of help. This would be detrimental to everything you're saying.
So I'm dead. Why do I care about this? And why would I choose to spend money on it now? And what if I want to retain my own intellectual property when I'm dead? Can I install a web-server in my tomb-stone to host this thing?
Oh wait, there is no tomb-stone -- again, because I'm dead so why would I want one? Hey look! It's another service to rape and impoverish people who have zero self-esteem in the first place!
Don't worry. You can suck in this life. In your afterlife, you'll be wise and useful. Hey look! It's another religious promise!
Last I checked, a facsimile after death is called a zombie.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps it'll taste like grocery-store, refrigerated-truck, warehouse-shelf toppings, but it won't taste anything like my pizza. My pizza, with farm-fresh toppings that have never seen a truck, nor a refrigerator, nor even a shelf, goes bad in about twelve hours -- with visible mould in 24 hours.
Many people have said "it's so bad, even the dog won't eat it". Well I've always said: "if mould doesn't want to eat it, neither do I."
So if your pizza keeps for three years, it lacks any form of nutrition. It's not for me.
yeah, if they can be modelled that way. but most businesses, especially small businesses, have zero consistency because what you're modeling is the will of the will of the owner. It shifts too much to have any structure. So there are no business entities to class, because everything's a class of 1.
That's when OO falls apart, crashes, and burns. When no class gets used more than once, there's no point in having the class. When no method is used on more than one object, there's no reason to tie it to an object. And when no object has more than one instance, there's no point in calling it an object.
When, at execution-time, no line of code is executed more than once, there's no benefit to OO.
And then you're left with only the disadvantages of OO -- code-structure, hard definitions, layers of abstraction, no injection points -- which makes everything an exercise in making it take as long as possible, to be as robust and future proof as possible, even though it'll never be used again and it has no future worth considering.
Umm, yes I did. It is. It's on my tax forms and everything. I'm interested in knowing how the hell you thought that you could dis-authenticate my name simply by reading it here? How the hell would you know what my name is?!
In either case, it's irrelevant. There's no confusion that I'm the same person as I was moments ago. You, on the other hand, I have no way to know if you are the same poster or a different one.
you can lol all you like. I don't believe that you're actually laughing.
I feel your pain. I actually went into, and then out of OO programming. The issue is that while it's a perfect technique for some very specific directions, it's horrible for solving real-world business problems.
You, specifically you, need to look at OO programming much differently. Then you'll find it quite easy to use. It's not actually any different than procedural programming. It's simply a collection of encapsulated procedural mini-programs. That's it. It's exactly the same code, it's just called differently. It's the same function/subroutine, it's just launched/triggered/executed with a different syntax.
The reason it's horrid for most business problems is simply because business problems are solved by figuring out how to sequence individual and often disparate tasks. Whereas OO is designed to solve problems where the same task needs to be solved countless times and the sequence is almost irrelevant.
If you've always tried to use OO for business tasks, then your struggle wasn't with the hammer, it was with how to use the hammer to turn a screw. But if I were to give you a nail, you'd suddenly understand how to use the hammer quite instinctively.
If you still/ever need someone to walk you through it, let me know. I'm happy to help.
And yet, I put my name behind my words. Gives them some weight. You might try not running away from yours.
Ok, that came out a little harsher than I'd intended. Let's blame it on passion.
If they gave you a computer science degree, and never taught you how to pick up a new language for free in a matter of a few days on your own in today's world of unlimited documentation for the ten-year-old languages that you've listed, then they're useless, you should never have gone in the first place.
You're now talking to a population of people who've picked up dozens of languages, and continue to pick up a handful every year. If you can't learn on your own, then you aren't worth squat to anybody.
C and C++ are among the most complicated and in-depth languages to learn, and even more effortful to comprehend. PHP is probably the simplest, with the shallowest learning curve and the most documentation. If you can't move from sprinting to walking, then you should just lie down now. Learn to bake pizzas; you'll find it challenging.
there will be more students than graduates, both per year and as numbers grow. So you need to charge graduates more money than their education was worth. Interesting.
never need to graduate. can stay in school forever for free.
don't need to get a job after graduating. can stay unemployed until the "set number of years" expires.
this discussed "communal benefit" of advanced education existed twenty years ago. I don't believe it does today. It really won't ten year from now. I refer you to the case of too-many-chiefs-not-enough-indians. This modern concept of not entering the work-force until age 25 isn't sustainable without poverty-stricken and war-torn immigrants. And we're running out of those globally.
When your word "maybe" becomes "didn't", your current phone is no longer an entry device, was my point. Entry level has nothing to do with high or low end. I'm actually on a very high end dumbphone. wrap your tiny head around that one.
and when you're done, if you ever are, you might want to put your name to your arguments, it might actually give them some weight.
Another term whose meaning has become useless. "Entry level" used to describe the level at which a person started, and then subsequently grew out of. It's not an entry level device if the consumer buys it and never grows up. I mean it is an entry level device, but calling it one is meaningless since any first is an entry.
Entry level devices, loss-leaders, starters, basics; these all used to be items that a consumer new to the technology would trial. If it worked for them, they'd throw it out and buy the full-fat version. That's just not true anymore.
So stop calling it an entry-level device. It's just a cheap crappy device that makes zero profit for anyone. Call it a useless device.
...and it's not your decision. You don't. You take the job as it is, for what it is, or you leave. You don't get to change the client, and that includes their decision in other persons.
My car, with it's thirty-year old headlight system also has the ability to having greater and brighter operation. They are called high-beams, and they are totally useless when there's another car within three kilometres of me. Modern bright low-beams already blind me, forcing me to swerve two-cars back and high-beam the guy who was low-beaming me until he pulls off the road to ask me why.
Putting the sun into a car isn't helpful.
It's not common courtesy and it's not common sense -- now it's the law.
Look, I'm on the side of the commenters too. I don't want to be forced to sit on a plane and hear dozens of phone calls. I'd much prefer the silence.
But there's no way in hell that I want to obligate other people to not doing something just for my own convenience!
Laws weren't ever meant to make life easier or more convenient. Laws were meant to stop people from directly harming each other. I've zero interest in telling people what they should be doing in general. This is very much a generational issue "there must be a law or a rule to tell me how I ought to behave" is something right out of a religious text. I don't need help deciding how to behave. I don't want others to have that help either.
Welcome to today's infinite surveillance. It's the only way to enforce these kinds of behavioural restrictions.
This isn't difficult. Employees get paid for their time. Brick-layers and programmers alike. The brick layer doesn't fix the wall for free. The bulider pays the brick layer by the hour to fix the wall. The owner doesn't pay the builder because the builder is contracted by the owner whereas the brick-layer is employed by the builder.
And this all makes sense. Since the choice of brick quality is made by the builder, the builder is accountable for fixing it.
Same goes for the software programmer, whose employer chose the platforms and the deployment schedule. The programmer gets paid to work. The quality of the work doesn't affect the pay at all -- just the odds of future employment.
For the record, I own and operate a web development company, for 21 years now. Bug fixing is always free to the client for the life of the project. I hate it when dumb employees make stupid mistakes. But I don't get to withhold their payment. I do get to fire them though. And I do get to engineer a platform that requires fewer employees. And I do get to choose clients and projects that don't require me to have employees do anything at all.
So, to answer your questions directly, there is no difference between software bugs and wall bricks. The only question is whether or not you contracted the programmer or hired the brick-layer.
Oh yeah. My parents did a huge job of that. I had complete "freedom". Between a bicycle that I'd take out with friends for full-day runs at age 12, and a car at 16, and suburban neighbourhoods throughout, they never held me back.
But man, the sheer number of lectures, and the length of those lectures, in the event that I did anything that they didn't wind up liking. Sheesh. The only discipline was the lecture, and it was always after-the-fact. I'm not talking about an hour in the kitchen either. I'm talking about four hour lectures in chairs and couches with the two of them and me in the sitting area off of their master bedroom.
I can't even count the number of stupid things that I didn't do purely because I didn't want to spend four hours listening to my parents about it after.
Monitoring, supervision, and being watched are three very different things.
Those of us raised by good parents have always felt that way. It's never been a problem.
Let me know when you start speaking without words, and that's when I'll stop programming in text.
Sherades just doesn't work as a form of communication. Welcome to visual programming.
What the hell do you have against text? Books not workin' for you? Video killed the radio star. Nothing killed the book.
Well respected means that they've got other things to do, which is why they aren't working on it anymore, and why you were brought in to the job in the first place. There's a very likely chance that this isn't his best-effort project, but rather was done as a quick-fix, or a really-fast effort. He probably never thought it would last beyond phase 1, which is why it isn't stellar code in the first place. Hey, if a contractor can stick with it, so much the better. But since you can't, and it's not your fault that you can't, it's time to rebuild it.
And contractors are perfect for rebuilding things that already exist. No need for a spec, nor for supervision. Just rebuild it. Ask for the time, and you'll get it. Ask for a quick meeting to discuss possible-future features so you build it properly this time. You'll get that too.
Enjoy.
Heh, I've been adamently against insurance/warranties for decades now. So that's correct.
...and then you listed arguments as to why one would care, and then you said "Did I say this particular approach was a good idea?!" -- with an interrobang no less. "I simply explained to you why people want this...".
I asked why would "I" want this. You answered why others would.
I see the senility. But it ain't on my side.
So you decided to argue a point that no one was making? You're making no sense.
You might want to define "preserving their memory or their remains" to discover that it doesn't cover what's being suggested. Not at all. It sounds like it does, hence the marketing of the idea, but it actually doesn't.
Sit, think, and then discover. But hey, it's not like this is the first time you've been fooled by clever marketing. 80% of insurance, mortgages, vitamins, fitness gyms, tanning salons, gadgets. All sorts of things that you've been convinced into buying that don't actually provide the benefits expected by the purchaser. Congrats on another.
So, go ahead, waste your money. I'll enjoy your tax dollars I guess.
We've got a few thousand years of people dying. We don't need any help. Certainly not this kind of help. This would be detrimental to everything you're saying.
So I'm dead. Why do I care about this? And why would I choose to spend money on it now?
And what if I want to retain my own intellectual property when I'm dead? Can I install a web-server in my tomb-stone to host this thing?
Oh wait, there is no tomb-stone -- again, because I'm dead so why would I want one?
Hey look! It's another service to rape and impoverish people who have zero self-esteem in the first place!
Don't worry. You can suck in this life. In your afterlife, you'll be wise and useful.
Hey look! It's another religious promise!
Last I checked, a facsimile after death is called a zombie.