Maybe, but your statement was effectively "claiming XML is preferred is dubious.. the general way is to use java". Which, IME, is certainly *not* the case. But since "preferred" and "general" are both anecdotal at best, I don't think either of us is in danger of changing the other's mind about which approach best fits those terms.
Yeah, I should give that a try huh.. oh wait, I already did! I stand by my comments. Creating a layout in XML is intuitive? Nope, not. What else you got?
As far as the "XML files (being) the preferred way of designing a UI", that's kinda dubious at best. Generally most of the specifics are coded in Java, with only basic metadata about the app being specified in XML.
You're lying, or just very inexperienced with Android development. The typical, standard, preferred way of describing an Android app's UI is via XML; this allows you to very simply leverage the platform features that display the correct UI based on device capabilities such as screen size, resolution etc. Not to mention there are some things you simply cannot do in java, such as easily applying a style to a UI element (via something like textView.setStyle(R.style.text_view)).
Professional android developer (over 40 released apps) here with a deep, ingrained distaste for XML.
In several parts of the world (France for one, IIRC), fucking (and other sex-related words) are not considered curses, but words that invoke the almighty invisible sky-fairy *are*. So it would not be cursing to say "you fucking asshole", but it would be the height of rudeness to tell someone to go to hell.
Indeed, in Greece (again, if memory serves) the worst insult is something like 'go with the devil'.
Not saying that this is necessarily related to the GP's post, but it might provide some context for the rather odd self-censorship.
"historical narrative fiction"-- which the bible would have to be, if false-- simply didnt exist when it was written.
The fuck? Try: Ovid, Homer, and for reaaallllyy going back a long way, The Epic of Gilgamesh. The rest of your post uses the Bible's existence as evidence of its accuracy; aren't we above such logical fallacies?
You can provide evidence for your wife being in the living room; you cannot provide evidence for fiery lime-coloured mustelidaeans with a penchant for universe-creation. Whether the evidence of your wife's location is believed, of course, depends on several factors - but the fact is such evidence exists. As you say, proof (originally meaning "test", hence proving grounds, proof of the pudding, etc) is only absolute in mathematics - but there are standards of evidence generally accepted as proof, otherwise we wouldn't have a judicial system worthy of much.
Saying "God did it" is a cop-out answer equivalent to "I have no fucking clue why but instead of encouraging you directly to seek out answers, I'm going to parrot this bullshit answer that's been bandied around for centuries and that doesn't actually explain _anything_."
Operators like "++" map directly to the machine instructions on the hardware it was created on.
Sounds like that would be a function of the compiler, not the language. Or are you saying the PDP hardware had a '++' op-code which the C language was somehow able to access without that pesky compilation step? Not being snarky, I really want to know what you meant by that statement.
Dude, you're attacking (at least obliquely) a sacred cow - did you think the followers wouldn't come to its defence?
That said, you're still missing the point: it's easy to say "oh, without X we would still have Y just in a different form". The point is we got Y because of X, in the form of dmr. So his accolades are well deserved, and you're just being a punk.
GP is not insane, just confused because he thinks the iDoody is being sold as a general-purpose computing device, when it in fact is not. Just as if you bought a toaster expecting it to toast all manner of bread products, but due to an unfortunate lack of research on your part, turns out merely to lightly scorch muffins.
Lack of schematics notwithstanding, there exists an expectation that computery-looking things such as the iPoopy ARE in fact general-purpose computing devices, because that is all computery-looking things have been up until now, just as toasters have been general-bread toasting devices, and only the latest generation restricts them to muffins.
Me too . But if songs had been $0.99 wouldn't you just have have downloaded them instead having a friend tape it
He's saying the tape exposed him to music he wouldn't otherwise have heard, not that it made distribution necessarily any cheaper. At least, that was my take.
Slashdot Mirror
Dear Slashdot, neighbor has released wild animals - lions and tigers and bears, oh my - how do I protect myself?
Well if you're in Ohio, just call out the cops with their assault rifles. Because apparently tranquilizers are too humane^W^Wnot as much fun.
Fair enough - that reply was anonymous, so I did not automatically associate it with your good self.
Yes, no, and no. In that order.
Maybe, but your statement was effectively "claiming XML is preferred is dubious.. the general way is to use java". Which, IME, is certainly *not* the case. But since "preferred" and "general" are both anecdotal at best, I don't think either of us is in danger of changing the other's mind about which approach best fits those terms.
Yeah, I should give that a try huh.. oh wait, I already did! I stand by my comments. Creating a layout in XML is intuitive? Nope, not. What else you got?
As far as the "XML files (being) the preferred way of designing a UI", that's kinda dubious at best. Generally most of the specifics are coded in Java, with only basic metadata about the app being specified in XML.
You're lying, or just very inexperienced with Android development. The typical, standard, preferred way of describing an Android app's UI is via XML; this allows you to very simply leverage the platform features that display the correct UI based on device capabilities such as screen size, resolution etc. Not to mention there are some things you simply cannot do in java, such as easily applying a style to a UI element (via something like textView.setStyle(R.style.text_view)) .
Professional android developer (over 40 released apps) here with a deep, ingrained distaste for XML.
This is the first time I've seen XML presented as easy or intuitive.
In the short term, it's suicidal, but it might pay off in the long term.
You have that precisely backwards. Without short-term survival, long-term viability is significantly decreased.
..and that would matter if this lawsuit were about refrigerator disambiguation.
But it's not.
In several parts of the world (France for one, IIRC), fucking (and other sex-related words) are not considered curses, but words that invoke the almighty invisible sky-fairy *are*. So it would not be cursing to say "you fucking asshole", but it would be the height of rudeness to tell someone to go to hell.
Indeed, in Greece (again, if memory serves) the worst insult is something like 'go with the devil'.
Not saying that this is necessarily related to the GP's post, but it might provide some context for the rather odd self-censorship.
"historical narrative fiction"-- which the bible would have to be, if false-- simply didnt exist when it was written.
The fuck? Try: Ovid, Homer, and for reaaallllyy going back a long way, The Epic of Gilgamesh.
The rest of your post uses the Bible's existence as evidence of its accuracy; aren't we above such logical fallacies?
So you're saying if said badger existed, you could provide evidence for it?
By that argument, you've just successfully shown that God does not exist.
You can provide evidence for your wife being in the living room; you cannot provide evidence for fiery lime-coloured mustelidaeans with a penchant for universe-creation. Whether the evidence of your wife's location is believed, of course, depends on several factors - but the fact is such evidence exists. As you say, proof (originally meaning "test", hence proving grounds, proof of the pudding, etc) is only absolute in mathematics - but there are standards of evidence generally accepted as proof, otherwise we wouldn't have a judicial system worthy of much.
Saying "God did it" is a cop-out answer equivalent to "I have no fucking clue why but instead of encouraging you directly to seek out answers, I'm going to parrot this bullshit answer that's been bandied around for centuries and that doesn't actually explain _anything_."
Saying so removes reason from the argument.
What does it take to get people to see a problem with thier government?
Education.
Thanks for the clarification!
As the one making the assertion "God did it", it is up to ol' gramps to provide the evidence.
Please explain to us humans how we can get to your planet - it sounds like a wonderful place to visit.
I'm just not sure I'd want to live there.
The key word there is *research*. He didn't mean UNIX had stopped being useful, just that there was nothing further to learn from its development.
Of course it's a joke. Windows is drag-n-dropped.
Operators like "++" map directly to the machine instructions on the hardware it was created on.
Sounds like that would be a function of the compiler, not the language. Or are you saying the PDP hardware had a '++' op-code which the C language was somehow able to access without that pesky compilation step? Not being snarky, I really want to know what you meant by that statement.
Dude, you're attacking (at least obliquely) a sacred cow - did you think the followers wouldn't come to its defence?
That said, you're still missing the point: it's easy to say "oh, without X we would still have Y just in a different form". The point is we got Y because of X, in the form of dmr. So his accolades are well deserved, and you're just being a punk.
GP is not insane, just confused because he thinks the iDoody is being sold as a general-purpose computing device, when it in fact is not. Just as if you bought a toaster expecting it to toast all manner of bread products, but due to an unfortunate lack of research on your part, turns out merely to lightly scorch muffins.
Lack of schematics notwithstanding, there exists an expectation that computery-looking things such as the iPoopy ARE in fact general-purpose computing devices, because that is all computery-looking things have been up until now, just as toasters have been general-bread toasting devices, and only the latest generation restricts them to muffins.
How does a dog learn to appreciate the value of peeing outside? Or to respect what it took to learn that is where they should pee?
Me too . But if songs had been $0.99 wouldn't you just have have downloaded them instead having a friend tape it
He's saying the tape exposed him to music he wouldn't otherwise have heard, not that it made distribution necessarily any cheaper. At least, that was my take.