Wow. I spend a lot of time in Canada, and I don't think I've ever seen money spelled that way. Maybe you're trying to make a joke that it takes more (Canadian) monney to equal (U.S.) money. In that case you should spell it "monnney" or even "monnnney".
Re:Hatred against muslims
on
More WTC News
·
· Score: 1
Nice post. It occurred to me yesterday that the terrorists who caused this atrocity were fully aware of a possible backlash against arab-americans. In fact, they are probably hoping for one. An American backlash against arabs and the Islamic religion will erode any support that the U.S. could get from moderate arabs. Hopefully, any action that the U.S. takes will have the support of some Moslem countries.
If I'm a decent boss, and I treat you well (including a decent salary, and training to further you), why can't I expect a little loyalty.
If you're a decent boss then you should expect loyalty.
And why can't I take such simple steps as blurring your face on television to keep the guys with deeper pockets from purchasing you, after I've made you what you are (assuming, of course, that I actually have made you what you are)?
If you think that "guys with deeper pockets" are going to "purchase" your employees, then you don't expect loyalty. Does this mean you aren't a decent boss? Maybe, you could just be paranoid. Also, IME employers don't "make you what you are", employees have to do that themselves.
Being a programmer is generally a thankless job. I think its a mistake for this company to take away some of their employee's kudos. I also fail to see how obscuring their faces on TV is going to protect them from recruiters. All a headhunter needs is your name and/or phone number to contact you.
In a way, they are basing it on the admin's. This quote sums it up well:
Wurzler found that system administrators working on open source systems tend to be better trained and stay with their employers longer than those at firms using Windows software, where turnover can exceed 33 percent per year. That turnover contributes to another problem: System administrators are not implementing all the patches that have been issued for Windows NT, Wurzler said.
I know if I wasn't going to be around in a couple of months it would be very easy to "forget" to download and apply each patch as it comes out. Its much easier to just wait for the next service pack. Not that this is a good attitude to have.
Here is the only reference to "GNU/Linux" that I could find in the article:
That's the way GNU/Linux development should happen.
Everywhere else, Linux is just Linux. I would guess that Bruce means: That's the way GNU or Linux development should happen. Of course, I've been wrong before, so flame away.
My guess is that IBM is really after Informix's customers. Sure they'll support the Informix software for a while (probably quite a while - IBM is good that way). They'll also pull some ideas out of Informix and add them to DB2. But I think the main goal is to make those customers IBM customers. A nice side effect of this for IBM is those customers won't turn to Oracle.
Re:evolving hardware *very* sensitive to environme
on
Microchips That Evolve
·
· Score: 1
As you said:... the trouble was these systems were incredibly sensitive to the environment. I remember an earlier article about this research where they discussed the impact of temperature changes. This quote from the current article addresses the environmental factor:
And get this: Evolution had left five logic cells unconnected to the rest of the circuit, in a position where they should not have been able to influence its workings. Yet if Thompson disconnected them, the circuit failed. Evidently the chip had evolved a way to use the electromagnetic properties of a signal in a nearby cell. But the fact is that Thompson doesn't know how it works.
This reminds me of maintaining some kinds of legacy software. The project lead will tell you "We don't know how this code works, but it does so don't touch it".
The solution is to build more complex test harnasses and test for how the circuit responds to a variety of environments, but that starts to get more and more expensive.
Which means that this technique could be useful for niche applications, for example some types of embedded circuits.
I've heard it said that in the future programming will be more like gardening than building up with legos, but I dunno...
I can't see this technique being used for general software development. The high price will only allow large companies to "grow" robust code. The blackbox nature of the code will make it impossible for VARs or customers to modify.
The scary bit is that it actually looks like it was written by a clueless reporter, not someone who should have at least an inkling of how to write a plausible story.
I love the picture of the reporter that MSNBC displays next to the story. He certainly looks clueless. He does have nice hair, however.
So it's not the bundling of an HTML rendering engine that bothers me, it's the crap that comes with it.
I agree. I have only looked into using the IE COM Objects a couple of times, so I could be wrong, but they seem to do too much. Let's say I wanted to create a browser for Win32 platforms using Delphi. The point of this new browser would be to be more secure than IE itself (mostly by limiting features). At a minimum I would like to use different security settings than IE normally does and filter what types of objects are retrieved from the network. It doesn't look like you can do either of these things with the IE objects. Or maybe I just didn't look hard enough.
BTW, on my windows boxen, I just set the option for active x code and scripting to "prompt" instead of enable or disable. It can be a pain at times, but unless I'm doing something like visiting the Windows update site, I usually deny any active x invokations on almost all web sites I visit.
For me, I set most of the ActiveX options to disable. Unfortunately, when I visit a site that uses ActiveX, I see a dialog warning me that the page may not display properly because I have disabled ActiveX controls. This can also be a pain. I guess its time to look into Opera again.
Having developed on IBM i-Series servers (i.e., AS/400 systems) since the launch of Silverlake in 1988 until 1999,...
Wow, I guess I'm not the only AS/400 programmer who visits/.
I agree with most of your points re. RPG, except this one:
1. Fixed format syntax (not true since the advent of RPG/400 many moons ago)
I think you mean RPG IV. Even here however, most of an RPG IV program will be fixed format. Although I agree with your points, however, I must disagree with your conclusions. I think that C or C++ could be as productive as RPG with the proper libraries. Plus, I prefer to use C (or Java) instead of RPG because it is more marketable. Having RPG on your resume is going to open fewer doors next year (and the year after) than it does this year.
... wish IBM would do a better job marketing their strengths.
So do I, but I don't put all of the blame on IBM. The IT managers who have AS/400 apps need to bite the bullet and modernize those apps. Nothing shouts "OLD LEGACY JUNK!" like green-screen apps.
The way I read the article, these researchers don't understand exactly how the gene "reprogramming" process works. Its hard to get better at something when you don't know what you're doing.
Ding, ding, ding! We have a winner!
As a contract programmer, I've been to a few different companies. None of them want you to install software on the company PC's (which is understandable). Most of them don't want you to change the config. (even desktop colors) because you might break something. My current client, however, is the first one that has locked down the PC's (using the Policy Editor) so that the user can't change anything. I had to jump through hoops so I could remap the keyboard when running some terminal emulation software. I can understand why a little control is necessary, but one size does not fit all!
As a side note, I don't understand why "Win98 experience" has any meaning.
Icons along the top let you browse your hard drive, change your view, search your computer,
or navigate forward, back, and "up" (that's the only confusing icon in the bunch--it takes
you "up" a folder level).
I disagree, "up" is the only intuitive icon in the bunch, it takes you up a folder level,
like you would expect. What the hell do "forward" and "back" do? Of course, I think the web
page metaphor is a bad fit for file management. OTOH, I think the explorer metaphor popularised
in Windows 95 is a good fit. Microsoft's annual interface changes are annoying.
For example, when you click a folder full of music files, you'll see links to publish the
entire folder to the Web (using a wizard, of course) and buy music online from WindowsMedia.com.
But at this stage--and in the upcoming final version--this feature publishes only to MSN sites
or to a local network, not to your own Web or FTP site.
...
The new software plays DVDs and also rips CD audio into well-compressed WMA files (a
proprietary format that combines good sound quality with smaller file sizes than MP3).
Anyone up for some "Embrace and extend"?
I don't know if this is a special CNET theme or the standard one, but I can't read half of text
in the screenshots (on tabs, in hints, etc). What is up with that?
This reminds me of a speech that I heard last year about how marketeers view us "consumers". I believe it was either at last years Comdex or Borcon conference. I also believe the speaker had something to do with the Cluetrain Manifesto. The point of the speech was that marketeers viewed the rest of the world as "gullets". To them the average consumer would swallow any deal that looked good. Unfortunately they might be right.
Marketeers are not your friends. Targeted marketing is not being done for your benefit. These people already know too much about us; they don't need to know any more.
From what I understand, the Sahara was caused by (of course) human activity, and (not so of course) goat activity.
I had heard this explanation in connection with the growing deserts in Ethiopia several years ago. However, the Sahara has been a desert for a long time now. At the dawn of civilization in Egypt the Sahara was a desert. I find it hard to believe that there was a large enough population of sheep- and goat-herders in the area to create the Sahara before the rise of Egypt!
Face it - humans have truly fscked up this planet. If we go to Mars, we'll only fsck it up as well.
Wow! You seem to have a lot of distain (hatred even) for the human race. Maybe you need to talk to someone about it.
Read Stanley Kim Robinson's Mars series (Red/Green/Blue Mars) - really gives good perspectives on both sides of the argument)
I'm halfway through this series and I have to say: Its great. I wish that one of the recent films on Mars would have been (even loosely) based on this series.
First of all, if someone is supposed to maintain a piece of code, he or she has to read the code (not the comments!) and understand it. Period.
This is very true. Code still needs to be commented however, so that programmers can easily find things that they need to read and understand. I also find it helpful when (I/O) files and variables have a one line description where they are defined (so I don't have to check external files or a data-dictionary to see what something is for).
In most of the cases, its even better to just forget about the comments at all.... It's unlikely that a programmer will adjust all the comments (if there are changes in the code) to be completely consistent all the time. You simply can't trust comments.
If you have been given reponsibity for a program and the comments in the code are that bad then either rewrite them or delete them. Forgetting about the comments doesn't help anyone - its just irresponsible and lazy. On the other hand, if some other programmer, who you don't like, is responsible for the code and you are just making a one-time change then definitely ignore the comments. Make sure that you don't add quality comments of your own either.
Comments won't be translated into machine code... but the source code will, and that's what's going to run in the end.
This attitude just burns me. The source code isn't just for the machine; Its also for you (the programmer). If this wasn't true then the open source movement would be pointless.
Now, I'm not saying good code has no comments, I just disagree with your your claim: The best code has lots of comments.
I have to agree with you (alvi) here. The original poster was wrong (but close). He should have written:
The best code has quality comments.
Unlike Eric Green, I don't know that you're full of [BLEEP!] - you could be joking. Like him, however, I do think that Software Engineering can be fun. Here's an analogy to explain why I believe that:
I'm a big basketball fan and I've played a lot of pickup games. When playing you see a lot of guys who try to make the big flashy play. It could be a behind-the-back pass or a near-impossible shot, but its obvious that flash is what's important to them. It doesn't matter that they missed that shot 3 times before that, threw the ball out of bounds twice in a row, or only play defense every other time - they're having fun.
Then there's other players who play defense, take high-percentage shots, and will set the occasional pick so someone else can score. These players also have fun, but they realize that its always more fun if you win.
Obviously, you can't win every time and sometimes you need to try new things so you can get better. But, if you are serious about developing software, you need to play to win (for the projects you are serious about).
Come off it. Java is plenty fast for almost any application,...
I think that OmegaDan was simply arguing semantics (interpret vs. run) instead of slamming Java. Or maybe I'm giving him (too much) benefit of the doubt.
* If you don't want to sign an NDA or a non-compete, then start handing in resume's at McDonalds, as *every* *single* tech company requires minimally an NDA for employment.
If they *don't* then I'd be worried about working for them, as they're clearly idiots. NDA's are absolutely nessecary pieces of paper for an employer. Non-competes are a bit different and more useless, but NDA's are vital.
Could you explain why you think an NDA is absolutely necessary?
Hmm. I've never tried this approach. I guess it could work when looking for a permanent position, but if you're trying to find work as an independent contractor, I would recommend dressing professionally. Unfortunately this sometimes means wearing a suit and tie.
It sounds nice to let the programmer go off and just write in their own style using their own unique design techniques. But it's terribly naive and unrealistic in the real world.
Hmmm. It sure sounds nice to let me (as a programmer) go off and write in my own style using my own design technique (and writing in whatever language/environment I feel like). As for the rest of you so-called "programmers", you better start standardizing based on what I do (coding style, design techniques, haircut, etc). If you ask me nicely enough, I might even provide a set of written guidelines (when I get around to it).
First let me admit that I didn't read the whole article. I skimmed it and I read the Table Oriented Programming article (which is linked to in this article and presumably written by the same person) about a year ago. I believe that this OOP criticism page was around at that point.
Although it is hard to take this page seriously (the comparison with Communism just killed me), I think I'll comment on a few of his points.
I guestimate custom software systems last about 3 years on the average. This is well behind the alleged payback period of OOP.
If that's true then why did I get all that Y2K work back in '98 and '99 fixing 5 to 10 year old programs?
When a new language fad replaces OOP, how do you convert legacy Java objects into Zamma-2008 objects? (I will eat a week's pay if OOP is still in vogue in 2015.)
I think here the author is refering to the data part of the object, not the logic. If so then this is a very good point, but its not an argument against OOP. Its an argument for "future-proofing" your system.
A common misconception is that one has to change all the procedural code if a DB field type or size changes. For example, if a percentage rate changes from an integer to a float/real, then OO fans often claim that it causes a procedural code change cascade. However, this usually only matters in strong-typed languages, like C, Java, and Pascal. (Weaker typing is better for p/r usage in my opinion.)
Here I just think its funny that he lumps C in with Java and Pascal as a "strongly-typed language".
I'd like to add that IMHO, OOP builds on procedural (structured) programming. It usually allows better abstraction than procedural programming, just like using C allows better abstraction than assembly language. In general, abstraction is neither good or bad. As systems get larger and more complex, however, its necessary.
No. You're not the only one. When the Windows "Whistler" preview was discussed on/. I was one of many who bashed MS for wasting screen real estate. Where are the other critics now? To be fair to the Eazel developers, however, I don't think I'm part of their "target" audience.
I'm not sure why people think Eazel is so "slick", frankly, the screenshots I have seen remind me of Win98.
Here are the three points that stood out to me while reading this essay (editorial?).
"I think it should be inconceivable that the
kind of person who writes one kind of
software also writes another kind," Lanier
says. "Basically, if you heard your brain
surgeon also had a tattoo parlor, you'd
probably demur. Right now we think of them
as the same thing. We think it's perfectly all
right for people to go back and forth. I don't
think it is."
This is happening now. I don't see too many people designing large pieces of financial software, running the company web site, and writing programmer's utilities. There may be people who can do all of these things, but they will find it very difficult to find a job where they have the opportunity to do so.
"I mean, everything in Unix is ultimately
based on command line interactions. You
can try to overcome that, but it's very hard.
Unix's whole philosophy on how to do
internal management and how to manage
timing is based on that set of assumptions,
so you have to fight it at a thousand levels."
Hmm, other people have already addressed this issue.
"Let me just say
that boldly: I don't think humanity has figured
out the trick of how to make software. We
don't know what we should do together to
do this, and we don't know what procedure
to follow."
I don't think there is a "trick" to making software. It is hard work. The current problem is the industry focus on time-to-market. Feature "bloat" in certain packages is another problem. BTW, NASA has created some high-quality software; So it is possible to do so.
Overall, I was hoping for a little more "meat" to this article. Is his.5 Manifesto any better?
And then, last week, I ran into the links-stop-working problem which has existed in Netscape 4 for how many years? Don't tell me you've never seen it.
I run Netscape 4.73 on Windows 95b at work. I have seen the links problem far too many times. I also have had Netscape lock up on me far too many times. Usually I can Ctrl-Alt-Del and kill it from the Close Program window, but not always.
Today I installed Mozilla 0.6 on this PC. So far so good. It displays pages faster than Netscape and hasn't crashed yet. It is distressing how sluggish the renderer is when repainting the Preferences dialog, but its great for web pages.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow. I spend a lot of time in Canada, and I don't think I've ever seen money spelled that way. Maybe you're trying to make a joke that it takes more (Canadian) monney to equal (U.S.) money. In that case you should spell it "monnney" or even "monnnney".
Nice post. It occurred to me yesterday that the terrorists who caused this atrocity were fully aware of a possible backlash against arab-americans. In fact, they are probably hoping for one. An American backlash against arabs and the Islamic religion will erode any support that the U.S. could get from moderate arabs. Hopefully, any action that the U.S. takes will have the support of some Moslem countries.
Being a programmer is generally a thankless job. I think its a mistake for this company to take away some of their employee's kudos. I also fail to see how obscuring their faces on TV is going to protect them from recruiters. All a headhunter needs is your name and/or phone number to contact you.
In a way, they are basing it on the admin's. This quote sums it up well:
I know if I wasn't going to be around in a couple of months it would be very easy to "forget" to download and apply each patch as it comes out. Its much easier to just wait for the next service pack. Not that this is a good attitude to have.Here is the only reference to "GNU/Linux" that I could find in the article:
Everywhere else, Linux is just Linux. I would guess that Bruce means: That's the way GNU or Linux development should happen. Of course, I've been wrong before, so flame away.My guess is that IBM is really after Informix's customers. Sure they'll support the Informix software for a while (probably quite a while - IBM is good that way). They'll also pull some ideas out of Informix and add them to DB2. But I think the main goal is to make those customers IBM customers. A nice side effect of this for IBM is those customers won't turn to Oracle.
As you said: ... the trouble was these systems were incredibly sensitive to the environment. I remember an earlier article about this research where they discussed the impact of temperature changes. This quote from the current article addresses the environmental factor:
This reminds me of maintaining some kinds of legacy software. The project lead will tell you "We don't know how this code works, but it does so don't touch it". Which means that this technique could be useful for niche applications, for example some types of embedded circuits. I can't see this technique being used for general software development. The high price will only allow large companies to "grow" robust code. The blackbox nature of the code will make it impossible for VARs or customers to modify.I agree with most of your points re. RPG, except this one:
I think you mean RPG IV. Even here however, most of an RPG IV program will be fixed format. Although I agree with your points, however, I must disagree with your conclusions. I think that C or C++ could be as productive as RPG with the proper libraries. Plus, I prefer to use C (or Java) instead of RPG because it is more marketable. Having RPG on your resume is going to open fewer doors next year (and the year after) than it does this year. So do I, but I don't put all of the blame on IBM. The IT managers who have AS/400 apps need to bite the bullet and modernize those apps. Nothing shouts "OLD LEGACY JUNK!" like green-screen apps.The way I read the article, these researchers don't understand exactly how the gene "reprogramming" process works. Its hard to get better at something when you don't know what you're doing.
Ding, ding, ding! We have a winner!
As a contract programmer, I've been to a few different companies. None of them want you to install software on the company PC's (which is understandable). Most of them don't want you to change the config. (even desktop colors) because you might break something. My current client, however, is the first one that has locked down the PC's (using the Policy Editor) so that the user can't change anything. I had to jump through hoops so I could remap the keyboard when running some terminal emulation software. I can understand why a little control is necessary, but one size does not fit all!
As a side note, I don't understand why "Win98 experience" has any meaning.
I don't know if this is a special CNET theme or the standard one, but I can't read half of text in the screenshots (on tabs, in hints, etc). What is up with that?
Marketeers are not your friends. Targeted marketing is not being done for your benefit. These people already know too much about us; they don't need to know any more.
BTW, nice sig.
The best code has quality comments.
Unlike Eric Green, I don't know that you're full of [BLEEP!] - you could be joking. Like him, however, I do think that Software Engineering can be fun. Here's an analogy to explain why I believe that:
I'm a big basketball fan and I've played a lot of pickup games. When playing you see a lot of guys who try to make the big flashy play. It could be a behind-the-back pass or a near-impossible shot, but its obvious that flash is what's important to them. It doesn't matter that they missed that shot 3 times before that, threw the ball out of bounds twice in a row, or only play defense every other time - they're having fun.
Then there's other players who play defense, take high-percentage shots, and will set the occasional pick so someone else can score. These players also have fun, but they realize that its always more fun if you win.
Obviously, you can't win every time and sometimes you need to try new things so you can get better. But, if you are serious about developing software, you need to play to win (for the projects you are serious about).
Hmm. I've never tried this approach. I guess it could work when looking for a permanent position, but if you're trying to find work as an independent contractor, I would recommend dressing professionally. Unfortunately this sometimes means wearing a suit and tie.
Relax, its only a joke... Or maybe a daydream.
First let me admit that I didn't read the whole article. I skimmed it and I read the Table Oriented Programming article (which is linked to in this article and presumably written by the same person) about a year ago. I believe that this OOP criticism page was around at that point. Although it is hard to take this page seriously (the comparison with Communism just killed me), I think I'll comment on a few of his points.
If that's true then why did I get all that Y2K work back in '98 and '99 fixing 5 to 10 year old programs? I think here the author is refering to the data part of the object, not the logic. If so then this is a very good point, but its not an argument against OOP. Its an argument for "future-proofing" your system. Here I just think its funny that he lumps C in with Java and Pascal as a "strongly-typed language".I'd like to add that IMHO, OOP builds on procedural (structured) programming. It usually allows better abstraction than procedural programming, just like using C allows better abstraction than assembly language. In general, abstraction is neither good or bad. As systems get larger and more complex, however, its necessary.
No. You're not the only one. When the Windows "Whistler" preview was discussed on /. I was one of many who bashed MS for wasting screen real estate. Where are the other critics now? To be fair to the Eazel developers, however, I don't think I'm part of their "target" audience.
I'm not sure why people think Eazel is so "slick", frankly, the screenshots I have seen remind me of Win98.
Here are the three points that stood out to me while reading this essay (editorial?).
This is happening now. I don't see too many people designing large pieces of financial software, running the company web site, and writing programmer's utilities. There may be people who can do all of these things, but they will find it very difficult to find a job where they have the opportunity to do so. Hmm, other people have already addressed this issue. I don't think there is a "trick" to making software. It is hard work. The current problem is the industry focus on time-to-market. Feature "bloat" in certain packages is another problem. BTW, NASA has created some high-quality software; So it is possible to do so.Overall, I was hoping for a little more "meat" to this article. Is his .5 Manifesto any better?
Today I installed Mozilla 0.6 on this PC. So far so good. It displays pages faster than Netscape and hasn't crashed yet. It is distressing how sluggish the renderer is when repainting the Preferences dialog, but its great for web pages.