Most of the languages you are talking about are strongly typed (in that objects have a type and usually a new object needs to be constructed to get similar information as a different type), but also dynamically typed (meaning that variables are not restricted to a single type).
They support different levels of ugly when it comes to automatic type coercion, of the ones I am at least passingly familiar, php is the worst, javascript is in the middle and python does okay (php and javascript will both coerce something like '1' to a number, python will not).
Also, you are vastly underestimating the state of the art in type inference; I don't really know much about it, but Haskell does a lot of it, and there are compilers for subsets of python (Shedskin is one of them) that do lots of the type inference that you are implying is impossible.
Slashcode actually does a pretty good job of inferring intent when using plaintext mode (so two line-end characters in a row get interpreted as a paragraph), but if you really want to use html, why not use it correctly and just put in a <p>?
Or am I missing sum bizarre subtlety in your post?
(there is even some sort of tidy functionality that closes tags and things...)
I would think you either use the principles involved to make a slightly bigger, less sensitive transistor, or you run 10 or 20 of them in parallel and use the largest consensus.
If you have a sound card and the hated flash installed, you could clickly-clickly on the little speaker to hear it pronounced.
Also, to help with this particular instance, say 'gi' like you would say it if you were saying giant, but instead of finishing with 'ant', say 'normous' as if you were saying enormous.
I'm not going to bother arguing what degree is reasonable with you (rape isn't even comparable to brief exposure of a slightly pinker circle of skin), I don't care that you disagree with me.
I will point out that the executives at CBS (and the NFL, etc.) were probably far more mortified by the incident than you were, and that the FCC didn't really need to punish them, advertisers and upset viewers were happy to do it.
I really don't care to speculate (it is basically pointless in a case like this...), I was just trying to help the poster I replied to correct their mental model of how a computer works, as it is pretty clear that it isn't quite right.
There really isn't any reason that text messaging *must* be implemented over SMS, all of the networks are data capable, and the great majority of phones are also data capable.
Slashdot Mirror
Are the XX men fertile?
There have been matriarchal societies. You are looking at the history you know as if it is the entirety of it.
Nearly the entirety of biological evidence is against it being an artifact of culture.
Old and sensitive, not a good combination.
It has been a terrible 40 years.
Most of the languages you are talking about are strongly typed (in that objects have a type and usually a new object needs to be constructed to get similar information as a different type), but also dynamically typed (meaning that variables are not restricted to a single type).
They support different levels of ugly when it comes to automatic type coercion, of the ones I am at least passingly familiar, php is the worst, javascript is in the middle and python does okay (php and javascript will both coerce something like '1' to a number, python will not).
Also, you are vastly underestimating the state of the art in type inference; I don't really know much about it, but Haskell does a lot of it, and there are compilers for subsets of python (Shedskin is one of them) that do lots of the type inference that you are implying is impossible.
Slashcode actually does a pretty good job of inferring intent when using plaintext mode (so two line-end characters in a row get interpreted as a paragraph), but if you really want to use html, why not use it correctly and just put in a <p>?
Or am I missing sum bizarre subtlety in your post?
(there is even some sort of tidy functionality that closes tags and things...)
For the sake of discussion, could you point to some code that you think is 'elegant' rather than 'simple', 'concise' and 'clear'?
At the moment, the grandparent post is showing 1 positive moderation and no negative moderation...
So that can't use Google?
It isn't exactly obscure.
How many times has that guy had angioplasty?
Get an Epson and use TWAIN. The software is clunky, but reliable.
I would think you either use the principles involved to make a slightly bigger, less sensitive transistor, or you run 10 or 20 of them in parallel and use the largest consensus.
Why is harping on this insightful? There simply isn't any coherent 'we' involved.
Wow, what a complicated explanation.
Oh, do tell.
Answers.com provides information from lots of other sources too. If you don't believe it, just go take a look...
If you have a sound card and the hated flash installed, you could clickly-clickly on the little speaker to hear it pronounced.
Also, to help with this particular instance, say 'gi' like you would say it if you were saying giant, but instead of finishing with 'ant', say 'normous' as if you were saying enormous.
"very unhappy"?
Really?
Do you realize you can still use it?
It is moderated.
So this horse walks into a bar, and the bartender takes out a shotgun and shoots him.
I'm not going to bother arguing what degree is reasonable with you (rape isn't even comparable to brief exposure of a slightly pinker circle of skin), I don't care that you disagree with me.
I will point out that the executives at CBS (and the NFL, etc.) were probably far more mortified by the incident than you were, and that the FCC didn't really need to punish them, advertisers and upset viewers were happy to do it.
I really don't care to speculate (it is basically pointless in a case like this...), I was just trying to help the poster I replied to correct their mental model of how a computer works, as it is pretty clear that it isn't quite right.
"Induce" is the key word there. And I would guess that the children you speak of were exposed to far more than just nipples.
And really, at this point, any 12 year old that wants to see a nipple has done so.
Simply deleting a file doesn't remove the bits from the drive.
There really isn't any reason that text messaging *must* be implemented over SMS, all of the networks are data capable, and the great majority of phones are also data capable.