Rather limited view.
You also need to provide some positive feedback to the system that produced your rock-solid product.
Get a poster or t-shirt, if not the new version.
One need not love Theo, but he's worthy of respect and support.
I agree that the use of quotation marks in the first place may have been more appropriate.
People overlook a logical, dispassionate, tolerant mindset when considering licensing, and their subjective affirmations on questions like 'property' and 'ethics' get in the way of a pragmatic consideration of reality.
Three flavors of license, and their target:
Closed...wallet (money)
GPL......heart (community)
BSD......mind (technical excellence)
The IT ecology is has an operating point in some abstract venn diagram with lots of overlap between the three.
Let the good times roll, and leave the religion in your community of faith.
Fred, you sound firmly in charge on these military matters.
At what point will you announce the presidential run, and start squashing the juice out of the various bugs in your path?
I went through college on "Pretty Hate Machine" and "Broken". Happiness in Slavery, after failing a EE exam in particular, was poignant.
Guess I'm old now, but his stuff doesn't seem to have progressed much.
Re:When you step back and consider history
on
Beginning Ruby
·
· Score: 1
Very little demand for the native-code-wrangling capable means colleges won't teach it and kids won't want to learn it
Disagree. You overlook: a) curiosity, b) the fact that there will always be a need to squeeze a little more love out of existing configurations, and c) somebody has to know how to bring the box up from cold iron: even if you park the SUV in ROM, you still have to know how to build/maintain the SUV, d) there is much loot to be earned knowing b) and c)
Re:When you step back and consider history
on
Beginning Ruby
·
· Score: 1
No. The days of compiled languages as mainstream are over -- "SUV languages", interpreted, garbage-collected, are here to stay. The programmer base is moving away from having the skills and aptitude to keep their pointers straight, and to be able to debug native code. Just like I never learned how to write large applications solely in asm, "svelte languages" are now the skills of a passing era.
I like your point, but I'm coming to the conclusion that there is a standard normal distribution of tools and the skill level required to use them. There may be more growth in the left tail for crayon-level tools, and a bulge in the middle for these "SUV languages", but the bulk of those "SUV languages" are going to remain implemented in something like C/C++.
Thus, the curve itself will be constructed with tools from the right tail, by people who develop the skill to play there.
You have a fab that can crank out a motherboard to order. A web page lets you pick the features you want, and then it arrives via overnight shipping.
If you care to sell your soul for rock 'n' roll, you can opt for the various DRM choices.
Maybe it arrives as a bag of chips, and you solder it yourself.
Interesting posibilities.
Re:When you step back and consider history
on
Beginning Ruby
·
· Score: 1
The fascinating thing about P6 is the amount of Haskell cross-pollinization at work.
But if Ruby is a better Perl, will P6 be a redder Ruby?
When you step back and consider history
on
Beginning Ruby
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
How many different programming tools do we need?
Wouldn't a venn diagram of key language features show substantial overlap?
Ruby sounds like your typical well-done tool, which clearly has its audience.
The only substantial criticism of Ruby I've ever heard is here: http://ciaranm.org/show_post/110
Still, I'm wondering, what is the Next Big Thing? Is Python3000 going to rule the day? It's obviously 500 times better than Perl6. Then again, you've another round of C++ coming up for standardization: will svelte compiled languages recover some of the mindshare lost to these SUV scripting languages?
Is the point of making some new tool the buzz of the day simply to sell books?
You mean this was the "old school" where you were graded on the basis of something they used to call "learning".
"Progress" has saved us all of that stress and ambiguity.
Now, you just pay a small mountain of cash for tuition, and walk away with your "A".
It's all about efficiency these days.
No, the entire concept of software patents is the legal feces in this context.
If the white-collar crime were any sweeter, 'twould be government itself!
Well, looking at the ASCII table, the case can be adjusted for [a-zA-Z] by flipping one bit, which could be implemented at a really low level.
Of course, modern stuff tends to use UNICODE internally, but it is likely that the performance trade-off to integrate case changes with revisions could be brutal for substantial amounts of text.
Or, it's such a niche feature as to be cost-ineffective to integrate.
Still, this is my pet Word bug, and I love it for its own sake.
My favorite is turning on Track Changes, then selecting text and using Shift+F3 to cycle the text case.
The fact that you changed, for example, 'rtfa!' to 'RTFA!' is _not_ included in Track Changes. Oops.
Reported that a version or two ago, and the report came back (promptly, I might add, as I paraphrase) "That behavior goes all the way back to Word97. We're going to label that 'Behavior by Design'".
If Word were a housecat, it would be conceptually similar to the Robin Williams routine, where Robin pretends to be a cat that sees something exiting through the closed sliding glass door, and careens into it going full-tilt-boogy. Cat's too proud to cry in front of you, so he limps over behind the couch, muttering "fsckin' meow, fsckin' meow"* to recuperate.
*The cat is was a sysadmin on a proper operating system before too many high-speed crashes gave him a Windows fetish...
We've got the USPTO convinced that "Prior Art" is just paintings by a moderately famous black comedian with a penchant for potty-mouth.
Don't screw this up, m'kay?
Slashdot Mirror
Rather limited view.
You also need to provide some positive feedback to the system that produced your rock-solid product.
Get a poster or t-shirt, if not the new version.
One need not love Theo, but he's worthy of respect and support.
The song is a physical component of the building. The public domain enters into the song. Sort of an acoustic Soviet Russia, if you will.
Stay tuned for the bloody French meltdown to follow.
Shoulda listened to Turgot
I agree that the use of quotation marks in the first place may have been more appropriate.
People overlook a logical, dispassionate, tolerant mindset when considering licensing, and their subjective affirmations on questions like 'property' and 'ethics' get in the way of a pragmatic consideration of reality.
Three flavors of license, and their target:
Closed...wallet (money)
GPL......heart (community)
BSD......mind (technical excellence)
The IT ecology is has an operating point in some abstract venn diagram with lots of overlap between the three.
Let the good times roll, and leave the religion in your community of faith.
Tut, tut, Verhängniswurst: science has manufactured this crisis, science will solve it.
Believe the science.
For what values of 'happy'?
Fred, you sound firmly in charge on these military matters.
At what point will you announce the presidential run, and start squashing the juice out of the various bugs in your path?
http://caughtinthexfire.mu.nu/archives/snl_bee.jpg
What a waste of a talent. Thanks, dope!
Which is a shame, because he clearly has talent. Nihilism eats itself after a while.
I went through college on "Pretty Hate Machine" and "Broken". Happiness in Slavery, after failing a EE exam in particular, was poignant.
Guess I'm old now, but his stuff doesn't seem to have progressed much.
Just have him give the other ones rides home.
It's just a minor conceptual leap from "term" to "terminal" limits.
Have you seen you Spin Doctor about this problem?
Thus, the curve itself will be constructed with tools from the right tail, by people who develop the skill to play there.
Clearly the marketing packages stuff in such a way that mortals can do it without cleanrooms and such.
You have a fab that can crank out a motherboard to order. A web page lets you pick the features you want, and then it arrives via overnight shipping.
If you care to sell your soul for rock 'n' roll, you can opt for the various DRM choices.
Maybe it arrives as a bag of chips, and you solder it yourself.
Interesting posibilities.
The fascinating thing about P6 is the amount of Haskell cross-pollinization at work.
But if Ruby is a better Perl, will P6 be a redder Ruby?
How many different programming tools do we need?
Wouldn't a venn diagram of key language features show substantial overlap?
Ruby sounds like your typical well-done tool, which clearly has its audience.
The only substantial criticism of Ruby I've ever heard is here:
http://ciaranm.org/show_post/110
Still, I'm wondering, what is the Next Big Thing? Is Python3000 going to rule the day? It's obviously 500 times better than Perl6. Then again, you've another round of C++ coming up for standardization: will svelte compiled languages recover some of the mindshare lost to these SUV scripting languages?
Is the point of making some new tool the buzz of the day simply to sell books?
You mean this was the "old school" where you were graded on the basis of something they used to call "learning".
"Progress" has saved us all of that stress and ambiguity.
Now, you just pay a small mountain of cash for tuition, and walk away with your "A".
It's all about efficiency these days.
No, the entire concept of software patents is the legal feces in this context.
If the white-collar crime were any sweeter, 'twould be government itself!
Well, looking at the ASCII table, the case can be adjusted for [a-zA-Z] by flipping one bit, which could be implemented at a really low level.
Of course, modern stuff tends to use UNICODE internally, but it is likely that the performance trade-off to integrate case changes with revisions could be brutal for substantial amounts of text.
Or, it's such a niche feature as to be cost-ineffective to integrate.
Still, this is my pet Word bug, and I love it for its own sake.
My favorite is turning on Track Changes, then selecting text and using Shift+F3 to cycle the text case.
The fact that you changed, for example, 'rtfa!' to 'RTFA!' is _not_ included in Track Changes. Oops.
Reported that a version or two ago, and the report came back (promptly, I might add, as I paraphrase) "That behavior goes all the way back to Word97. We're going to label that 'Behavior by Design'".
If Word were a housecat, it would be conceptually similar to the Robin Williams routine, where Robin pretends to be a cat that sees something exiting through the closed sliding glass door, and careens into it going full-tilt-boogy. Cat's too proud to cry in front of you, so he limps over behind the couch, muttering "fsckin' meow, fsckin' meow"* to recuperate.
*The cat is was a sysadmin on a proper operating system before too many high-speed crashes gave him a Windows fetish...
We've got the USPTO convinced that "Prior Art" is just paintings by a moderately famous black comedian with a penchant for potty-mouth.
Don't screw this up, m'kay?