With Quake you are on a level playing field. You get the same weapons, same armour as soon as you log in. On WoW you're not, you have groups of people well above your level ganking you, if you don't have buddies their level to help then all you can do is log off/go to another area.
1) The guy is nothing like Milton. He:
a) knew he'd been fired
b) was happy to do with without being paid
c) had to sneak into the office, yet milton had access
d) was able to corral support for his project, Milton seemed to whine on and on to coworkers about his red stapler
e) was talented
2) How is this +4 Funny when the comparison is so utterly invalid? (or maybe the moderators didn't read the article? No!)
3) How exactly is Milton cooler than Samir? Come one, the guy can do the whole rap/dance/freestyle thing.
If more programmers today realized what can be done in that amount of memory, or better yet had to spend a few months programming in such an environment before being allowed to touch a "real" computer, I'm thinking we would have far more stable and efficient software today.
That, or you we would spawn a generation of premature optimisors intent on squeezing the last cycle from some unimportant part of the application, years past a possible ship-by date.
I am NOT trolling. You have confused trolling with refuting. Please respond why you (anonymous coward) think I am trolling. If you do not respond with well reasoned argument proving you are not affiliated with the original poster I'll...
And here's how my team and I solved it in our contract work: apt-get.
Right, contractors, thanks. Here today, screw tomorrow.
We even spent a couple of weeks hacking dselect to launch OpenOffice when necessary to create a kind of crude distributed document management system. The users loved it! It's the UNIX way!
A "couple of weeks"?!? You (presuming you are halfway competent) could have encapsulated the entire functionality using a simple <whatever> scripting language in a few days. Perhaps you should get out of the consulting business into what you are most likely best at, used car sales.
Using an advanced search engine (like a rackmounted google box) plus a q&d <script lang> munging launcher could deliver superior functionality based on what requirements you have poorly fulfilled. Your complicity in providing substandard technology and then boasting about it is shameful.
Yes, indexing would be great, but what you want (modifying the current element being iterated over) is possible without indexing, as 'foreach' aliases the current element to the actual element in the list being processed.
Relevant text from perlsyn:
The "if" and "unless" modifiers have the expected seman
tics, presuming you're a speaker of English. The "fore
ach" modifier is an iterator: For each value in EXPR, it
aliases "$_" to the value and executes the statement.
The topic is so huge in its implications that it deserves Paterniti's over-the-top writing style. If I recall correctly - this article is from the same author who wrote "Driving Albert's Brain". In my opinion - this piece is much better
Is it? There seemed to be a plethora of quaint English verbiage, yet little information. I was left after reading said article, that:
there was no understanding of how the energy was created
the use of tungsten in the Z machine was not applied scientifically
There must be some very smart people working on this, but I don't think the reporting has been especially thorough.
Paul.
> This is the same reason why people who use lex and yacc didn't need XML to perform things that are now touted as "innovations" (XML for them is just one of formats that can be parsed with no noticeable effort)
Creating a new language with different syntax every time you need a configuration file, or something as pithy verges on being ridiculous. And what better way of documenting a file spec, than listing (or referencing) its DTD ? XML is not let lex/yacc, and for many situations, I think (at least) it is a superior solution (in terms of allowing the programmer to do real work, not write another config parser).
> and the same reason why people who can write portable C code don't see point in Java.
Show me a 100 line C application that runs on both Solaris, Windows and Linux (on either sparc/x86), accesses data using identical schemas on either MySQL, Sybase or Oracle, dishing out HTML, and I'll show you a flying pink elephant with a smoking monkey on its head typing out A Midsummer Night's Dream.
This comment is apt: "Perl was written in C, not because it's a portable language, but because it's a ubiquitous language. A bare C program is about as portable as Chuck Yeager on foot."
--- Footnote explaining the library for accessing configuration information on page 385 of _Programming_Perl_, 2nd Edition
> And i've been running linux for 3 or 4 years now. Just to let you know.
I am at a loss for words, why your relatively lengthy (relative, to most slashdot readers) experience with GNU/Linux would justify your harsh, and offensive opinion.
> Why should I use BSD just because RMS is, IMHO, a twit? I'm happy with Linux. I really think RMS > needs to learn a lesson from Linus, Linus never receives this much heat because he's smart > enough to earn respect and recognition rather than demanding it.
RMS has already earned respect. RMS already has recognition. What he wants so badly, is for his IDEALS to be recognised, for the freedoms he helps bestow on others through the FSF to be recognised and respected. This is what you do not understand.
This is not something Linus cares much for. A year/year and a half ago it could have been possible for a closed source commercial word processor such as the one published by Corel, to take a monopoly of X-Windows user based WP's. But it's Linus's opinion that commercial support of Linux by application developers is a Good Thing, I've never seen him do anything but welcome commercial support with open arms. This is dangerous, and something RMS has been campaigning against for many, many years.
Before you take it upon yourself to bash the reputation of RMS and the FSF to the ground with your aggressive, inflated ego, please do try to at least witness RMS speak, and take up an argument with him in person. You may be in for quite a surprise.
You may learn that RMS is not, as you believe, a 'twit', nor is he on a selfish crusade for his own self gratification. Perhaps you may just learn he's trying to make the world a better place.
Slashdot Mirror
With Quake you are on a level playing field. You get the same weapons, same armour as soon as you log in. On WoW you're not, you have groups of people well above your level ganking you, if you don't have buddies their level to help then all you can do is log off/go to another area.
1) The guy is nothing like Milton. He:
a) knew he'd been fired
b) was happy to do with without being paid
c) had to sneak into the office, yet milton had access
d) was able to corral support for his project, Milton seemed to whine on and on to coworkers about his red stapler
e) was talented
2) How is this +4 Funny when the comparison is so utterly invalid? (or maybe the moderators didn't read the article? No!)
3) How exactly is Milton cooler than Samir? Come one, the guy can do the whole rap/dance/freestyle thing.
You bought the Andromeda DVDs? Up to and including season 4?!
"A fool and his money are soon parted."
If more programmers today realized what can be done in that amount of memory, or better yet had to spend a few months programming in such an environment before being allowed to touch a "real" computer, I'm thinking we would have far more stable and efficient software today.
That, or you we would spawn a generation of premature optimisors intent on squeezing the last cycle from some unimportant part of the application, years past a possible ship-by date.
I am NOT trolling. You have confused trolling with refuting. Please respond why you (anonymous coward) think I am trolling. If you do not respond with well reasoned argument proving you are not affiliated with the original poster I'll...
Hmmm. Not much I can really do. Bother...
Oh , so true.
And here's how my team and I solved it in our contract work: apt-get.
Right, contractors, thanks. Here today, screw tomorrow.
We even spent a couple of weeks hacking dselect to launch OpenOffice when necessary to create a kind of crude distributed document management system. The users loved it! It's the UNIX way!
A "couple of weeks"?!? You (presuming you are halfway competent) could have encapsulated the entire functionality using a simple <whatever> scripting language in a few days. Perhaps you should get out of the consulting business into what you are most likely best at, used car sales.
Using an advanced search engine (like a rackmounted google box) plus a q&d <script lang> munging launcher could deliver superior functionality based on what requirements you have poorly fulfilled. Your complicity in providing substandard technology and then boasting about it is shameful.
> Asking if anyone 'really needs' X is -NOT- a good argument against X.
I think that, on slashdot, you need to use a different variable.
Relevant text from perlsyn:
Illustrative code examples: Both output "2 3 4 5".
So, your code, and another possible way of achieving it (without over obfuscation), would be:
Don't make enemies (or, take them out preemptively). WFM!
What sense is found in hosting a poll which may ultimately scare away future revenue sources?
- there was no understanding of how the energy was created
- the use of tungsten in the Z machine was not applied scientifically
There must be some very smart people working on this, but I don't think the reporting has been especially thorough. Paul.> This is the same reason why people who use lex and yacc didn't need XML to perform things that are now touted as "innovations" (XML for them is just one of formats that can be parsed with no noticeable effort)
Creating a new language with different syntax every time you need a configuration file, or something as pithy verges on being ridiculous. And what better way of documenting a file spec, than listing (or referencing) its DTD ? XML is not let lex/yacc, and for many situations, I think (at least) it is a superior solution (in terms of allowing the programmer to do real work, not write another config parser).
> and the same reason why people who can write portable C code don't see point in Java.
Show me a 100 line C application that runs on both Solaris, Windows and Linux (on either sparc/x86), accesses data using identical schemas on either MySQL, Sybase or Oracle, dishing out HTML, and I'll show you a flying pink elephant with a smoking monkey on its head typing out A Midsummer Night's Dream.
This comment is apt:
"Perl was written in C, not because it's a portable language, but
because it's a ubiquitous language. A bare C program is about as
portable as Chuck Yeager on foot."
--- Footnote explaining the library for accessing configuration
information on page 385 of _Programming_Perl_, 2nd Edition
> And i've been running linux for 3 or 4 years now. Just to let you know.
I am at a loss for words, why your relatively lengthy (relative, to most slashdot readers) experience with GNU/Linux would justify your harsh, and offensive opinion.
> Why should I use BSD just because RMS is, IMHO, a twit? I'm happy with Linux. I really think RMS
> needs to learn a lesson from Linus, Linus never receives this much heat because he's smart
> enough to earn respect and recognition rather than demanding it.
RMS has already earned respect. RMS already has recognition. What he wants so badly, is for his IDEALS to be recognised, for the freedoms he helps bestow on others through the FSF to be recognised and respected. This is what you do not understand.
This is not something Linus cares much for. A year/year and a half ago it could have been possible for a closed source commercial word processor such as the one published by Corel, to take a monopoly of X-Windows user based WP's. But it's Linus's opinion that commercial support of Linux by application developers is a Good Thing, I've never seen him do anything but welcome commercial support with open arms. This is dangerous, and something RMS has been campaigning against for many, many years.
Before you take it upon yourself to bash the reputation of RMS and the FSF to the ground with your aggressive, inflated ego, please do try to at least witness RMS speak, and take up an argument with him in person. You may be in for quite a surprise.
You may learn that RMS is not, as you believe, a 'twit', nor is he on a selfish crusade for his own self gratification. Perhaps you may just learn he's trying to make the world a better place.
Paul.