Tell them it is nothing more than a collection of well-written, consistent, standards-based, heavily-reviewed and -tested code, and all it does is contain some pre-written libraries to make it easier to do common tasks.
So you want them to lie?
That sounds dishonest. jQuery is, after all, poorly written, inconsistant, not based on standards, poorly reviewed and tested, and it makes many common tasks far more difficult than necessary.
it's an API over the native browser APIs, which hacks around various glitches, quirks, and bugs in said native APIs.
Oh, if that's the case, then it's an abysmal failure. I'd need something like jQueryQuery to hack around the various glitches, quirks, and bugs in jQuery!
It can't even manage consistency across the decreasingly few browsers it claims to support. What moron actually still believes this nonsense?
But jquery has been in industry wide use for years and is no "a hack".
Check out the code, it's amazing that it works at all. That should come as no surprise to you as it should be pretty obvious by now that Resig doesn't even have a superficial understanding of javascript. (As evidence, in addition to jQuery, I would also like to submit jStat and any of his books.)
Yeah, jQuery is a hack -- and an ugly, inconsistent, and unstable one at that! Only in the software industry could a library written for people who don't know the language by someone who knows even less about the language become so successful.
Good for Panasonic. They made the right call here.
I hate to break it to you, but boys and girls brains are different. It's undeniable. I recommend that you just get over it and learn to live in reality with the rest of us. Closing your eyes, plugging your ears, and shouting "we're all exactly the same" isn't helpful.
I should also let you know that girl's bodies are different too as you'll probably never discover that fact for yourself.
I don't want creativity in Assembly, I want solid engineering.
LOL! You think programming is like engineering!
I hate to break it to you, but it's not. Not even a tiny little bit. It remains a creative endeavor, despite countless laughably misguided attempts to turn it into "engineering".
I would assume that that's because it's not an important part of the assessment. You should be able to ask any of your kid's teachers for the rubric. You may find it both surprising and helpful.
rather than on the soundness or validity of their arguments.
A presentation in the form of a formal deductive argument would be awful dull, don't you think?
I don't know of any elementary or secondary school that teaches sentential logic anyway. What makes you think a class in basic computer applications is the right place to integrate that subject?
a person that uses a computer often should learn to script, but not to code
WTF is that supposed to mean? You might as well say "a person that uses a computer often should learn to code, but not to program". These terms all mean the exact same thing. There is no distinction between them.
No, people wasting time and money doing inefficient things proves nothing other than silliness.
Is it a waste? The fax machine is much simpler and faster than modern alternatives which take longer, have more steps, and require more technical knowledge on the part of both sender and receiver. The typewriter is simpler and faster than replacing an existing process with a more complex computerized system than mu.st be developed, implemented, supported, and maintained -- to say nothing of the retraining involved! Replacing the typewriter (at least in the case of the girls in the next office) would be horribly a inefficient waste of time and money.
In both cases, the older technology is simpler, faster, and less expensive than the newer technology for their modern use-cases.
As you get older, you'll realize that "newer" does not necessarily mean "better". Surprisingly often, older technologies are the right tools for the job. You'll also discover than technical solutions aren't always what are required. Often times, problems can be solved simply by changing processes and procedures.
How much can climate research cost anyway? Except for a few satellites that got launched in the last 20 years there is not much that comes to mind that costs 'real money'. A supercomputer perhaps, and thats it.
Yes, because you're a super-genius who knows everything about every branch of science as whatever you immediately assume must be 100% accurate and true.
In most countries research funding does not work as weird as it seems to be in the USA.
Wow, you've even got an extensive knowledge of "research funding" practices across the world. Surely, your time is wasted doing low-level IT work and practicing at your dojo.
Slashdot Mirror
Tell them it is nothing more than a collection of well-written, consistent, standards-based, heavily-reviewed and -tested code, and all it does is contain some pre-written libraries to make it easier to do common tasks.
So you want them to lie?
That sounds dishonest. jQuery is, after all, poorly written, inconsistant, not based on standards, poorly reviewed and tested, and it makes many common tasks far more difficult than necessary.
I'll define "a good alternative" as one which is smaller, faster, and has better cross-browser support and a more consistent API.
It turns out that already exists an excellent alternative that meets all of the above criteria and more. You're welcome.
Because, in the vast majority of actual use cases, it doesn't even save you that much. Saving 1 or 2 lines of code sounds optimistic to me.
it's an API over the native browser APIs, which hacks around various glitches, quirks, and bugs in said native APIs.
Oh, if that's the case, then it's an abysmal failure. I'd need something like jQueryQuery to hack around the various glitches, quirks, and bugs in jQuery!
It can't even manage consistency across the decreasingly few browsers it claims to support. What moron actually still believes this nonsense?
But jquery has been in industry wide use for years and is no "a hack".
Check out the code, it's amazing that it works at all. That should come as no surprise to you as it should be pretty obvious by now that Resig doesn't even have a superficial understanding of javascript. (As evidence, in addition to jQuery, I would also like to submit jStat and any of his books.)
Yeah, jQuery is a hack -- and an ugly, inconsistent, and unstable one at that! Only in the software industry could a library written for people who don't know the language by someone who knows even less about the language become so successful.
Good for Panasonic. They made the right call here.
AVG or Spybot? That's crazy. They pale in comparison to the obviously superior MyCleanPC!
Why do you think he takes every opportunity to spread the good news?
I hate to break it to you, but boys and girls brains are different. It's undeniable. I recommend that you just get over it and learn to live in reality with the rest of us. Closing your eyes, plugging your ears, and shouting "we're all exactly the same" isn't helpful.
I should also let you know that girl's bodies are different too as you'll probably never discover that fact for yourself.
I don't want creativity in Assembly, I want solid engineering.
LOL! You think programming is like engineering!
I hate to break it to you, but it's not. Not even a tiny little bit. It remains a creative endeavor, despite countless laughably misguided attempts to turn it into "engineering".
I would assume that that's because it's not an important part of the assessment. You should be able to ask any of your kid's teachers for the rubric. You may find it both surprising and helpful.
...before this is stolen and installed in a '94 honda civic.
rather than on the soundness or validity of their arguments.
A presentation in the form of a formal deductive argument would be awful dull, don't you think?
I don't know of any elementary or secondary school that teaches sentential logic anyway. What makes you think a class in basic computer applications is the right place to integrate that subject?
a person that uses a computer often should learn to script, but not to code
WTF is that supposed to mean? You might as well say "a person that uses a computer often should learn to code, but not to program". These terms all mean the exact same thing. There is no distinction between them.
So... What's wrong with the language? Or were you just repeating the meme?
Ah, Ray Kurzweil. The Deepak Chopra of AI.
Is Betteridge's law of headlines true? Click to find out!
I thought it sounded crazy until he told me the list of famous billionaires who have invested in the company.
I'd like a copy of that list. It'll be like mining for gold in Fort Knox.
Note to Chinese Rovers: Next time, find a better language.
No, people wasting time and money doing inefficient things proves nothing other than silliness.
Is it a waste? The fax machine is much simpler and faster than modern alternatives which take longer, have more steps, and require more technical knowledge on the part of both sender and receiver. The typewriter is simpler and faster than replacing an existing process with a more complex computerized system than mu.st be developed, implemented, supported, and maintained -- to say nothing of the retraining involved! Replacing the typewriter (at least in the case of the girls in the next office) would be horribly a inefficient waste of time and money.
In both cases, the older technology is simpler, faster, and less expensive than the newer technology for their modern use-cases.
As you get older, you'll realize that "newer" does not necessarily mean "better". Surprisingly often, older technologies are the right tools for the job. You'll also discover than technical solutions aren't always what are required. Often times, problems can be solved simply by changing processes and procedures.
Newer is not always better. Neither technology is "unnecessary", as evidenced by its use, and, consequently, is in no way "obsolete".
They're not completely irrelevant yet. You can still buy them new. CSB: The girls in the office across from mine use one regularly.
I'll let you puzzle out why.
The older prediction had me worried.
That's where you're wrong. It's completely unregulated and has not been evaluated by the FDA. We need to protect our children from this at all cost.
an open platform like Android
LOL!
I don't think this is what you want.
How much can climate research cost anyway? Except for a few satellites that got launched in the last 20 years there is not much that comes to mind that costs 'real money'. A supercomputer perhaps, and thats it.
Yes, because you're a super-genius who knows everything about every branch of science as whatever you immediately assume must be 100% accurate and true.
In most countries research funding does not work as weird as it seems to be in the USA.
Wow, you've even got an extensive knowledge of "research funding" practices across the world. Surely, your time is wasted doing low-level IT work and practicing at your dojo.