How many methods does the serializable interface have?
Correct response: Not a clue, but do you know how to use PhantomReferences and a judicious use of the reflection api to build an auto-reclaiming object pool? No? Then let's move on to the questions that will actually determine my fitness for this position, shall we?
This is like the kid whining after he gets a new bike, because the neighbor got a better one.
I don't know... If the kid had to pay for the bike, and both of the bikes came from the same guy, and it looked an aweful lot like the guy was taking advantage of you because he knew thinks you are more gullible than the other kid...
OCaml's major problem is that, like every other functional language
Stop there. that is the problem. The reason functional languages fail is because they are functional languages. They are powerful, but amazingly terse and difficult for even a jedi-level programmer to fully comprehend.
Great to hack in, great to show your buddies how amazingly awesom0 you are, worth fuck-all when you have a real development environment when the junior engineers outnumber the senior engineers 5-1 or even 10-1.
Oops bug in the production server that could cost us millions, what do we do? Nope, 90% of our workforce has no chance of even comprehending where it printed out the error to the screen, so I guess we have to call in that fuck-tard who wrote the damn thing. Fire him and rewrite it in visual basic.
Don't believe me? Here's a random section from near the TOP of chapter ONE in one of the tutorials mentioned above:
Note - no brackets, and no comma between the arguments.
Now confusingly repeated ("hello", 3) is meaningful in OCaml. It means "call the function repeated with ONE argument, that argument being a 'pair' structure of two elements". Of course that would be a mistake, because the repeated function is expecting two arguments, not one, and in any case the first argument is a string, not a pair. But let's not worry about pairs ("tuples") just yet. Instead, just remember that it's a mistake to put the brackets and commas in around function call arguments.
What the fuck does that mean?
call the function repeated with ONE argument, that argument being a 'pair' structure of two elements for crying out loud!
magine trying to understand 735 documents composed of such language, some of which can be many many pages, or make "small" adjustments to current laws. Some bills, I'm sure, are written and titled to purposely obfuscate their true intentions as well.
Yeah, and how, exactly, are the people expected to be abrest of and follow those laws if the very people who pass them can't read them?
So famous that people were forging him while he was alive. I remember a story of how he was once given a lineup of his painting and some fogeries and asked if he knew which ones were fake. He pulled out off the forgeries and also three of his own orignals. When that was mentioned to him he responded, "I can forge a Picasso just as well as anyone else."
95% of shipping containers coming into this country aren't being inspected, yet we have law enforcement agents to spare to make sure Pufferbelly Toys pulls those subversive Magic Cubes off their store shelf? Has our government gone completely f'ing insane?
Last year I was all "40,000 people die each year in car wrecks (a WTC per month!) and the government is all trying to stop 'terrorists'? Has our government gone completely f'ing insane?" but it didn't help.
On top of that, someone could come along and change the code and forget to update the comment to reflect the change. Then you simply have more obfuscated code.
And that is why I never, ever comment my code.
That was moderated as funny, but in reality it is an excellent idea. People still have to understand what your code does, so if you write you code in such a way that it is perfectly clear what you are doing, and with variable, class and method names that clearly indicate thier function, there is absolutly no reason to comment code and every reason not to.
Comments can very easily grow out of date but the code itself NEVER can. That is the nature of code, after all.
Stop spending $100s of billions on counterproductive wars, farm subsidies, ineffective weapons systems, etc.
Wow, think of it a second...
100 billion is enough to hire:
1 million firemen 1 million policemen AND 1 million teachers
for one year, assuming $30k each, about.
So, the Iraq war has gone on, what, two years maybe? So with that same money, in that same period of time, that we used to accomplish NOTHING we could have hired 1.5 million people to do whatever.
We could have paid for the tuitions of about 2.5 million college students.
We could have personally bought *every* man woman and child in the US a cheap computer (about $400 each, in volume).
Wow, I never thought of it that wat before, but man, was the Iraqi war really worth it after all?
What next? Will I be extradited for having had sex with a 16-year-old (illegal in the US)? How about drinking alcohol in public, which is illegal in many countries (Saudi Arabia for instance), or hell - buying alcohol at the tender age of 15 (illegal in the US)? How about having had sex before I was 18 (also illegal in the US)? Having had sex outside of marriage (probably illegal in Iran)? Having had anal sex while there was a third party in the sexual congress (illegal in the UK).
I've been doing hard-core "turn the knobs to 11" XP for a while now, and I feel quite the same feeling as this... We've proven that we can offer bug-free code, on time, every time, in a manner that allows new employees to come up to speed in days as opposed to weeks, but still, it just "feels" wrong to most management that the increased productivity is completely ignored...
It doesn't matter that we've gon from 6 month release cycles of mostly bug-fixes to one week cycles of new features, nor that we've gone down from two or three critical bugs a week to a total of TWO medium level bugs in two years. Those numbers are meaningless to the upper eschelons... but having two programmers working at the same machine, now THAT's a definite "problem area" that they feel needs to be addressed.
Yeah, people bitch about high insurance rates, but when an acceptable(?) solution comes around they seem to balk at it. After all, if you want a low rate, why not prove it? Is Big Brother/privacy concerns worth the $?
Have you no experience in the real world?
The most likely outcome is that the rates will stay the same and the payouts will be reduced as they find you don't "deserve" a payout becuase when you were hit by a drunk driver you were going two miles over the speed limit.
So, lets say you have two pairs of entagled photons. Half you give to one side and half to the other. If you want to send a '0' bit, you read each photong normally, and when the other side checks, they can see each of thier photons have a different reading.
Now if they want to send a '1' then they entanlge the two photons that they have on thier own end, making all four of them be entangled, and then read just one of them. Now all four of them would be in the same quantum state, no?
n particular, Graham claims that terser languages are more powerful, because studies have shown that coders churn out a pretty constant number of lines per day, regardless of the programming language. Java is anything but terse.
I've noticed that a lot of hard core programmers are the ones using such excellent programming environments as vi and emacs to get thier work done. That's fine and all, but using a modern IDE can give you a WHOLE lot of additional speed. Not just popping up methods, but they can wipe out huge swaths of boilerplate code in seconds.
Instead of System.out.println("variable x = " + x);
I just type s[tab]. It's got a macro to go find whatever variable is closest and make a println of that variable, with a little drop down box to pick a different variable.
I can't remember the last time I wrote a for loop header by hand, or actually had to write out a new method signature.
I just write a method that I want to exist, like object.foo("hi", "mom", 5); Hit Alt-Enter and bam, the signature is created in the right place with the right parameters.
Java is verbose when you have to write out every line by hand, but in an IDE a couple of letters is enough to pop up a list of possible choices, and good IDEs will make excellent guesses as to which one you plan to use next. This cuts down the verbosity of WRITING java to almost nothing, but the verbosity of READING java is still there, making it quite easy to read what's going on six months later when you've forgotten what you did.
Terse languages may help you write something quickly, but they don't provide legibility when you return to that language many moons later. THAT is where they fail miserably.
Most, if not all, of my Java code can be understood by a new employee very quickly, in minutes, without any need for documentation. That's because every variable and method is descriptivly named and, again thanks to the IDE, there is agreat deal of standardisation in what I write. All loops look the same, they use similar variable loop names in similar ways. There are no backwards counting jump all over the place for loops, for example. All the code is formated and checked for compile time correctness on th efly, so there is no way I can write code that doesn't compile.
It's lame and pointless to have to switch physical CDs every time you want to play a different game. I've got a couple huge hard drives and plenty of space, so why shouldn't I be allowed to burn and iso and mount it to play? You know what, I think if the only way I can get a game to play via ISO is to pirate it, then damn, i guess that's what I'm going to have to start doing.
What I was saying is that "radiation" is, in fact, the light coming out of the screen... so if you can see the picture, boom, you are being drenched in radiation.
theres a difference between exposure to bacteria (natural) and exposure to artificial chemical pesticides
Different how? If we discover a bacteria that produces a toxin that is chemically identical to some "artifical" pesticide does that mean it suddenly becomes good for you since it's "natural"? Botox is natural, you know...
Basically, you are getting sick because your head wants you to be sick. Believe that and you are half way home. Now for the next two months, do something incredibly pleasurable when you are near your machine. Eat chocolate, have sex, get massaged, anything you can do to feel extrodinarily good when you smell that smell.
After two months you will really LOVE that new computer smell.
It's entertaining to spray these people with distilled water, particularly if they have just drunk said water in the last few hours, and tell them it's pesticide or something similar.... Watching them squirm and cry and claw around for a few minutes is a JOY, I tell you. Then tell them it's just distilled water and watch them complain that the spray bottle you used must contain harmful chemicals... no they couldn't be just mental, it's the spray bottle!
Slashdot Mirror
When did leverage become a verb? Try "use". Plain, precise speech is a sign of intelligence, actually.
So by leveraging the word "use" we actually sound more intelligent? Is that what you are trying to dialog to me?
How many methods does the serializable interface have?
Correct response: Not a clue, but do you know how to use PhantomReferences and a judicious use of the reflection api to build an auto-reclaiming object pool? No? Then let's move on to the questions that will actually determine my fitness for this position, shall we?
This is like the kid whining after he gets a new bike, because the neighbor got a better one.
I don't know... If the kid had to pay for the bike, and both of the bikes came from the same guy, and it looked an aweful lot like the guy was taking advantage of you because he knew thinks you are more gullible than the other kid...
OCaml's major problem is that, like every other functional language
Stop there. that is the problem. The reason functional languages fail is because they are functional languages. They are powerful, but amazingly terse and difficult for even a jedi-level programmer to fully comprehend.
Great to hack in, great to show your buddies how amazingly awesom0 you are, worth fuck-all when you have a real development environment when the junior engineers outnumber the senior engineers 5-1 or even 10-1.
Oops bug in the production server that could cost us millions, what do we do? Nope, 90% of our workforce has no chance of even comprehending where it printed out the error to the screen, so I guess we have to call in that fuck-tard who wrote the damn thing. Fire him and rewrite it in visual basic.
Don't believe me? Here's a random section from near the TOP of chapter ONE in one of the tutorials mentioned above:
Note - no brackets, and no comma between the arguments.
Now confusingly repeated ("hello", 3) is meaningful in OCaml. It means "call the function repeated with ONE argument, that argument being a 'pair' structure of two elements". Of course that would be a mistake, because the repeated function is expecting two arguments, not one, and in any case the first argument is a string, not a pair. But let's not worry about pairs ("tuples") just yet. Instead, just remember that it's a mistake to put the brackets and commas in around function call arguments.
What the fuck does that mean?
call the function repeated with ONE argument, that argument being a 'pair' structure of two elements for crying out loud!
magine trying to understand 735 documents composed of such language, some of which can be many many pages, or make "small" adjustments to current laws. Some bills, I'm sure, are written and titled to purposely obfuscate their true intentions as well.
Yeah, and how, exactly, are the people expected to be abrest of and follow those laws if the very people who pass them can't read them?
"OMFG!" as a close second
No, OMFG is where mad science usually ends.
Picasso was famous when he was alive.
So famous that people were forging him while he was alive.
I remember a story of how he was once given a lineup of his painting and some fogeries and asked if he knew which ones were fake. He pulled out off the forgeries and also three of his own orignals. When that was mentioned to him he responded, "I can forge a Picasso just as well as anyone else."
95% of shipping containers coming into this country aren't being inspected, yet we have law enforcement agents to spare to make sure Pufferbelly Toys pulls those subversive Magic Cubes off their store shelf? Has our government gone completely f'ing insane?
Last year I was all "40,000 people die each year in car wrecks (a WTC per month!) and the government is all trying to stop 'terrorists'? Has our government gone completely f'ing insane?" but it didn't help.
On top of that, someone could come along and change the code and forget to update the comment to reflect the change. Then you simply have more obfuscated code.
And that is why I never, ever comment my code.
That was moderated as funny, but in reality it is an excellent idea. People still have to understand what your code does, so if you write you code in such a way that it is perfectly clear what you are doing, and with variable, class and method names that clearly indicate thier function, there is absolutly no reason to comment code and every reason not to.
Comments can very easily grow out of date but the code itself NEVER can. That is the nature of code, after all.
Stop spending $100s of billions on counterproductive wars, farm subsidies, ineffective weapons systems, etc.
Wow, think of it a second...
100 billion is enough to hire:
1 million firemen
1 million policemen
AND
1 million teachers
for one year, assuming $30k each, about.
So, the Iraq war has gone on, what, two years maybe? So with that same money, in that same period of time, that we used to accomplish NOTHING we could have hired 1.5 million people to do whatever.
We could have paid for the tuitions of about 2.5 million college students.
We could have personally bought *every* man woman and child in the US a cheap computer (about $400 each, in volume).
Wow, I never thought of it that wat before, but man, was the Iraqi war really worth it after all?
I don't know... maybe he can claim the reward, pay off the damages, and end up the winner for his troubles.
Become a terrorist, problem solved!
What next? Will I be extradited for having had sex with a 16-year-old (illegal in the US)? How about drinking alcohol in public, which is illegal in many countries (Saudi Arabia for instance), or hell - buying alcohol at the tender age of 15 (illegal in the US)? How about having had sex before I was 18 (also illegal in the US)? Having had sex outside of marriage (probably illegal in Iran)? Having had anal sex while there was a third party in the sexual congress (illegal in the UK).
Dude, that was an AWESOME weekend.
I've been doing hard-core "turn the knobs to 11" XP for a while now, and I feel quite the same feeling as this... We've proven that we can offer bug-free code, on time, every time, in a manner that allows new employees to come up to speed in days as opposed to weeks, but still, it just "feels" wrong to most management that the increased productivity is completely ignored...
It doesn't matter that we've gon from 6 month release cycles of mostly bug-fixes to one week cycles of new features, nor that we've gone down from two or three critical bugs a week to a total of TWO medium level bugs in two years. Those numbers are meaningless to the upper eschelons... but having two programmers working at the same machine, now THAT's a definite "problem area" that they feel needs to be addressed.
Yeah, people bitch about high insurance rates, but when an acceptable(?) solution comes around they seem to balk at it. After all, if you want a low rate, why not prove it? Is Big Brother/privacy concerns worth the $?
Have you no experience in the real world?
The most likely outcome is that the rates will stay the same and the payouts will be reduced as they find you don't "deserve" a payout becuase when you were hit by a drunk driver you were going two miles over the speed limit.
duck tape
So, lets say you have two pairs of entagled photons. Half you give to one side and half to the other. If you want to send a '0' bit, you read each photong normally, and when the other side checks, they can see each of thier photons have a different reading.
Now if they want to send a '1' then they entanlge the two photons that they have on thier own end, making all four of them be entangled, and then read just one of them. Now all four of them would be in the same quantum state, no?
n particular, Graham claims that terser languages are more powerful, because studies have shown that coders churn out a pretty constant number of lines per day, regardless of the programming language. Java is anything but terse.
I've noticed that a lot of hard core programmers are the ones using such excellent programming environments as vi and emacs to get thier work done. That's fine and all, but using a modern IDE can give you a WHOLE lot of additional speed. Not just popping up methods, but they can wipe out huge swaths of boilerplate code in seconds.
Instead of System.out.println("variable x = " + x);
I just type s[tab]. It's got a macro to go find whatever variable is closest and make a println of that variable, with a little drop down box to pick a different variable.
I can't remember the last time I wrote a for loop header by hand, or actually had to write out a new method signature.
I just write a method that I want to exist, like object.foo("hi", "mom", 5); Hit Alt-Enter and bam, the signature is created in the right place with the right parameters.
Java is verbose when you have to write out every line by hand, but in an IDE a couple of letters is enough to pop up a list of possible choices, and good IDEs will make excellent guesses as to which one you plan to use next. This cuts down the verbosity of WRITING java to almost nothing, but the verbosity of READING java is still there, making it quite easy to read what's going on six months later when you've forgotten what you did.
Terse languages may help you write something quickly, but they don't provide legibility when you return to that language many moons later. THAT is where they fail miserably.
Most, if not all, of my Java code can be understood by a new employee very quickly, in minutes, without any need for documentation. That's because every variable and method is descriptivly named and, again thanks to the IDE, there is agreat deal of standardisation in what I write. All loops look the same, they use similar variable loop names in similar ways. There are no backwards counting jump all over the place for loops, for example. All the code is formated and checked for compile time correctness on th efly, so there is no way I can write code that doesn't compile.
^H, batman!
It's lame and pointless to have to switch physical CDs every time you want to play a different game. I've got a couple huge hard drives and plenty of space, so why shouldn't I be allowed to burn and iso and mount it to play? You know what, I think if the only way I can get a game to play via ISO is to pirate it, then damn, i guess that's what I'm going to have to start doing.
What I was saying is that "radiation" is, in fact, the light coming out of the screen... so if you can see the picture, boom, you are being drenched in radiation.
theres a difference between exposure to bacteria (natural) and exposure to artificial chemical pesticides
Different how? If we discover a bacteria that produces a toxin that is chemically identical to some "artifical" pesticide does that mean it suddenly becomes good for you since it's "natural"? Botox is natural, you know...
Then they forced him to watch TV through a MIRROR, so the radiation couldn't get to him.
Some more people who don't understand what "radiation" is... (assuming he could see the picture, of course.)
Basically, you are getting sick because your head wants you to be sick. Believe that and you are half way home. Now for the next two months, do something incredibly pleasurable when you are near your machine. Eat chocolate, have sex, get massaged, anything you can do to feel extrodinarily good when you smell that smell.
After two months you will really LOVE that new computer smell.
It's entertaining to spray these people with distilled water, particularly if they have just drunk said water in the last few hours, and tell them it's pesticide or something similar.... Watching them squirm and cry and claw around for a few minutes is a JOY, I tell you. Then tell them it's just distilled water and watch them complain that the spray bottle you used must contain harmful chemicals... no they couldn't be just mental, it's the spray bottle!