Eval'ing anything more than complex than simple, pre-formatted blocks of text is going to cause a headache. One of the great things about interpreted programs is their ability to morph through eval calls. Having to ensure that blocks of text you paste together in code are properly indented to be interpreted via eval has got to be LOADS of fun.
Re:I see whitespace is still syntactically relevan
on
Python 2.3 Final Released
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
The reason I never bothered with Python is because of the whitespace issue, and I'll tell you why:
I don't trust that blocks are properly grouped.
When I program in C++, Java or even Ruby, and I create a new block, the first thing I do is close the block. Any code I put in the block I indent, but if the block grows, or my indenting gets goofy, I don't have to fear that my block is now improperly closing.
If I paste in a few quick lines of code for debug purposes, and it just happened to be indented differently than where I was pasting it, that would screw up the block closure unless I went and tabbed everything correctly. Sometimes, I *like* that the temporary code is indented wrong because it helps remind me to comment it out or remove it when I'm done debugging.
The whitespace thing is just too weird. It generates a lot of feelings that I might screw up my blocks. That sort of anxiety shouldn't be there; I shouldn't be so worried about blocks closing.
Probably the reason you can only work after midnight is because the world has gone quiet and your brain can forget what's going on around you and focus on work.
First, get yourself into a quieter, more solitary work environment. Second, meditate on your tasks to get started. Write down what it is you expect to accomplish that day, and when you are ready to work on a task, close your eyes and visualize everything you need to do for about 5 or 10 minutes. If your mind is particularly cluttered, try adding a short nap to the mix to get reset. Use these techniques to "tune out" day time noises also.
HTTP is stateless, but that is a description of how HTTP usually works, not a guarantee or a parameter.
Sessions are non-stateless, and so there is an inherent conflict between what is expected of HTTP (stateless and discrete) and what is actually happening during a session (non-stateless).
If someone designs a network holding HTTP's stateless nature as a hard and fast rule, and thus assigns differing external IPs with each HTTP request from a client inside the network, then I would say that network was designed without taking the possibility of non-stateless HTTP situations, and I wouldn't do too much to account for that, as a web developer.
Are you still here?
Of course I'm still here.
I hope you didn't strain your puny little mind thinking of a reason to continue this volley.
That was the worse insult I think I've ever encountered. I'm more insulted that you would think I would be offended by such a diminutive effort to insult me than I am offended by the insult itself.
If you attempt to insult me again and instead produce another such inferior vulgarity, I will immediately cease any and all banter with you.
Indeed it does. AOL for example uses a number of caching servers, and one user uses a number of different caching servers during his visit. So by tieing a session id to an IP address effectively prevents users of AOL and other large ISPs from using a website.
No, not really. Only the session ID needs to be unique, the IP address only needs to match. Each user behind a given NAT/Firewall will have their own unique session ID, so it doesn't matter that they share the same IP address, just so long as each time they pass their session ID to the web site, they do so from the same IP address when the session was created. IP addresses don't need to be unique.
However, while this protects you from other people on the internet from hijacking your session, anyone inside your NAT/Firewall could hijack it, if they knew the session ID.
That makes sense, but I think the part about requiring the user's permission is a little harsh. Unless they allow the web site to state "by continuing to use this web site, you are agreeing to the site's use of cookies as described here (link to cookie description)."
If they're happy with that sort of thing, that would be fine. But if they expect every site that uses cookies to push people through a YES/NO page, that would be immensely cumbersome.
The problem is what people are using cookies FOR, not cookies per se. Using cookies to store passwords or access keys is insecure unless you take into account the risks involved and go a step further to protect the user.
A blanket decree requiring web sites to require user permission before using cookies of any sort is ignorant.
What made you think I might be fluent in French, exactly? Were you that impressed? Did you find my usage of a handful few words in French so breath-takingly concise that it occurred to you I might be fluent? Or did you hear a voice in your head say "I am fluent in French" and think it was me whispering in your ear?
What was it, exactly?
I'm not slinking anywhere, bulletboy. I enjoy this too much. Got any new interesting journal entries? Perhaps an ode to David Koresh in there somewhere?
Personally, I can only work out in the evening. If I workout in the morning or at lunch, for the rest of the day I carry a bit of a "buzz" that makes my vision a little fuzzy and my thinking a little too bohemian. It's great for off-days, but on programming days it's like professional suicide.
Swimming, jogging and tennis are good evening workouts for during the week. Give yourself at least one really good workout on the weekend like hiking or surfing.
Re:Before all the flamers get in.
on
Qt On DirectFB
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
Stop and take a hard look at your sad self there. The love letter to RMS. This obsessive ranting of yours to protect the GPL's image. Desperately trying to impress me with Latin lessons. Now you have gone delusionally into the subject of whether or not I am fluent in French.
Are you completely without any notion of how pathetic and desperate that makes you look? I speak a few very common words in French and, to you, I have either hit Babelfish or I must be claiming to be fluent. Ich kann auch ein bischen Deutsch sprechen. Y en Espanol. Impressive to you? You are easily impressed.
Step back, my friend. It's time to check yourself back into the clinic. Your train has jumped its track. You are obsessive and delusional, to say the least. A class-A cult candidate if I ever saw one.
I find it amusing you made the assumption I used a translator. You are dog-paddling hard to stay afloat there, aren't you? Not much going on up stairs without the array of reference books handy, is there?
Poor guy, you've lost so much ground in this argument. Insinuating I have an agenda while it was you all along, writing love letters to RMS. Tsk tsk. Hypocrisy. It suits you.
You still have not provided me with sufficient evidence that the GPL is not viral to counter my belief that it attaches itself permanently to projects and then replicates perfect copies of itself; defining behaviors of a virus.
I don't expect you to be able to produce a valid argument against my opinion that the GPL is viral. You have too much of the "cult" mentality. Rather than provide logical, thoughtful arguments, you only know how to nit-pick and stonewall.
Go on, bulletboy, write up a nice little thing on how the GPL cannot possibly be considered viral. Or, do your usual and just avoid that topic and start quoting from your Latin booklet on the meaning of "replicate" or "attach." Or go to a medical site and start showing me other types of virii that don't replicate at all but instead actually have sex with glitter.
You would be the one to know about constructing rational arguments; the only evidence of critical thinking you've performed is nit-picking on the syntax of "virus." You remind me of a born-again Christian arguing for the existence of a god. You can't actually delve into the subject itself, you have to dance around and create a hostile atmosphere, using external references such as the Latin origins of the term "viral" and then go on to summarize with bulleted paragraphs. You are dazzled by RMS' governing light and are now completely protected from all arguments regarding the GPL, and you have nothing more to offer this or ANY discussion any more than reflexive counter-propaganda.
Speaking of your god, I glanced briefly at your journal entry regarding RMS. Touching diatribe.
Even 10 minutes is a waste of time. I've already had this discussion with several people, and read back on countless other identical discussions. My mind remains firm on this: the GPL is viral.
Slashdot Mirror
I have my own indention procedures as well, but if I don't follow them precisely, my code doesn't gain unwanted "features" as a result.
But often when a sophisticated bit of eval work is going on, you are loading the code from a file; a file that was hand-edited by a developer.
Which is still bad, but not as bad as the program quietly operating incorrectly, which is still possible.
Here's another one:
eval'd code.
Eval'ing anything more than complex than simple, pre-formatted blocks of text is going to cause a headache. One of the great things about interpreted programs is their ability to morph through eval calls. Having to ensure that blocks of text you paste together in code are properly indented to be interpreted via eval has got to be LOADS of fun.
The reason I never bothered with Python is because of the whitespace issue, and I'll tell you why:
I don't trust that blocks are properly grouped.
When I program in C++, Java or even Ruby, and I create a new block, the first thing I do is close the block. Any code I put in the block I indent, but if the block grows, or my indenting gets goofy, I don't have to fear that my block is now improperly closing.
If I paste in a few quick lines of code for debug purposes, and it just happened to be indented differently than where I was pasting it, that would screw up the block closure unless I went and tabbed everything correctly. Sometimes, I *like* that the temporary code is indented wrong because it helps remind me to comment it out or remove it when I'm done debugging.
The whitespace thing is just too weird. It generates a lot of feelings that I might screw up my blocks. That sort of anxiety shouldn't be there; I shouldn't be so worried about blocks closing.
Skip the upgrade and switch to Ruby.
Thanks. Group hug.
Probably the reason you can only work after midnight is because the world has gone quiet and your brain can forget what's going on around you and focus on work.
First, get yourself into a quieter, more solitary work environment. Second, meditate on your tasks to get started. Write down what it is you expect to accomplish that day, and when you are ready to work on a task, close your eyes and visualize everything you need to do for about 5 or 10 minutes. If your mind is particularly cluttered, try adding a short nap to the mix to get reset. Use these techniques to "tune out" day time noises also.
HTTP is stateless, but that is a description of how HTTP usually works, not a guarantee or a parameter.
Sessions are non-stateless, and so there is an inherent conflict between what is expected of HTTP (stateless and discrete) and what is actually happening during a session (non-stateless).
If someone designs a network holding HTTP's stateless nature as a hard and fast rule, and thus assigns differing external IPs with each HTTP request from a client inside the network, then I would say that network was designed without taking the possibility of non-stateless HTTP situations, and I wouldn't do too much to account for that, as a web developer.
Are you still here? Of course I'm still here. I hope you didn't strain your puny little mind thinking of a reason to continue this volley. That was the worse insult I think I've ever encountered. I'm more insulted that you would think I would be offended by such a diminutive effort to insult me than I am offended by the insult itself. If you attempt to insult me again and instead produce another such inferior vulgarity, I will immediately cease any and all banter with you.
Indeed it does. AOL for example uses a number of caching servers, and one user uses a number of different caching servers during his visit. So by tieing a session id to an IP address effectively prevents users of AOL and other large ISPs from using a website.
No, not really. Only the session ID needs to be unique, the IP address only needs to match. Each user behind a given NAT/Firewall will have their own unique session ID, so it doesn't matter that they share the same IP address, just so long as each time they pass their session ID to the web site, they do so from the same IP address when the session was created. IP addresses don't need to be unique.
However, while this protects you from other people on the internet from hijacking your session, anyone inside your NAT/Firewall could hijack it, if they knew the session ID.
That makes sense, but I think the part about requiring the user's permission is a little harsh. Unless they allow the web site to state "by continuing to use this web site, you are agreeing to the site's use of cookies as described here (link to cookie description)."
If they're happy with that sort of thing, that would be fine. But if they expect every site that uses cookies to push people through a YES/NO page, that would be immensely cumbersome.
The problem is what people are using cookies FOR, not cookies per se. Using cookies to store passwords or access keys is insecure unless you take into account the risks involved and go a step further to protect the user.
A blanket decree requiring web sites to require user permission before using cookies of any sort is ignorant.
What a relief for you!
Very succinct, by the way. The art of brevity might not be beyond you after all.
Adee!
If I could think of a real reason to continue this ... volley with you, I would.
Somewhere, I have a TRS-80 and an Osborne that has its original modem and CP/M disks. I think I have Wordstar for it too.
What made you think I might be fluent in French, exactly? Were you that impressed? Did you find my usage of a handful few words in French so breath-takingly concise that it occurred to you I might be fluent? Or did you hear a voice in your head say "I am fluent in French" and think it was me whispering in your ear?
What was it, exactly?
I'm not slinking anywhere, bulletboy. I enjoy this too much. Got any new interesting journal entries? Perhaps an ode to David Koresh in there somewhere?
Personally, I can only work out in the evening. If I workout in the morning or at lunch, for the rest of the day I carry a bit of a "buzz" that makes my vision a little fuzzy and my thinking a little too bohemian. It's great for off-days, but on programming days it's like professional suicide.
Swimming, jogging and tennis are good evening workouts for during the week. Give yourself at least one really good workout on the weekend like hiking or surfing.
Word.
Stop and take a hard look at your sad self there. The love letter to RMS. This obsessive ranting of yours to protect the GPL's image. Desperately trying to impress me with Latin lessons. Now you have gone delusionally into the subject of whether or not I am fluent in French.
Are you completely without any notion of how pathetic and desperate that makes you look? I speak a few very common words in French and, to you, I have either hit Babelfish or I must be claiming to be fluent. Ich kann auch ein bischen Deutsch sprechen. Y en Espanol. Impressive to you? You are easily impressed.
Step back, my friend. It's time to check yourself back into the clinic. Your train has jumped its track. You are obsessive and delusional, to say the least. A class-A cult candidate if I ever saw one.
Don't stalk me, ok?
I find it amusing you made the assumption I used a translator. You are dog-paddling hard to stay afloat there, aren't you? Not much going on up stairs without the array of reference books handy, is there?
Merde, encore. Bien. As expected.
Poor guy, you've lost so much ground in this argument. Insinuating I have an agenda while it was you all along, writing love letters to RMS. Tsk tsk. Hypocrisy. It suits you.
You still have not provided me with sufficient evidence that the GPL is not viral to counter my belief that it attaches itself permanently to projects and then replicates perfect copies of itself; defining behaviors of a virus.
I don't expect you to be able to produce a valid argument against my opinion that the GPL is viral. You have too much of the "cult" mentality. Rather than provide logical, thoughtful arguments, you only know how to nit-pick and stonewall.
Go on, bulletboy, write up a nice little thing on how the GPL cannot possibly be considered viral. Or, do your usual and just avoid that topic and start quoting from your Latin booklet on the meaning of "replicate" or "attach." Or go to a medical site and start showing me other types of virii that don't replicate at all but instead actually have sex with glitter.
I wonder what the next reply will contain!
You would be the one to know about constructing rational arguments; the only evidence of critical thinking you've performed is nit-picking on the syntax of "virus." You remind me of a born-again Christian arguing for the existence of a god. You can't actually delve into the subject itself, you have to dance around and create a hostile atmosphere, using external references such as the Latin origins of the term "viral" and then go on to summarize with bulleted paragraphs. You are dazzled by RMS' governing light and are now completely protected from all arguments regarding the GPL, and you have nothing more to offer this or ANY discussion any more than reflexive counter-propaganda.
Speaking of your god, I glanced briefly at your journal entry regarding RMS. Touching diatribe.
Oh yes, *I* am the one with the agenda.
Back down into your hole, pawn.
Even 10 minutes is a waste of time. I've already had this discussion with several people, and read back on countless other identical discussions. My mind remains firm on this: the GPL is viral.