mccarthy, while his methods were excessive, was after communists in the state dept and army. and you know what, there were plenty. we have the venona project as proof that we were infiltrated at the highest levels. and before you defend political freedom, these were people working for the enemy. you konw, the one with 10,000 nukes pointed at us, the same Stalin that had millions of Ukrainians starved to death, that killed many millions more in his purges, sent millions to the gulags, oh wait, duranty was right. those trials were legit.
what makes it even more funny is that bobby kennedy served as mccarthy's right hand man. jack kennedy was a good friend of joe mccarthy, and the real "terror" came from HUAC. but see, that was a bipartisan affair, and well, history is easier just demonizing the republican mccarthy.
as for the NSA thing, monitoring incoming calls is hardly widespread domestic spying. since i'm not a lawyer, i honestly don't know all the FISA details. but amateurish speculation is nothing more than sophistry. oh, as for the history, well, I'm a history teacher.
one last question, would there be as much anti-mccarthyism if he went after fascists? 'cause when you get right down to it, both the communists and nazis were equally evil, equally bent on world control, domination, and destruction. but since uncle joe or chairman mao didn't target those according to their race, i guess it's not really genocide then, eh? the millions dead? just "collateral damage" to be sure.
safari is really a front end to WebKit which is just Konqueror without all the fancy buttons. WebKit is nice as you can integrate a browser into any app with 1 line of code. So it's like IE in that it's a component (Framework), but unlike it in that it isn't part of the fundamental OS. WebKit does one thing only and it is secure.
plus, if you remember Jobs' keynote from June when they announced the intel switch, he kept stressing "use Xcode, use Xcode, use Xcode..." for everything. the put up some fancy graphs that made it appear to be easy to make universals in xcode but a very difficult in codewarrior. i guess the guys at metroworks got the hint!!! as i'm not really a cocoa developer, i'm not too terribly concerned. except that windows development has been almost exclusively VS, and i fear the same problems will afflict the mac. while there are still plenty of other mac options, wx (python and c++), java, and some of the bridges, to really naximize cocoa you need obj-c and that means xcode. i wonder what adobe and others are using. it's not that xcode is bad, but for what i need (python, java, php) it doesn't work well at all. for jall three, eclipse kicks its ass, and netbeans 5.0 is really slick for pure java. if there was an obj-c mode for eclipse that could handle nibs, etc., then IB/Eclipse would be a great tool for mac dev.
don't think for a moment that apple didn't know what was in IBM's pipeline. there had to be lots of reasons for the switch. job's keynote mentioned the performance/wattage factor. intel chips are far more efficient. the market is heavy towards laptops and the G5 series didn't provide the necessary performance vis-a-vis power consumption. it's not just pure power, but the ability to squeeze it into a laptop that can deliver without frying your cajones or dying after an hour.
yes, they voiced their concerns. but that's the point. it was disclosed to the intel committee, and they had the opportunity to voice there concerns. were the concerns legal or other. also, if they knew private citizens were being monitored, they haven't said as much. most of the hyperbole has been speculation and insinuation. and there's been no call to end the program. think about that. it's not the program, but the implementation. the fact remains is that the NSA has been doing this for a looonnnggg time, it's only how they're doing it now, not that they're doing it. I think that's significant.
the NSA was intercepting incoming calls from known or suspected terrorists. remember, members of both parties were informed aboit the activities since the program was undertaken, and there was no grave concern expressed then. now, i'm not a lawyer (as I'm sure most of us here aren't either), so I can't comment on the specific legalities. but it was not wiretapping, but international call interception. huge difference. and you know what, he'd better be doing that. if he wasn't, wouldn't his critics have said he wasn't "connecting the dots"?
I do all my work on an iBook so I test on Safari and firefox. I also check her site at school (we only have macs at home, as well as my ubuntu box) for compatibility. Safari has really good CSS2 support, so does firefox. I think IE6 is fairly good. I am not using any dynamic html, no drop down menus, etc. I always found that to be a little too much and funny thing, I don't think I see them as much anymore. Maybe I'm just not surfing the cool sites though!!
I teach econ at the high school level (besides, it was my major!!). Here's an economic analysis: when the marginal cost of support exceeds the marginal benefit. I know that sounds crazy, but look at it this way. If it require 5 additional hours of programming to support say IE3, and your time is say $50 per hour, then you'd better get at least $250 of benefit from it. If someone is running IE3, that means they're on what, windows 95. If they haven't bought a new computer in 8 + years, then I guess that they aren't going to be buying alot of newer stuff anyways. And if they are content with their poor overall web experience, than accomodating them is probably not worth it. In fact, testing for lynx, et al., is also probably a waste of time. For purely philosophical reasons, adhering to standards is nice, but might not make sense from a practical standpoint. I do my wife's photo web site, and all I use is all CSS2 positioning, no tables, spacer gifs, etc. Why? When she does a shoot, for it to be worth her while someone better spend a few hundred dollars minimum. Checking her stats, 75% of her visitors used IE6 and 16% used Firefox. (6.6% Safari) Do the math. Is it worth it to support 3% of her visitors? If they can't even afford a relatively new computer, $500 maybe, then are they going to spend that on the session and portraits? Now, it depends on also I imagine the audience your addressing. If your site say is for old folks, then maybe they're running their kids old computer and it might have win98/IE4. But overall I'd say just figure out what it's going to cost you, and then what you're going to get from it. Really, if you turn off someone who isn't going to spend anyways, they really weren't a customer.
it usually was to get software I had to run rather than a game.
that's the difference between a mac and a linux box. I'm typing this on my ibook, but am sitting next to a P4 running ubuntu. alot of software already has a mac version that doesn't require chicken blood and a shaman to get it running under wine. like i said, a few people around here will maybe find a use for running XP on a mac, but most won't. and besides, isn't xp like four years old already. isn't there supposed to be a new OS coming soon?
It goes far beyond the driver issue. Why would I want to run XP on it period? If I wanted to run windows, I'd buy a Dell or something. What exactly would you need to run XP for. Oh yeah, for developers, cross platform, yada yada. I doubt seriously though that other than the "hey, look what I did" factor, there's little reason to run XP on a Mac. As for games, unless microsoft ports DirectX to the Mac (highly unlikely), then there's not going to be a flood of new games. Jobs doesn't want the Mac to be a gaming platform (like Gates did, way back when), nor does he want to really be a pure hardware company again. they have too much invested in the iApps, plus the OS itself to be a pretty piece of hardware. The IntelMac is aimed at serious content creators and the like, who need the power that the G4 (and even the G5) lacked. The iMac is of course aimed at the consumer, but again, it's the total package they're selling. I seriously doubt the need for a dual boot XP/OS X system. Maybe a few around here need, er want, it, but I'd say 99% of people have no use. Being able to run OS X then fire up XP for a quick game or two is hardly worth the hassle. And I seriously doubt any company is going to purchase a bunch of IntelMacs to run windows.
In some aspects, the "kids today" argument is true. Teenagers have always been rebellious and prone to defy authority. But...I am speaking from some level of experience as a teacher, and comparing my curricula to what was taught just a few decades ago. Why else would my district, at least at my school, be making a big push to integrate writing across the curriculum? We have seen a real drop in writing scores and half of all incoming Cal State freshman can't write at an entry level and need to take remedial writing courses. That's bad. Very bad.
Employers have been asked this question repeatedly, and the skills they want are good reading/writing, following directions, motivated people, etc. They don't care about a particular level of math or science, or even if the applicants have "training". They want literacy, and that is something sorely lacking today. I assign lots of reading, especially primary source documentation, and the kids just simply won't do it. If it's challenging at all, they just stop. Period. They can't or won't try to discern meaning from context, use a dictionary, or re-read a piece. As for writing, spell/grammar checkers are the worst thing to happen. The kids write once, spell check, and think they're done. The writing process is a series of steps, and computers interfere with all of them. Once you are an effective writer, sure, they are nice. But not when learning to write. And there's a huge difference. My master's is in Ed Technology and I'm no Luddite. But, for most disciplines, there is precious little reason to integrate technology. I am a huge advocate of a technology curriculum, but as technology, not as some new methodology. Kids should, must, be technologically literate, but it is not the job of a history or English teacher to teach computers.
I'm going to politely disagree. I am a high school teacher (seven years junior high 3 years high school) and have yet to find a piece of software that is effective and better than a more traditional approach. In finihing my master's, I did a great deal of research and found that there is no evidence to prove that technology (i.e. computers) improves learning, and in fact, there is much research to conclude the opposite, that computers hinder learning. Todd Oppenheimer's great book is a worthy read.
That being said, there are some great tools that students can use for science, but they are not necessarily "educational", just happen to be good in schools. I know the ed software business is big business, educators, administrators, and parents get all warm and fuzzy over "kids and computers", but nothing beats a good book, and even more than that, nothing replaces the writing process. Kids today barely read at all, and their writing is awful. I rather suspect the inundation of computers and whiz-bang technology has jaded their outlooks. But, there is no substitute for reading a book. The problem with most ed software I've seen is that it is rather limited in developing critical thinking and analysis. Students tend to stay on the low end of Bloom's taxonomy. For example, how do you get them (in my discipline, history) to see cause and effect?
I use Keynote on my iBook all the time, but a teacher using a computer to present material is a far cry from kids playing on the computer. But that's just my experience. 10 years worth.
I teach the AP comp sci class at my high school. I stress repeatedly that they need to learn to program first, then do it in java second. I always show them examples with python, perl, php, even c, for comparison. Learning good programming techniques is entirely different from "learning (programming language)". It's like the debate over editors, ide's, whatever, it's the best tool for the job. Me, I like java for lots of things. But I also do alot with LAMP and the same concepts apply. Whether its branching, security, speed, or features, I always design first, code second. I can never emphasize that enough with my class.
Re:The real 90s versus outdated 00s software
on
Java Is So 90s
·
· Score: 1
yeah, i've been told that by a few people and never bothered to look it up on dictionary.com. i just thought fo ra moment and said "that's a witty sig". stupid? sure. kinda like (un-PC moment here) does a person from China who moves to the US become disoriented?
hey, i think i found my new sig!!
Re:The real 90s versus outdated 00s software
on
Java Is So 90s
·
· Score: 1
maybe I read the wrong python books. I thought you had to define a class to import the methods. perhaps I'm wrong. But then again, I'm no pythonista. I do like it alot, and when I have the time (3 kid, sure, there's plenty!!)I do plan on spending more time with it. it does everything perl does and it's readable too!!
Re:The real 90s versus outdated 00s software
on
Java Is So 90s
·
· Score: 1
okay, everything was an overstatement. I meant it in a broad sense. in other words, you can write non-OO c++ code but not in java.
yes, there are primitive types, but they all have object wrappers. int = Integer, etc.
from a pure CS perspective, I was incorrect. I grant that. java has it's incosistencies, arrays for example. but what Iike is that all code must be contained in objects (not true in python by the way) which makes plugging into an application really easy.
Re:The real 90s versus outdated 00s software
on
Java Is So 90s
·
· Score: 1
thanks. I put it in there but forgot the damn thml problem!! arrrgghhh!!!
Re:The real 90s versus outdated 00s software
on
Java Is So 90s
·
· Score: 1
what I was referring to is java is completely opposite a language like perl. while i like java's i/o structure, it is open resource (i.e. file, socket), get input/ouptut stream, read/write to stream, then close. fine, but I love perl's pipes and redirects. and compare this:
File f=new File("file.foo");
BufferedInputSTream bis=new BufferedInputStream(new FileInputStream(f));
while( (br.readLine()!=null)...
or
open (FILE, "file.foo");
@f=;
foreach(@f){...
perl is cryptic and hard to get for a novice. no doubt. but it has a beauty all its own.
Re:The real 90s versus outdated 00s software
on
Java Is So 90s
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I teach AP Comp Sci and have been programming in Java, perl, PHP, and others for years. Even did my penance with VB!! I love java and hate java. here's why:
love: object serialization sockets everything is an object i/o syntax ability to pass objects and arrays as data types consistency threading
hate: verbosity!!! dogmatic approach -> there is one way to do anything swing
overall, i'd say for alot of things, java is powerful enough and useful enough to do most programming projects. without starting a linux flamewar, i see java like linux on the desktop in some ways. it does 98% of what 98% of people need. however, there is no substitute for the remaining 2%. java's security model is limiting as is it's speed. i teach economics as well, and like in econ, there is a trade-off to everything. java trades speed and security for portability and simplicity.
it tried to be everything to everyone. reminds me of the old SNL bit about a desert topping and a floor wax.
however, as c/c++ brings enormous problems and difficulty which java solves, python has OO design and clarity and speed of development like java, yet is far more extendable. (think UI's)
had python the corporate backing of java it'd be more prevalent, which I'd like to see that happen in the near future, especially with the AP test. but, any language still boils down to the best tool for the job. and for many things, java is really good.
It means I passed the Sun Java Certified Programmer exam a few years ago. I know, not really a big deal, but I just wanted to illustrate that I'm not some idiot, just someone who couldn't get XP to stop crashing who other wise is viewed by most of my peers as some sort of geek. Around here, I'm probably on the low end of programming skill, but as I'm the only guy in the entire school that can teach AP Comp Sci (java programming), at least I'm not clueless. Yet XP had me flummoxed.
um, I'm gonna call bullshit here. my wife's XP box, P4 3Ghz, 512MB ram, etc., ran XP and it began acting funny. she's a photographer and uses photoshop alot. alot. it would just crash and hang. i ran all the anti-spyware stuff. anti-virus stuff. still crashing. i spend hours on it, and still it's crashing and acting funny. so, finally xmas season is approaching and she's gotta have a computer that works. so i buy her a mac mini and the only problem we had was hooking her old windows hard drive up to it through usb is that osx doesn't write to ntfs. shit. anyways, it ain't the memory as i'm using her old computer right now, except it's running ubuntu and hasn't crashed once. same hardware, different OS. it ain't the chips. it's the piece of shit OS. now, i've got an MA Education technology, I am a certified java programmer, have several years of LAMP development, etc. yes, many around here got lots more experience, and i don't argue that. my point is that i know wtf I'm doing with computers and the like, and couldn't fix her damn windows box. her mini? flawless. in fact, once she figured out where to save her files, i.e./Users/..,., and figured out all you have to do is drag an new app to/Applications, hell, she's not asked me for any help at all. and that's over two months and she's not needed any help at all. if apple can do it with far less resources, than hell, microsoft should have a far better product. they don't because they don't have to.
Slashdot Mirror
mccarthy, while his methods were excessive, was after communists in the state dept and army. and you know what, there were plenty. we have the venona project as proof that we were infiltrated at the highest levels. and before you defend political freedom, these were people working for the enemy. you konw, the one with 10,000 nukes pointed at us, the same Stalin that had millions of Ukrainians starved to death, that killed many millions more in his purges, sent millions to the gulags, oh wait, duranty was right. those trials were legit.
what makes it even more funny is that bobby kennedy served as mccarthy's right hand man. jack kennedy was a good friend of joe mccarthy, and the real "terror" came from HUAC. but see, that was a bipartisan affair, and well, history is easier just demonizing the republican mccarthy.
as for the NSA thing, monitoring incoming calls is hardly widespread domestic spying. since i'm not a lawyer, i honestly don't know all the FISA details. but amateurish speculation is nothing more than sophistry. oh, as for the history, well, I'm a history teacher.
one last question, would there be as much anti-mccarthyism if he went after fascists? 'cause when you get right down to it, both the communists and nazis were equally evil, equally bent on world control, domination, and destruction. but since uncle joe or chairman mao didn't target those according to their race, i guess it's not really genocide then, eh? the millions dead? just "collateral damage" to be sure.
That's just elitist and anti-social.
What? Is this a BSD thread?
safari is really a front end to WebKit which is just Konqueror without all the fancy buttons. WebKit is nice as you can integrate a browser into any app with 1 line of code. So it's like IE in that it's a component (Framework), but unlike it in that it isn't part of the fundamental OS. WebKit does one thing only and it is secure.
oops, my mistake. I thought everything evil in the world came from him. hey, isn't he responsible for the recent protests over a cartoon?
plus, if you remember Jobs' keynote from June when they announced the intel switch, he kept stressing "use Xcode, use Xcode, use Xcode..." for everything. the put up some fancy graphs that made it appear to be easy to make universals in xcode but a very difficult in codewarrior. i guess the guys at metroworks got the hint!!! as i'm not really a cocoa developer, i'm not too terribly concerned. except that windows development has been almost exclusively VS, and i fear the same problems will afflict the mac. while there are still plenty of other mac options, wx (python and c++), java, and some of the bridges, to really naximize cocoa you need obj-c and that means xcode. i wonder what adobe and others are using. it's not that xcode is bad, but for what i need (python, java, php) it doesn't work well at all. for jall three, eclipse kicks its ass, and netbeans 5.0 is really slick for pure java. if there was an obj-c mode for eclipse that could handle nibs, etc., then IB/Eclipse would be a great tool for mac dev.
damn, where's mod points when you need them!!!
on another note, a student of mine once said that the shortest sentence in the English language is "I am". The longest sentence is "I do".
don't think for a moment that apple didn't know what was in IBM's pipeline. there had to be lots of reasons for the switch. job's keynote mentioned the performance/wattage factor. intel chips are far more efficient. the market is heavy towards laptops and the G5 series didn't provide the necessary performance vis-a-vis power consumption. it's not just pure power, but the ability to squeeze it into a laptop that can deliver without frying your cajones or dying after an hour.
yes, they voiced their concerns. but that's the point. it was disclosed to the intel committee, and they had the opportunity to voice there concerns. were the concerns legal or other. also, if they knew private citizens were being monitored, they haven't said as much. most of the hyperbole has been speculation and insinuation. and there's been no call to end the program. think about that. it's not the program, but the implementation. the fact remains is that the NSA has been doing this for a looonnnggg time, it's only how they're doing it now, not that they're doing it. I think that's significant.
the NSA was intercepting incoming calls from known or suspected terrorists. remember, members of both parties were informed aboit the activities since the program was undertaken, and there was no grave concern expressed then. now, i'm not a lawyer (as I'm sure most of us here aren't either), so I can't comment on the specific legalities. but it was not wiretapping, but international call interception. huge difference. and you know what, he'd better be doing that. if he wasn't, wouldn't his critics have said he wasn't "connecting the dots"?
re: safari
I do all my work on an iBook so I test on Safari and firefox. I also check her site at school (we only have macs at home, as well as my ubuntu box) for compatibility. Safari has really good CSS2 support, so does firefox. I think IE6 is fairly good. I am not using any dynamic html, no drop down menus, etc. I always found that to be a little too much and funny thing, I don't think I see them as much anymore. Maybe I'm just not surfing the cool sites though!!
I teach econ at the high school level (besides, it was my major!!). Here's an economic analysis: when the marginal cost of support exceeds the marginal benefit. I know that sounds crazy, but look at it this way. If it require 5 additional hours of programming to support say IE3, and your time is say $50 per hour, then you'd better get at least $250 of benefit from it. If someone is running IE3, that means they're on what, windows 95. If they haven't bought a new computer in 8 + years, then I guess that they aren't going to be buying alot of newer stuff anyways. And if they are content with their poor overall web experience, than accomodating them is probably not worth it. In fact, testing for lynx, et al., is also probably a waste of time. For purely philosophical reasons, adhering to standards is nice, but might not make sense from a practical standpoint. I do my wife's photo web site, and all I use is all CSS2 positioning, no tables, spacer gifs, etc. Why? When she does a shoot, for it to be worth her while someone better spend a few hundred dollars minimum. Checking her stats, 75% of her visitors used IE6 and 16% used Firefox. (6.6% Safari) Do the math. Is it worth it to support 3% of her visitors? If they can't even afford a relatively new computer, $500 maybe, then are they going to spend that on the session and portraits? Now, it depends on also I imagine the audience your addressing. If your site say is for old folks, then maybe they're running their kids old computer and it might have win98/IE4. But overall I'd say just figure out what it's going to cost you, and then what you're going to get from it. Really, if you turn off someone who isn't going to spend anyways, they really weren't a customer.
it usually was to get software I had to run rather than a game.
that's the difference between a mac and a linux box. I'm typing this on my ibook, but am sitting next to a P4 running ubuntu. alot of software already has a mac version that doesn't require chicken blood and a shaman to get it running under wine. like i said, a few people around here will maybe find a use for running XP on a mac, but most won't. and besides, isn't xp like four years old already. isn't there supposed to be a new OS coming soon?
It goes far beyond the driver issue. Why would I want to run XP on it period? If I wanted to run windows, I'd buy a Dell or something. What exactly would you need to run XP for. Oh yeah, for developers, cross platform, yada yada. I doubt seriously though that other than the "hey, look what I did" factor, there's little reason to run XP on a Mac. As for games, unless microsoft ports DirectX to the Mac (highly unlikely), then there's not going to be a flood of new games. Jobs doesn't want the Mac to be a gaming platform (like Gates did, way back when), nor does he want to really be a pure hardware company again. they have too much invested in the iApps, plus the OS itself to be a pretty piece of hardware. The IntelMac is aimed at serious content creators and the like, who need the power that the G4 (and even the G5) lacked. The iMac is of course aimed at the consumer, but again, it's the total package they're selling. I seriously doubt the need for a dual boot XP/OS X system. Maybe a few around here need, er want, it, but I'd say 99% of people have no use. Being able to run OS X then fire up XP for a quick game or two is hardly worth the hassle. And I seriously doubt any company is going to purchase a bunch of IntelMacs to run windows.
In some aspects, the "kids today" argument is true. Teenagers have always been rebellious and prone to defy authority. But...I am speaking from some level of experience as a teacher, and comparing my curricula to what was taught just a few decades ago. Why else would my district, at least at my school, be making a big push to integrate writing across the curriculum? We have seen a real drop in writing scores and half of all incoming Cal State freshman can't write at an entry level and need to take remedial writing courses. That's bad. Very bad.
Employers have been asked this question repeatedly, and the skills they want are good reading/writing, following directions, motivated people, etc. They don't care about a particular level of math or science, or even if the applicants have "training". They want literacy, and that is something sorely lacking today. I assign lots of reading, especially primary source documentation, and the kids just simply won't do it. If it's challenging at all, they just stop. Period. They can't or won't try to discern meaning from context, use a dictionary, or re-read a piece. As for writing, spell/grammar checkers are the worst thing to happen. The kids write once, spell check, and think they're done. The writing process is a series of steps, and computers interfere with all of them. Once you are an effective writer, sure, they are nice. But not when learning to write. And there's a huge difference. My master's is in Ed Technology and I'm no Luddite. But, for most disciplines, there is precious little reason to integrate technology. I am a huge advocate of a technology curriculum, but as technology, not as some new methodology. Kids should, must, be technologically literate, but it is not the job of a history or English teacher to teach computers.
I'm going to politely disagree. I am a high school teacher (seven years junior high 3 years high school) and have yet to find a piece of software that is effective and better than a more traditional approach. In finihing my master's, I did a great deal of research and found that there is no evidence to prove that technology (i.e. computers) improves learning, and in fact, there is much research to conclude the opposite, that computers hinder learning. Todd Oppenheimer's great book is a worthy read.
That being said, there are some great tools that students can use for science, but they are not necessarily "educational", just happen to be good in schools. I know the ed software business is big business, educators, administrators, and parents get all warm and fuzzy over "kids and computers", but nothing beats a good book, and even more than that, nothing replaces the writing process. Kids today barely read at all, and their writing is awful. I rather suspect the inundation of computers and whiz-bang technology has jaded their outlooks. But, there is no substitute for reading a book. The problem with most ed software I've seen is that it is rather limited in developing critical thinking and analysis. Students tend to stay on the low end of Bloom's taxonomy. For example, how do you get them (in my discipline, history) to see cause and effect?
I use Keynote on my iBook all the time, but a teacher using a computer to present material is a far cry from kids playing on the computer. But that's just my experience. 10 years worth.
we're living in a fascist state I tell ya. this fscking nazi gov't we are living under. bushitler and his gestapo buddies
/. will never have a retraction.
we interrup this broadcast...
wait, belgium, not America. oh shit. well, let's just make it up like that numbnuts and the commie manifesto thing.
I teach the AP comp sci class at my high school. I stress repeatedly that they need to learn to program first, then do it in java second. I always show them examples with python, perl, php, even c, for comparison. Learning good programming techniques is entirely different from "learning (programming language)". It's like the debate over editors, ide's, whatever, it's the best tool for the job. Me, I like java for lots of things. But I also do alot with LAMP and the same concepts apply. Whether its branching, security, speed, or features, I always design first, code second. I can never emphasize that enough with my class.
yeah, i've been told that by a few people and never bothered to look it up on dictionary.com. i just thought fo ra moment and said "that's a witty sig". stupid? sure. kinda like (un-PC moment here) does a person from China who moves to the US become disoriented?
hey, i think i found my new sig!!
maybe I read the wrong python books. I thought you had to define a class to import the methods. perhaps I'm wrong. But then again, I'm no pythonista. I do like it alot, and when I have the time (3 kid, sure, there's plenty!!)I do plan on spending more time with it. it does everything perl does and it's readable too!!
okay, everything was an overstatement. I meant it in a broad sense. in other words, you can write non-OO c++ code but not in java. yes, there are primitive types, but they all have object wrappers. int = Integer, etc. from a pure CS perspective, I was incorrect. I grant that. java has it's incosistencies, arrays for example. but what Iike is that all code must be contained in objects (not true in python by the way) which makes plugging into an application really easy.
thanks. I put it in there but forgot the damn thml problem!! arrrgghhh!!!
what I was referring to is java is completely opposite a language like perl. while i like java's i/o structure, it is open resource (i.e. file, socket), get input/ouptut stream, read/write to stream, then close. fine, but I love perl's pipes and redirects. and compare this: File f=new File("file.foo"); BufferedInputSTream bis=new BufferedInputStream(new FileInputStream(f)); while( (br.readLine()!=null) ...
or
open (FILE, "file.foo");
@f=;
foreach(@f){ ...
perl is cryptic and hard to get for a novice. no doubt. but it has a beauty all its own.
I teach AP Comp Sci and have been programming in Java, perl, PHP, and others for years. Even did my penance with VB!! I love java and hate java. here's why:
love:
object serialization
sockets
everything is an object
i/o
syntax
ability to pass objects and arrays as data types
consistency
threading
hate:
verbosity!!!
dogmatic approach -> there is one way to do anything
swing
overall, i'd say for alot of things, java is powerful enough and useful enough to do most programming projects. without starting a linux flamewar, i see java like linux on the desktop in some ways. it does 98% of what 98% of people need. however, there is no substitute for the remaining 2%. java's security model is limiting as is it's speed. i teach economics as well, and like in econ, there is a trade-off to everything. java trades speed and security for portability and simplicity.
it tried to be everything to everyone. reminds me of the old SNL bit about a desert topping and a floor wax.
however, as c/c++ brings enormous problems and difficulty which java solves, python has OO design and clarity and speed of development like java, yet is far more extendable. (think UI's)
had python the corporate backing of java it'd be more prevalent, which I'd like to see that happen in the near future, especially with the AP test. but, any language still boils down to the best tool for the job. and for many things, java is really good.
It means I passed the Sun Java Certified Programmer exam a few years ago. I know, not really a big deal, but I just wanted to illustrate that I'm not some idiot, just someone who couldn't get XP to stop crashing who other wise is viewed by most of my peers as some sort of geek. Around here, I'm probably on the low end of programming skill, but as I'm the only guy in the entire school that can teach AP Comp Sci (java programming), at least I'm not clueless. Yet XP had me flummoxed.
um, I'm gonna call bullshit here. my wife's XP box, P4 3Ghz, 512MB ram, etc., ran XP and it began acting funny. she's a photographer and uses photoshop alot. alot. it would just crash and hang. i ran all the anti-spyware stuff. anti-virus stuff. still crashing. i spend hours on it, and still it's crashing and acting funny. so, finally xmas season is approaching and she's gotta have a computer that works. so i buy her a mac mini and the only problem we had was hooking her old windows hard drive up to it through usb is that osx doesn't write to ntfs. shit. anyways, it ain't the memory as i'm using her old computer right now, except it's running ubuntu and hasn't crashed once. same hardware, different OS. it ain't the chips. it's the piece of shit OS. now, i've got an MA Education technology, I am a certified java programmer, have several years of LAMP development, etc. yes, many around here got lots more experience, and i don't argue that. my point is that i know wtf I'm doing with computers and the like, and couldn't fix her damn windows box. her mini? flawless. in fact, once she figured out where to save her files, i.e. /Users/..,., and figured out all you have to do is drag an new app to /Applications, hell, she's not asked me for any help at all. and that's over two months and she's not needed any help at all. if apple can do it with far less resources, than hell, microsoft should have a far better product. they don't because they don't have to.