... a waste of life.
I don't read as much as I used to -- but when I did, I was a voracious reader of many kinds of SF and fantasy: Frank Herbert, Philip K Dick, Janny Wurts, Tolkien, Asimov, Melvyn Peake, Stephen Donaldson, William Gibson... and I remember reading one of the Earthsea books. Horrificly boring. Just as bad as the Pilgrim's Progress that I had to struggle through for my English degree. I remember feeling incredibly depressed that I had just wasted several hours of my life reading two-thirds of the book (before reality set in and I threw the bloody thing into the dark corner where it deserved to moulder unread).
Hmm... I don't think it will encourage bad code any more than Java's exceptions and try/catch statements. It's a good thing because encourages you as a script writer to consider the possibility of your statements failing.
Although from reading it, it makes sense, I commented *every* line of those 20
That pretty much sums up what I think the role of comments should be. I have no problem with comments as helpful extras together with clean code and self-documenting names for variables, objects, classes, methods, packages etc. If I sounded like I don't comment, or I don't like comments, I wasn't explaining myself too clearly:) I do actually work as a team (only of about five), not all of whom are permanent (ie we have people coming in on contract sometimes, who have to get up to speed quickly). And I do comment, and document my code.
What I do have a problem with is where comments are used as a band-aid rather than fixing a structural problem. I am trying to think of an example and if I can find one, I'll post it.
BTW: your JavaScript HTML editor... is it cross-browser? We had to write an IE-only one here; so I know what you mean about fighting with ugly problematic technologies... IE (and 'MSHTML' - shudder) isn't very pretty on the inside;) And about OO JavaScript... it's pretty horrific to work with. Instead of separate concepts like 'class', 'object', 'constructor', 'static function', JavaScript makes do with 'function'.. ewww! I really don't want to go there again..:)
I think your example is quite telling. If, for instance, you need quirky flags that work around a problem casued by bad code in package X, then package X sucks, so don't use it, or if it's your code, rewrite it. Workarounds should never stay in code.
Of course I'm being a little idealistic. In reality crap code is used a lot because of deadline pressure. But that doesn't make it OK.
And, at the end of the day, it's nice to have comments, yes. But your code should not be indecipherable without them. You seem to suggest that I'm not thinking of the maintainer of my code, but actually, I think the maintainer is best served if the code is as self-documenting as possible. Then any comments are a bonus -- not a lifeline to save the poor guy/gal from a morass of spaghetti...
I'm amused to see that the name 'Parrot', originally coined for an April Fool's joke over at O'Reilly, has now been used to christen the bytecode interpreter for Perl 6. Life imitating art I guess.
As for the 'extreme makeover'... I hope it loses a bit of the excessive punctuation...
$broken ? fix($it) : s/!@#\$%\^\*//g if $ugly >= $all_hell;
The comparison between running C and Java programs is unfair. C programs compile to native machine code. Java apps are platform-independent bytecode that are run over a JVM. Its not just a runtime library but a virtual machine that allows Java apps to run the same anywhere, everywhere.
I guess the real problem is not the fact that a JRE has to be installed, but that it's not bundled with every OS.
This seems completely asinine. How many hundreds of products out there call themselves "win"foo, or foo"indows"-bar? Yet who does MS go after? a Linux company.
But how many of these pieces of software named/.*w?in(dows)?.*/ are operating systems?
I don't think Lindows' choice of name is a protest, or even especially witty. You're reading too much into what seems to me to be a blatant Utterly Butterly-style attempt to muddy the waters and pretend that their distro is intechangeable with Windows.
I personally find it unpalatable -- I wouldn't install a distro that's anything like win32! But to me, as much as to the 'average joe' or jenny, an OS called anything that ends in -indows is clearly named after win32.
I wonder what this community's reaction would be if MicroSoft came out with Winux, or Minux.
but the number of industries and critical systems that are based around these technologies that could be damaged by new exploits found in this source code is something that doesn't bare thinking about
I find it quite shocking that the writer doesn't realise that s?he has spelt out the essential problem with security-by-obscurity.
There's no point in Microsoft and its scions flinging up their hands when the inevitable happens and some code leaks out. They set themselves up for this by banking so much on secrecy.
Re:SCO website just a symbol...
on
SCO Offline
·
· Score: 1
Anyway, SCO can eat apple sauce out of my ass with a spoon.
I personally wouldn't let anyone near my arse with a spoon or any other piece of cutlery -- especially not SCO.
the evaluation of how information is best presented would surely combine both aspects?
Surely. But I'm basing my opinion on the painful experience of reading a huge quantity of material by Nielson. I don't think he is capable of making value judgements. In fact I would probably agree with those words from someone else -- as you say, ad hominem. I just hate his guts.
And yet you chose to make your argument in a three line post? I wonder why?
A forum is like a conversation. I don't expect websites to be presented in the same way. Nor do I think Jakob Nielson's critiques are directed at forum content.
At least his argument isn't full of logical holes, ad hominems and doesn't rely on selective use of the data to try and make his case.
If I wanted to put together an argument, I would do so. What exactly do you think my argument is here -- what 'data' is question? I wasn't intending to analyse or deconstruct. I am just casually slagging off someone I find irritating. He really is an annoying little piece of crap -- is this not obvious? If you like I can put together an anti-Nielsen counter-argument for you -- but that'll have to wait till after work:)
Yes, true, but the bottom line is not really interesting unless you're a shareholder in one of those companies. As a viewer, I don't see a difference between crap media that makes money and crap media that doesn't; it just sucks. Except that I will have to put up with the crap that makes money for longer, since it will be more successful; so really it's worse:)
And also, aren't they two very different kinds of Philistine really? Nielson thinks anything apart from information in its barest form is a waste of 'screen real estate'. Look at his website. It's so bare and ugly that I stand to stay on the page long enough to read any of it. The marketing Philistines are a different animal; they don't care about information in the slightest. The only thing that matters to them in the money.
So the ideal piece of information according to dear Jakob is the soundbite?
I could do with less soundbites and more indepth info... 'word count' is quantitive, not qualitative... typically reductionist. The man is a Philistine.
I'm a huge fan of the books, and have been very impressed by the fact that the movies have, while necessarily stripping out a lot of detail, been more or less faithful to the spirit of the books, if not to their letter.
One let-down, however, has been the films' treatment of the character of Saruman. Christopher Lee thoroughly impressed, but the script does not allow for the subtlety of distinction between the two Towers -- Barad-dur and Isengard. Saruman (in the books) has plans to take the Ring for himself, and double-cross Sauron. In the films, the script suggests that he is a mere stooge of the Enemy, which is a shame, since it removes some of the subtlety of Middle-Earth politics.
As I recall, there's a website somewhere that allows you to type in any URL, and they get the content, replace random nouns and verbs with arbitrarily chosen obscene words, and shows the whole webpage in its new form. Definitely a giggle. Unfortunately I can't remember what it's called or where it is. Anyone know?
I'd also really like to see a copy of the sanitised version of the content that this thread's author mentioned. Can you put it up somewhere?
Slashdot Mirror
Try HitSquad's Software Music Machine. Plenty of free/shareware there.
... a waste of life. I don't read as much as I used to -- but when I did, I was a voracious reader of many kinds of SF and fantasy: Frank Herbert, Philip K Dick, Janny Wurts, Tolkien, Asimov, Melvyn Peake, Stephen Donaldson, William Gibson ... and I remember reading one of the Earthsea books. Horrificly boring. Just as bad as the Pilgrim's Progress that I had to struggle through for my English degree. I remember feeling incredibly depressed that I had just wasted several hours of my life reading two-thirds of the book (before reality set in and I threw the bloody thing into the dark corner where it deserved to moulder unread).
Hmm ... I don't think it will encourage bad code any more than Java's exceptions and try/catch statements. It's a good thing because encourages you as a script writer to consider the possibility of your statements failing.
Cool. I also found this extension for Firefox.
SharpReader
Perhaps more of the Great Unwashed would use RSS feeds if support was built into the most commonly used browsers.
I just re-read my original comment. I was being a bit OTT :) But I've paid. My karma is now officially bad :(
That pretty much sums up what I think the role of comments should be. I have no problem with comments as helpful extras together with clean code and self-documenting names for variables, objects, classes, methods, packages etc. If I sounded like I don't comment, or I don't like comments, I wasn't explaining myself too clearly :) I do actually work as a team (only of about five), not all of whom are permanent (ie we have people coming in on contract sometimes, who have to get up to speed quickly). And I do comment, and document my code.
What I do have a problem with is where comments are used as a band-aid rather than fixing a structural problem. I am trying to think of an example and if I can find one, I'll post it.
BTW: your JavaScript HTML editor ... is it cross-browser? We had to write an IE-only one here; so I know what you mean about fighting with ugly problematic technologies ... IE (and 'MSHTML' - shudder) isn't very pretty on the inside ;) And about OO JavaScript ... it's pretty horrific to work with. Instead of separate concepts like 'class', 'object', 'constructor', 'static function', JavaScript makes do with 'function' .. ewww! I really don't want to go there again .. :)
I think your example is quite telling. If, for instance, you need quirky flags that work around a problem casued by bad code in package X, then package X sucks, so don't use it, or if it's your code, rewrite it. Workarounds should never stay in code.
Of course I'm being a little idealistic. In reality crap code is used a lot because of deadline pressure. But that doesn't make it OK.
And, at the end of the day, it's nice to have comments, yes. But your code should not be indecipherable without them. You seem to suggest that I'm not thinking of the maintainer of my code, but actually, I think the maintainer is best served if the code is as self-documenting as possible. Then any comments are a bonus -- not a lifeline to save the poor guy/gal from a morass of spaghetti...
Comments are like crutches, or a band-aid. Healthy, readable code with sensible naming conventions and a clear structure doesn't need 'em.
I'm amused to see that the name 'Parrot', originally coined for an April Fool's joke over at O'Reilly, has now been used to christen the bytecode interpreter for Perl 6. Life imitating art I guess.
As for the 'extreme makeover' ... I hope it loses a bit of the excessive punctuation ...
The comparison between running C and Java programs is unfair. C programs compile to native machine code. Java apps are platform-independent bytecode that are run over a JVM. Its not just a runtime library but a virtual machine that allows Java apps to run the same anywhere, everywhere.
I guess the real problem is not the fact that a JRE has to be installed, but that it's not bundled with every OS.
But how many of these pieces of software named /.*w?in(dows)?.*/ are operating systems?
I don't think Lindows' choice of name is a protest, or even especially witty. You're reading too much into what seems to me to be a blatant Utterly Butterly-style attempt to muddy the waters and pretend that their distro is intechangeable with Windows.
I personally find it unpalatable -- I wouldn't install a distro that's anything like win32! But to me, as much as to the 'average joe' or jenny, an OS called anything that ends in -indows is clearly named after win32.
I wonder what this community's reaction would be if MicroSoft came out with Winux, or Minux.
There's no point in Microsoft and its scions flinging up their hands when the inevitable happens and some code leaks out. They set themselves up for this by banking so much on secrecy.
Anyway, SCO can eat apple sauce out of my ass with a spoon.
I personally wouldn't let anyone near my arse with a spoon or any other piece of cutlery -- especially not SCO.
Although this is good news, it's not really much of a surprise. IBM have been making noises in this direction for some time now ...
What would be a turn-up for the books is if Sun started pushing a Linux desktop --- oh wait, they already did :)
the evaluation of how information is best presented would surely combine both aspects?
Surely. But I'm basing my opinion on the painful experience of reading a huge quantity of material by Nielson. I don't think he is capable of making value judgements. In fact I would probably agree with those words from someone else -- as you say, ad hominem. I just hate his guts.
And yet you chose to make your argument in a three line post? I wonder why?
A forum is like a conversation. I don't expect websites to be presented in the same way. Nor do I think Jakob Nielson's critiques are directed at forum content.
At least his argument isn't full of logical holes, ad hominems and doesn't rely on selective use of the data to try and make his case.
If I wanted to put together an argument, I would do so. What exactly do you think my argument is here -- what 'data' is question? I wasn't intending to analyse or deconstruct. I am just casually slagging off someone I find irritating. He really is an annoying little piece of crap -- is this not obvious? If you like I can put together an anti-Nielsen counter-argument for you -- but that'll have to wait till after work :)
Yes, true, but the bottom line is not really interesting unless you're a shareholder in one of those companies. As a viewer, I don't see a difference between crap media that makes money and crap media that doesn't; it just sucks. Except that I will have to put up with the crap that makes money for longer, since it will be more successful; so really it's worse :)
And also, aren't they two very different kinds of Philistine really? Nielson thinks anything apart from information in its barest form is a waste of 'screen real estate'. Look at his website. It's so bare and ugly that I stand to stay on the page long enough to read any of it. The marketing Philistines are a different animal; they don't care about information in the slightest. The only thing that matters to them in the money.
So the ideal piece of information according to dear Jakob is the soundbite?
I could do with less soundbites and more indepth info ... 'word count' is quantitive, not qualitative ... typically reductionist. The man is a Philistine.
Yes, the survey is awful -- really crap design, really unprofessional-looking -- the latter of which should matter to MicroSoft.
I'm a huge fan of the books, and have been very impressed by the fact that the movies have, while necessarily stripping out a lot of detail, been more or less faithful to the spirit of the books, if not to their letter.
One let-down, however, has been the films' treatment of the character of Saruman. Christopher Lee thoroughly impressed, but the script does not allow for the subtlety of distinction between the two Towers -- Barad-dur and Isengard. Saruman (in the books) has plans to take the Ring for himself, and double-cross Sauron. In the films, the script suggests that he is a mere stooge of the Enemy, which is a shame, since it removes some of the subtlety of Middle-Earth politics.
As I recall, there's a website somewhere that allows you to type in any URL, and they get the content, replace random nouns and verbs with arbitrarily chosen obscene words, and shows the whole webpage in its new form. Definitely a giggle. Unfortunately I can't remember what it's called or where it is. Anyone know? I'd also really like to see a copy of the sanitised version of the content that this thread's author mentioned. Can you put it up somewhere?
How could anyone miss the irony? Surely "Funny" would be more appropriate :S
'roxorz' ?? ... go wash your mouth out with $0@|) and \/\/@+3®