> I always hated the "show your work" because I could usually do it in my head a lot faster so I never bothered.
The thing is, for most purposes "I did in in my head" turns a solution into uselessness. Solutions to problems are things that you can communicate with others. There is almost as much value in *how* you got to a solution as in the solution itself, because a good *how* actually adds value. No one builds a 100 floor building after an engineer computed something in his head.
Most of what you learn is not useful in itself, but as a way to teach you how to "show your work". The showing of your work is what really counts.
The standard argument I get from [university] students when I fail them for not making their reasoning explicit is that because the problem was easy, it was pointless. The underlying idea is that they can simply skip the communicative part of solving something easy, and magically when they are confronted with the problem of communicating something difficult they'll somehow manage.
Hating-the-"show-your-work" is simply something you have to get over.
Textbook are revised for all sort of reasons. Most of them, quite independent of methodology and what not. Permuting the exercises counts as a 'revision'...
Huh? As a mathematician who travels quite frequently I have never ever had any issues with that. I would simply stop going to a place where people have such problems!
No, they realized (a long time ago) that writing a desktop targeted at people that do care to personalize their desktops in the sense you have in mind is a pointless exercise: they are far too few in the big picture and way too uninteresting.
Closures has been available in good languages since essentially the egining of time. That it is now a "modern" feature only reflecs the fact that languages mostly suck...
You seem to think this is some kind of X server implemented in the browser. It is not. You *could* read up a bit on what it is before evaluating the technology... What you wrote only shows you have no idea what this is, really.
But choice does not mean that every piece of software has to provide you with every choice!
Gnome has decided where it wants to go. You may not like it, and you may surely choose to use something else which is moving in a direction you prefer. But Gnome is under absolutely no obligation to provide choices which go against what it thinks it should provide.
If you think the GPL is somehow related to all desktops environments providing all possible interaction option, you are seriously mistaken.
So you are saying that Redhat is secretly trying to ruin Gnome so as to hurt Ubuntu... I imagine you suspect Redhat is also secretly writing a new desktop to use in future releases of RHEL, right?
No, I am not from Chile. I am from *another* country that was sucked into chaos with cheering support from the US. You should look up the numbers---I doubt many countries got more money from the US than Egypy.... And I can but assume you have not been in Chile lately!
Slashdot Mirror
Yes because a typo and complete ignorance of ---at the very least--- the education systems in a good half of the world are the same thing...
In a context comapring countries, the ignorance displayed by this comment is pretty amazing.
Hmm, so you are the guy that uses the capslock key for something?!
You will need (correct) usage examples, then, on top of the definition...
Please look up the actual meaning of the *per se* thingie you used there.
The thing is, for most purposes "I did in in my head" turns a solution into uselessness. Solutions to problems are things that you can communicate with others. There is almost as much value in *how* you got to a solution as in the solution itself, because a good *how* actually adds value. No one builds a 100 floor building after an engineer computed something in his head.
Most of what you learn is not useful in itself, but as a way to teach you how to "show your work". The showing of your work is what really counts.
The standard argument I get from [university] students when I fail them for not making their reasoning explicit is that because the problem was easy, it was pointless. The underlying idea is that they can simply skip the communicative part of solving something easy, and magically when they are confronted with the problem of communicating something difficult they'll somehow manage.
Hating-the-"show-your-work" is simply something you have to get over.
Textbook are revised for all sort of reasons. Most of them, quite independent of methodology and what not. Permuting the exercises counts as a 'revision'...
That must be an amazing particle to get you that interested!
Huh? As a mathematician who travels quite frequently I have never ever had any issues with that. I would simply stop going to a place where people have such problems!
SO you are saying that you took CS when you should have taken Software Engineering? Well, everyone makes mistakes.
Hmmm. Have you just been unfrozen?
Well, then: do it.
The ones currently developing are quite free to do the same: exactly what they want.
No, they realized (a long time ago) that writing a desktop targeted at people that do care to personalize their desktops in the sense you have in mind is a pointless exercise: they are far too few in the big picture and way too uninteresting.
Closures has been available in good languages since essentially the egining of time. That it is now a "modern" feature only reflecs the fact that languages mostly suck...
Best slashdot comeback in a few years...
Let me introduce to to this thing Tim came up with...
You seem to think this is some kind of X server implemented in the browser. It is not. You *could* read up a bit on what it is before evaluating the technology... What you wrote only shows you have no idea what this is, really.
By posting that you have only proved that you simply have no idea how this works, or even what the architecture is.
Or, you know, like someone who expects his software packages to be signed...
(And before you say anything, I don't think I have even been closed to an Arch package much less used the thing)
But choice does not mean that every piece of software has to provide you with every choice!
Gnome has decided where it wants to go. You may not like it, and you may surely choose to use something else which is moving in a direction you prefer. But Gnome is under absolutely no obligation to provide choices which go against what it thinks it should provide.
If you think the GPL is somehow related to all desktops environments providing all possible interaction option, you are seriously mistaken.
Well, they did built LHC to test one of its predictions...
If you think that in quantum mechanics "everything is based on your perceptions" then you have no idea what quantum mechanics is...
So you are saying that Redhat is secretly trying to ruin Gnome so as to hurt Ubuntu... I imagine you suspect Redhat is also secretly writing a new desktop to use in future releases of RHEL, right?
You would have prosecuted Navokov, I guess?
No, I am not from Chile. I am from *another* country that was sucked into chaos with cheering support from the US. You should look up the numbers---I doubt many countries got more money from the US than Egypy.... And I can but assume you have not been in Chile lately!