So the calmer you are in what would normally be an adrenaline producing situation, the better you are at the game? That's going to produce some scary people.
The thing is that won't end up with us being out of a job because there's always more to do. There are things people would like us to do, but we don't have time for, and if we free up more time we can move on to that.
Amen to that. My wife got nervous when I described how things were going at work. We had a team of four, lost two people, hired one to replace them. We don't feel any need to hire more even though we're actually handling more responsibilities now than we did as a foursome. I'm currently reworking some legacy code that's been a timesink for us to constantly dance around. She asked me "Won't that come to a point where they don't need you?" I thought that was kind of funny. There are ALWAYS other projects to fill in the freed up resources.
And my point is sigils are part of the name, which makes each name distinct.
But they're not part of the name. To my original post on the subject:
So you're saying that you can have @foo and %foo, and then assign @foo = @foo{('curly','larry','moe')}, and the lhs @foo refers to something different than the rhs @foo?
not to mention cases where you can have $foo, @foo, and %foo, and then assignments like:
$foo = $foo[5]; $foo = $foo{bar};
which is a more common case than the one above
The sigils tell you what type to expect an expression to return, but they're not part of the name.
Am i the only one who is confused by the wording of the summary?
Far from it. From the summary, it sounds like he convinced women to strip for him in front of a camera, then used those pictures to blackmail the women into... sending him naked pictures of themselves.
If you have a few hundred of domains the costs to implement are lower than the discount given till mid 2014 == profit for implementing dnssec
I'm assuming there's some kind of catch in there so that it's not worthwhile for someone to register a few thousand new domains and then implement DNSSEC on them.
To a Perl programmer this is all very clear despite having multiple things called 'file' in the same scope. What would you prefer? "$file, $file_handle, $file_array, $file_hash"? There are a lot of things you could do instead but they're not much clearer or easier to read, and this is more than sufficiently clear.
Before I say anything else: I understand that your code is illustrative and not intended to be an example of how to read a file.
That said, I do feel that discrete names provide better clarity, and don't believe that having distinct symbol tables for each variable type is beneficial. Clearly YMMV (and it seems, DOES vary).
BTW, I think the guy who wrote the ruby version also understood what you were doing. His point (and mine, to a lesser degree) is that if you use distinct names, which he and I both appear to prefer, then the sigils become clutter.
$foo is one (scalar) variable, which is not the same as @foo (array), and %foo (hash) and foo (file handle), which can coexist without interference, and no Perl programmer will be confused by that (we actually think of the sigil as *part* of the name, as in "dollar foo" and "percent foo"). So it's not redundant syntax, which Perl avoids like the plague.
They're also there to ensure that you're getting the right kind of value when you build an expression, like @stooges = @people{('curly','larry','moe')} (stooges is an array, people is a hash). That is the kind of compact syntax that makes it popular as opposed to iterating over the keys to add the values to the array.
So you're saying that you can have @foo and %foo, and then assign @foo = @foo{('curly','larry','moe')}, and the lhs @foo refers to something different than the rhs @foo? And that's not confusing?
I've heard Coulton's version once. Or at least, about half of it, before I got bored. What I did not doubt was that he knew exactly how he was coming across. I figured it was a joke. Joke's not as funny if you only do half the song though.
I've always felt the best done cover in the same concept (not the same song) was Dynamite Hack.
Depending on whether Turks count as European the Turks were a) never colonized by Euros/Westerners or b) are by definition colonized by themselves. The Saudis always maintained significant autonomy from the Sultan in Istanbul.
"Turks" as a people maybe not (not sure if colonization can apply to people rather than territory), but IIRC the Romans colonized a large chunk of Turkey.
Have they launched anything? What have they done? I ask this without intending any disrespect -- but if they've got some accomplishments under their belt then they need a better PR machine.
CSA is the Canadian Space agency! I thought I took a nap and woke in a Turtledove-esq alternate universe where the south won the civil war and were in space!
My first reaction was something like "Oh. The Canadians have a space agency?"
Have they launched anything? What have they done? I ask this without intending any disrespect -- but if they've got some accomplishments under their belt then they need a better PR machine.
Slashdot Mirror
So the calmer you are in what would normally be an adrenaline producing situation, the better you are at the game? That's going to produce some scary people.
So thats 1000kg...
Nobody ever says Megagram, or Megameter either for that matter. I for one would like to see that become commonplace.
He says the scanner provides an excuse for them to do "enhanced patdowns".
I don't know what sort of people enjoy giving enhanced patdowns to other people, but know I don't want them in my airports.
Actually, the summary is poorly worded. He says the opposite in the article:
“People had become comfortable with the scanner. It certainly did speed the process and removed the need for the enhanced pat-down.”
And in an era in which aerial combat is of diminishing importance
That's going to need a citation methinks.
It is in NYC, but most of the US isn't a major population center.
I try not to be a grammar Nazi,
And yet.... You are.
Try harder. Nobody likes a pedantic ass. Technically correct or not.
I lied. I don't really try.
For all intensive purposes
I try not to be a grammar Nazi, but man you even italicized it.
In case you don't know what a regular expression is — it is a way of specifying what characters are allowed using wild-card characters and more.
I mean... really?
Have trouble parsing them? I get that. We all do.
Not know what they are? Who in this audience?
The thing is that won't end up with us being out of a job because there's always more to do. There are things people would like us to do, but we don't have time for, and if we free up more time we can move on to that.
Amen to that. My wife got nervous when I described how things were going at work. We had a team of four, lost two people, hired one to replace them. We don't feel any need to hire more even though we're actually handling more responsibilities now than we did as a foursome. I'm currently reworking some legacy code that's been a timesink for us to constantly dance around. She asked me "Won't that come to a point where they don't need you?" I thought that was kind of funny. There are ALWAYS other projects to fill in the freed up resources.
Hey man, thanks for explaining the joke to those without a sarcasm detector. I really appreciate it.
Just to be clear, he's being sarcastic right there.
Not to mention all the FTL tech that people thought of even before then. Seriously, this world is just full of slackers.
Which household pets are tastiest after being blended?
And my point is sigils are part of the name, which makes each name distinct.
But they're not part of the name. To my original post on the subject:
So you're saying that you can have @foo and %foo, and then assign @foo = @foo{('curly','larry','moe')}, and the lhs @foo refers to something different than the rhs @foo?
not to mention cases where you can have
$foo, @foo, and %foo, and then assignments like:
$foo = $foo[5];
$foo = $foo{bar};
which is a more common case than the one above
The sigils tell you what type to expect an expression to return, but they're not part of the name.
Am i the only one who is confused by the wording of the summary?
Far from it. From the summary, it sounds like he convinced women to strip for him in front of a camera, then used those pictures to blackmail the women into... sending him naked pictures of themselves.
If you have a few hundred of domains the costs to implement are lower than the discount given till mid 2014 == profit for implementing dnssec
I'm assuming there's some kind of catch in there so that it's not worthwhile for someone to register a few thousand new domains and then implement DNSSEC on them.
To a Perl programmer this is all very clear despite having multiple things called 'file' in the same scope. What would you prefer? "$file, $file_handle, $file_array, $file_hash"? There are a lot of things you could do instead but they're not much clearer or easier to read, and this is more than sufficiently clear.
Before I say anything else: I understand that your code is illustrative and not intended to be an example of how to read a file.
That said, I do feel that discrete names provide better clarity, and don't believe that having distinct symbol tables for each variable type is beneficial. Clearly YMMV (and it seems, DOES vary).
BTW, I think the guy who wrote the ruby version also understood what you were doing. His point (and mine, to a lesser degree) is that if you use distinct names, which he and I both appear to prefer, then the sigils become clutter.
My complaint with your argument lies in reconciling that syntax with this statement:
(we actually think of the sigil as *part* of the name, as in "dollar foo" and "percent foo")
$foo is one (scalar) variable, which is not the same as @foo (array), and %foo (hash) and foo (file handle), which can coexist without interference, and no Perl programmer will be confused by that (we actually think of the sigil as *part* of the name, as in "dollar foo" and "percent foo"). So it's not redundant syntax, which Perl avoids like the plague.
They're also there to ensure that you're getting the right kind of value when you build an expression, like @stooges = @people{('curly','larry','moe')} (stooges is an array, people is a hash). That is the kind of compact syntax that makes it popular as opposed to iterating over the keys to add the values to the array.
So you're saying that you can have @foo and %foo, and then assign @foo = @foo{('curly','larry','moe')}, and the lhs @foo refers to something different than the rhs @foo? And that's not confusing?
I've heard Coulton's version once. Or at least, about half of it, before I got bored. What I did not doubt was that he knew exactly how he was coming across. I figured it was a joke. Joke's not as funny if you only do half the song though.
I've always felt the best done cover in the same concept (not the same song) was Dynamite Hack.
no you do not "recall" correctly. the Eastern Roman empire sprawled over parts of what now is Turkey
How is that not being colonized by the Romans?
They were eventually removed, but I didn't exactly claim Turkey was still part of the Roman empire.
IIRC you had broccoli growing in your underpants. now you write a post disputing that and we'll go at this ad infinitum
Why would I want to dispute that? Free broccoli!
Depending on whether Turks count as European the Turks were a) never colonized by Euros/Westerners or b) are by definition colonized by themselves. The Saudis always maintained significant autonomy from the Sultan in Istanbul.
"Turks" as a people maybe not (not sure if colonization can apply to people rather than territory), but IIRC the Romans colonized a large chunk of Turkey.
There are lots of problems in that list, but... Cuba? Really?
Note to Canadians - try writing the word 'Canada' in even larger letters on vital components of NASA's manned space programme.
Starts with a 'C', ends with 'a', has the words 'Made In' next to it.... about the only time Canada gets mixed up with China.
CSA is the Canadian Space agency! I thought I took a nap and woke in a Turtledove-esq alternate universe where the south won the civil war and were in space!
My first reaction was something like "Oh. The Canadians have a space agency?"
Have they launched anything? What have they done? I ask this without intending any disrespect -- but if they've got some accomplishments under their belt then they need a better PR machine.
Get management buy in, and have them pad your estimates to allow a little bit of code rework in each release cycle.
If that fails, lie about your estimates and use the extra time to rework the code in each release cycle.