Just a different way of thinking. Purely functional programming is possible in JavaScript, and is basically mandated in Clojure. So it's more like comparing JavaScript and "use strict"; -- you want to be pure in your algorithms and so it babysits you.
Web Inspector gained the ability to live update CSS and I gained the ability to switch to Chrome. Between the addon compatibility problems that come from rapid-fire releases and the general slowness Firefox suffers from, I was eager to leave it behind. I still think Firebug is better, and still have it installed, but Chrome is just so much easier/faster/mindless. So I switched.
It looked to me from Ars take on it that they're compiling JS server-side but running it client-side. Timing shouldn't factor into that. It should decrease the time it takes JS to start running because the code's already been parsed and I would think poorly coded animation will run smoother. In a perfect world this feature would make litte difference.
Absolutely. Working in IT when you want to write code is not ideal. But it puts you near where you want to be, talking to the right people. The skillset, as others have said, won't help or hurt, but in the mean time you're drawing a paycheck and fostering professional relationships. Plus. when a development position does open up, you'll likely hear about it first and may have a brief window to apply before it opens up to the world.
That was my first thought..net has a much longer history than Silverlight (when considering it as a platform). And yet MS still treats.net as a stepchild. While it sounds ridiculous to say Office should be rewritten in.net, remember Windows Defender was originally.net and was re-written to remove those dependencies. If Microsoft is unwilling to commit to that platform, they're surely not going to commit to a platform with.net as a dependency.
This looks cool when everything works, but what happens when you try to `cat` a JSON file with a syntax error? Terminal is already lowest common denominator. If you want a better/easier/user-friendlier way, they're out there, but it seems like doing it in the terminal layer is wrong.
An excellent point. I find tabs are terribly useful on one screen but the utility of multiple windows rapidly overtakes the utility of multiple tabs by the time you have more than 1 monitor. Let the window manager do its job. Pointing out deficiencies is the easiest way to get it fixed in the proper layer.
Also seems like it's become impolite to disagree with people in your bubble. It's OK to agree, but if you disagree, you're supposed to remain silent. Same effect, but with the added bonus of breeding apathy.
I tried on two machines, a 13" laptop and 40" combined dual-monitor desktop. Worked great on the laptop: I really liked it. On the desktop, though....
For one, mirror the menus is a big improvement compared to anything. They tray (notify area) was on both monitors, the focused app's menu stayed on that monitor (compare to multi-mon OSX where the app's menu shows on one central monitor regardless of which monitor app is on).
But the launcher sucks. It lives on a single monitor, and being on the horizontal edge, means I've got potentially 40" to slide the mouse before I get to the bar. Now, it's got a text-driven launcher app too, like Spotlight or Gnome Do or Windows' start menu. That always runs on the primary screen. And then the app launches on the primary screen. Whereas with Gnome Do, it summoned on my active screen and then launched the app on the screen its active screen.
Unity lost 10 years of advancements with multiple monitors. And that makes it a huge pain.
Switched my work machine from a Mac Pro to Ubuntu PC a couple weeks ago, largely because of XAMPP. XAMPP doesn't do a good job replacing OSX's built in Apache/PHP, and that makes CLI PHP work (CakePHP's console) unnecessarily hard. Possible? Absolutely. But eventually I got tired of fighting with it, and wanted PHP to just work.
And a shell script is just a text file. So are SVGs. And really a web page is just text, too, so we're all massacring English every time we use the word 'website.'
Get over yourself. These "bookmarks" have functionality. Functionality is what makes them apps. Who cares, really, if your app is a VBA script hosted in Excel, or a website, or an Java ME applet on a mobile phone, or an ELF executable? They all have functionality.
Running, driving and walking are transportation. Abbreviating it transp doesn't magically exclude flying, just as the word App doesn't exclude HTTP-transported, browser-contained applications.
I'm been getting more spam for about the last two weeks than any other time in recent memory. To be fair, that's more spam getting past filters and into my inbox, not total volume. So perhaps total spam volume IS down, but spam's effectiveness is up?
Sure, easy enough to **sell** through Google. But if you have a Google Account that doesn't end in @gmail.com, it'll make it much easier to **buy** apps.
It's my sincere hope the courses stay, despite the disappearance of the AP test. I look the A exam in it's final year as C++ as a Junior, and got a 5. Of course, being the A exam, it was not good for credit even at my state college. But the content they taught there carried well into Computer Science 251 (which, by then, was Java) course. It was easily the most informative course I took through all of High School.
In fact, since then, learning Scheme was the only useful exercise I've do in generic computer science. It took working with MVCs in web development to get the full usefulness of objects. Using them purely for organization never conveyed their purpose.
AP as a test, in general, is not really worth the effort. The curriculum is far past anything I ever experienced in the equivalent college course, schools are loathe to hand out credit on the tests. The courses should stay, and just relabel them Honors. Losing the test is no great loss.
For the longest time, I agreed with you. But there are two circumstances I've observed which make RSS helpful:
1) Rarely updated sites. If a site exists, is alive, but is not frequently updated (like Paul Graham) I might subscribe to its feed so I won't forget about it but won't check back day-after-day to find nothing has changed.
2) Too much to keep track of. While some sites might only update once a day or a few times a week, like Anandtech, there are others which update many, many times a day (like Slashdot or TUAW). You can argue "what does it matter if you miss a story?" but if you hope to catch it all, having a mechanism to enforce it makes things easier. And once you have more than a handful of sites to keep track of, it's just easier to offload remembering what to check elsewhere.
Yes, it does sound ironic. But in a corporation, anyone can be silenced, and relatively easily. Given a compotent and confident base, it can be maintained.
No, Mozilla's developers and evangelists should not have more control over the ways money is spent. People who live lower on the totem pole often do not understand the true costs and requirements of doing business. 2000 developers arguing over the neccessity of spending a few hundred dollars will do no good for the overall project.
Some will claim that only a small percentage of the overall developer base will be interested in it, but this is still an invalid position. If they want to participate in those kinds of positions, they need to adopt a second position within the corporation. Just being a developer is not good enough. At your job, working on your company's web site does not entitle you to dictate marketing dollars use to the CEO. You're still free to offer advice in either scenario, but advice need not be acted upon.
As for the evangelists and financial contributors: If they do not like what they see happening, they are free to cease contribution.
The point is that although Firefox is an open-source project, conflict of interest and incompotence still exist, and the corporate structure helps to mitigate it. Let the business people do what they do best, and the developers do what they do best. If software development positions within Mozilla were available, people would be clamoring for such a clearly-split division of responsibility. Although developers here are not paid resources of Mozilla the corporation, nothing changes. And if you don't like that, you can always fork the code into yet another design-and-management by the community open-source project that nobody uses.
I don't think there is a parallels substitute. I've tried numerous virtual machines on Windows and Linux, and some of the old PC emulators in the PowerPC days. Coherence mode puts Parallels so far ahead of anything else. I only adopted Parallels over Christmas but it took less than a day to realize how much better Parallels is than any emulator or even bootcamp.
I'm sure I've now been labeled a shill or something, but I'm not. I'm just a guy who happens to be a big fan and has seen what else is out there.
Slashdot Mirror
Just a different way of thinking. Purely functional programming is possible in JavaScript, and is basically mandated in Clojure. So it's more like comparing JavaScript and "use strict"; -- you want to be pure in your algorithms and so it babysits you.
Clojure: http://clojure.org/
Don't think it's formally Google anymore.
That is the most brief and coherent explanation of Firefox's versioning failure I've seen.
Web Inspector gained the ability to live update CSS and I gained the ability to switch to Chrome. Between the addon compatibility problems that come from rapid-fire releases and the general slowness Firefox suffers from, I was eager to leave it behind. I still think Firebug is better, and still have it installed, but Chrome is just so much easier/faster/mindless. So I switched.
It looked to me from Ars take on it that they're compiling JS server-side but running it client-side. Timing shouldn't factor into that. It should decrease the time it takes JS to start running because the code's already been parsed and I would think poorly coded animation will run smoother. In a perfect world this feature would make litte difference.
Absolutely. Working in IT when you want to write code is not ideal. But it puts you near where you want to be, talking to the right people. The skillset, as others have said, won't help or hurt, but in the mean time you're drawing a paycheck and fostering professional relationships. Plus. when a development position does open up, you'll likely hear about it first and may have a brief window to apply before it opens up to the world.
This is beginning of something far more important than nuclear power: Microwave Transmission.
Exactly. Somehow it seems like The FBI (http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/10/fbi-tracking-device/) should have a problem with this legislation.
That was my first thought. .net has a much longer history than Silverlight (when considering it as a platform). And yet MS still treats .net as a stepchild. While it sounds ridiculous to say Office should be rewritten in .net, remember Windows Defender was originally .net and was re-written to remove those dependencies. If Microsoft is unwilling to commit to that platform, they're surely not going to commit to a platform with .net as a dependency.
This looks cool when everything works, but what happens when you try to `cat` a JSON file with a syntax error? Terminal is already lowest common denominator. If you want a better/easier/user-friendlier way, they're out there, but it seems like doing it in the terminal layer is wrong.
An excellent point. I find tabs are terribly useful on one screen but the utility of multiple windows rapidly overtakes the utility of multiple tabs by the time you have more than 1 monitor. Let the window manager do its job. Pointing out deficiencies is the easiest way to get it fixed in the proper layer.
Also seems like it's become impolite to disagree with people in your bubble. It's OK to agree, but if you disagree, you're supposed to remain silent. Same effect, but with the added bonus of breeding apathy.
I tried on two machines, a 13" laptop and 40" combined dual-monitor desktop. Worked great on the laptop: I really liked it. On the desktop, though.... For one, mirror the menus is a big improvement compared to anything. They tray (notify area) was on both monitors, the focused app's menu stayed on that monitor (compare to multi-mon OSX where the app's menu shows on one central monitor regardless of which monitor app is on). But the launcher sucks. It lives on a single monitor, and being on the horizontal edge, means I've got potentially 40" to slide the mouse before I get to the bar. Now, it's got a text-driven launcher app too, like Spotlight or Gnome Do or Windows' start menu. That always runs on the primary screen. And then the app launches on the primary screen. Whereas with Gnome Do, it summoned on my active screen and then launched the app on the screen its active screen. Unity lost 10 years of advancements with multiple monitors. And that makes it a huge pain.
Switched my work machine from a Mac Pro to Ubuntu PC a couple weeks ago, largely because of XAMPP. XAMPP doesn't do a good job replacing OSX's built in Apache/PHP, and that makes CLI PHP work (CakePHP's console) unnecessarily hard. Possible? Absolutely. But eventually I got tired of fighting with it, and wanted PHP to just work.
That was my first thought, anyway. Silly letter-versions.
And a shell script is just a text file. So are SVGs. And really a web page is just text, too, so we're all massacring English every time we use the word 'website.'
Get over yourself. These "bookmarks" have functionality. Functionality is what makes them apps. Who cares, really, if your app is a VBA script hosted in Excel, or a website, or an Java ME applet on a mobile phone, or an ELF executable? They all have functionality.
Running, driving and walking are transportation. Abbreviating it transp doesn't magically exclude flying, just as the word App doesn't exclude HTTP-transported, browser-contained applications.
I'm been getting more spam for about the last two weeks than any other time in recent memory. To be fair, that's more spam getting past filters and into my inbox, not total volume. So perhaps total spam volume IS down, but spam's effectiveness is up?
Didn't expect this from Brown. Good for him.
Sure, easy enough to **sell** through Google. But if you have a Google Account that doesn't end in @gmail.com, it'll make it much easier to **buy** apps.
Exactly. The potential to expand, change, etc open source doesn't mean diddly until it actually happens or you decide you're actually going to.
It's my sincere hope the courses stay, despite the disappearance of the AP test. I look the A exam in it's final year as C++ as a Junior, and got a 5. Of course, being the A exam, it was not good for credit even at my state college. But the content they taught there carried well into Computer Science 251 (which, by then, was Java) course. It was easily the most informative course I took through all of High School. In fact, since then, learning Scheme was the only useful exercise I've do in generic computer science. It took working with MVCs in web development to get the full usefulness of objects. Using them purely for organization never conveyed their purpose. AP as a test, in general, is not really worth the effort. The curriculum is far past anything I ever experienced in the equivalent college course, schools are loathe to hand out credit on the tests. The courses should stay, and just relabel them Honors. Losing the test is no great loss.
For the longest time, I agreed with you. But there are two circumstances I've observed which make RSS helpful: 1) Rarely updated sites. If a site exists, is alive, but is not frequently updated (like Paul Graham) I might subscribe to its feed so I won't forget about it but won't check back day-after-day to find nothing has changed. 2) Too much to keep track of. While some sites might only update once a day or a few times a week, like Anandtech, there are others which update many, many times a day (like Slashdot or TUAW). You can argue "what does it matter if you miss a story?" but if you hope to catch it all, having a mechanism to enforce it makes things easier. And once you have more than a handful of sites to keep track of, it's just easier to offload remembering what to check elsewhere.
Yes, it does sound ironic. But in a corporation, anyone can be silenced, and relatively easily. Given a compotent and confident base, it can be maintained.
No, Mozilla's developers and evangelists should not have more control over the ways money is spent. People who live lower on the totem pole often do not understand the true costs and requirements of doing business. 2000 developers arguing over the neccessity of spending a few hundred dollars will do no good for the overall project.
Some will claim that only a small percentage of the overall developer base will be interested in it, but this is still an invalid position. If they want to participate in those kinds of positions, they need to adopt a second position within the corporation. Just being a developer is not good enough. At your job, working on your company's web site does not entitle you to dictate marketing dollars use to the CEO. You're still free to offer advice in either scenario, but advice need not be acted upon.
As for the evangelists and financial contributors: If they do not like what they see happening, they are free to cease contribution.
The point is that although Firefox is an open-source project, conflict of interest and incompotence still exist, and the corporate structure helps to mitigate it. Let the business people do what they do best, and the developers do what they do best. If software development positions within Mozilla were available, people would be clamoring for such a clearly-split division of responsibility. Although developers here are not paid resources of Mozilla the corporation, nothing changes. And if you don't like that, you can always fork the code into yet another design-and-management by the community open-source project that nobody uses.
I don't think there is a parallels substitute. I've tried numerous virtual machines on Windows and Linux, and some of the old PC emulators in the PowerPC days. Coherence mode puts Parallels so far ahead of anything else. I only adopted Parallels over Christmas but it took less than a day to realize how much better Parallels is than any emulator or even bootcamp. I'm sure I've now been labeled a shill or something, but I'm not. I'm just a guy who happens to be a big fan and has seen what else is out there.