The coffee was being served at 40-50 decgrees hotter than recommended
Recommended by whom? Coffee drinkers and coffee geeks recommend that coffee's hot water should be between 90C (194F) and 95C (203F), and that coffee should be served immediately after being brewed e.g. with the coffee itself being well above 80C (176F), because that's the way to get the best out of your coffee
Coffee hot water's ideal temperature is between 90 and 95C (190 to 200F) and coffee is best served immediately after brewing (e.g. when the temperature is still well above 80C (175F)), or at worst within 20 minutes sitting on the warmer.
They serve hot coffee because that's how you're supposed to serve coffee, and because that's the only way to get coffee that actually tastes like coffee
Coffee is hot, that's a fact, that's how it's supposed to be, just as tea is hot unless you're ordering iced tea. Live with it, and if you're untable to be fucking careful with your fucking coffee then you don't deserve coffee in the first place. Now please go slit your wrists emo kid.
Or maybe they're just using their beta program how a beta program is supposed to be used beta test e.g. to test and debug over an extra wide user base?
My my my, how's that possible, that the preview release of a beta version could be less stable as a software released 5 years ago is unheard of, i'd suggest you to sue Microsoft.
Re:Lisp not accessible?
on
Beyond Java
·
· Score: 1
I'm unfamiliar with SciTE, but if it has parens matching and syntax highlighting for Common Lisp
It does
Re:Gcj anyone is it a JVM or is it not.
on
Beyond Java
·
· Score: 1
GCJ is not a VM, it's a compiler to native code. Kaffe, JamVM or SableVM on the other hand are open-source JVMs. IKVM.Net is also a JVM although a much stranger one since it's a JVM implemented in.Net (I must say that I couldn't, for the life of me, understand the point of doing that...).
[BTW: CLISP is just an implementation of Common Lisp, please don't confuse it with the language itself]
I was using CLisp as the shortcut to Common Lisp, much easier to type.
Do we have standard threads/networking/GUI in C? C++? (POSIX doesn't count - a lot of C/C++ code is written for Win32)
Well, there is POSIX and there is Win32. And then you can go query the OS api itself.
And C and C++ are quite low level languages anyway, so people don't expect them to come bundled with anything. Common Lisp on the other hand is a very high level language, that doesn't really expose the OS api either, which means that you can't compare it to C/C++.
What about 'standard' threads/GUI in Perl?
Perl has the whole CPAN, which is what you could call an extended standard library, which is why the language itself doesn't need a huge standard library. Each and every Perl user knows about CPAN, and the first reflex of a Perl guy looking for a module or a functionality (unless he really wants to reimplement it himself) is to browse CPAN, so that's a non issue.
In Python's case for instance, variables do not have the notion of type.
Duh? Python doesn't even have the notion of variable. Python has names, and python has object. A name is bound to an object, and an object can have multiple names bound to it. A name has no value and no attribute (it's merely a kind of pointer) therefore can't have a type, and an object has a type.
You can explicitely do your typechecks if you consider that you need them (via type() or isinstance()), and some people have reimplemented attributes/return values typechecks via decorators if you feel lost without them.
Now please do tell me, how is python weakly typed (as in "not a strongly typed language at all")? Because it's not statically and explicitely typed? Is that all?
Re:Lisp not accessible?
on
Beyond Java
·
· Score: 1
What editor are you using?
Good ol' SciTE.
If you're on Windows, there are a couple of good Lisp environments, namely Allegro's personal edition.
The only pricing I found on Franz' website is AllegroCL 7.0 for Students and it's $99. There is no way in hell i'm going to pay $100 to learn CLisp.
There was none, your example was trivial, worthless and stupid which gained it an as trivial, worthless and stupid answer.
Re:Lisp not accessible?
on
Beyond Java
·
· Score: 1
Lisp isn't accessible? Is that because of the parens or some other reason?
Definitely the parens, that's what I'm currently trying to get over atm (I'm just done learning the "basics" of Ruby [== I can start doing actual work in ruby] and have decided to pick CLisp as my next language, but I'm having trouble getting my mind to process the parens atm, they burn my brain and screw my eyes.
Different Schemes have different OO/package/whatever system, so porting between them is, well, something quite like complete rewrite.
Sad thing is... you can say exactly the same for the various Common Lisp implementations.
While there is an extensive (yet old) specification for the core language, the CLisp folks just didn't consider that standardizing a "standard library" would be a good idea, and as a result each and every implementation features it's very own implementation of threads, networking, GUI,... completely incompatible with the implementation next door (and sometimes within an implementation from one platform to the other).
And the worst, I think, is that the Lisp community doesn't seem to see how some kind of standard library (as in, including the batteries in Clisp) would be useful to bring people new to the language in, or keep them there.
Then again, actually reading comp.lang.lisp (or -- god forbid -- asking a question there) is sadly more than enough to drive you very far from trying to code in lisp ever again.
What "dynamic typing" lets you do is forget about data types.
Sorry, no, it doesn't. Try to apply a string operation to an array object in Ruby and see the interpreter tell you where you can stick it if you don't believe me.
Please, don't mix dynamic typing with loose/weak typing.
Smalltalk, Ruby or Python are dynamically strongly typed languages, this means that their typing is as strong as Java's or C#'s if not stronger (you can't actually cast in Ruby or Python, you have to convert, for example) but that the type checking is completely done at runtime, while Java or C# (due to "somewhat static" typing) do some type checking at compile time and some at runtime.
PHP or Javascript, on the other hand, are weakly dynamically typed languages, which means that very few typechecking is actually done and the language will do it's best (/worst) to coerce your values to a type compatible with the operation you try to apply to it.
"somewhat static" typing as implemented in Java or C# (which is extremely different than complete static typing such as Haskell's or Ada's) doesn't catch that many errors actually, and the few it could catch are catched by unit tests.
Re:Perl is not too loose and messy
on
Beyond Java
·
· Score: 1
Built in reg exp are extreme useful
Thing is, ruby has them too, and it still manages to have readable code outside of the regexps.
Ruby (on Rails) is too simplistic, in my opinion, a few commands and you have a full website up in no time, albeit, without very much control over the internals.
This alone shows how you haven't even tried to know what Rails is.
Rails doesn't give you "a full website up in no time in a few commands", what it gives you is a mere base, something like 40locs you don't have to type for every table you have in your db.
Then, it gives you full and complete control over what you want or don't want to do, how you want to set your site, what you want to display and where.
Scaffolding is the little twinkie that gets you started, but by the time you get anything actually worth using 95% of the code generated by the scafolding util will have disappeared into oblivion, either edited or completely wiped out for being utterly unneeded.
Seeing as Matz intend to stay in command of Ruby (as he's been since he created it) and has started a complete, faster, more efficient rewrite of Ruby for Ruby 2.0 (without even excluding possible backward-compatibility breakage for the sake of sanity and efficiency), without the errors of the past (e.g. without the mistakes he made raising Ruby from the beginning to the current 1.8.4) and potentially with a JIT at the end, Ruby doesn't intend to take the path Java did.
And neither does Python, obviously.
So my guess on where they'll be in 10 years: leading, or evolved into a language transcending them both, a better smalltalk, something even closer to Lisp power while keeping a sane, clean, readable, expressive syntax.
Slashdot Mirror
Because we're not coding in fucking C, thanks nonetheless for the suggestion.
Recommended by whom? Coffee drinkers and coffee geeks recommend that coffee's hot water should be between 90C (194F) and 95C (203F), and that coffee should be served immediately after being brewed e.g. with the coffee itself being well above 80C (176F), because that's the way to get the best out of your coffee
That's a recommandation, too...
Congratulation, you're a moron.
Coffee hot water's ideal temperature is between 90 and 95C (190 to 200F) and coffee is best served immediately after brewing (e.g. when the temperature is still well above 80C (175F)), or at worst within 20 minutes sitting on the warmer.
They serve hot coffee because that's how you're supposed to serve coffee, and because that's the only way to get coffee that actually tastes like coffee
Coffee is hot, that's a fact, that's how it's supposed to be, just as tea is hot unless you're ordering iced tea. Live with it, and if you're untable to be fucking careful with your fucking coffee then you don't deserve coffee in the first place. Now please go slit your wrists emo kid.
Doesn't mean you can't sue his family, and his label too.
Or maybe they're just using their beta program how a beta program is supposed to be used beta test e.g. to test and debug over an extra wide user base?
My my my, how's that possible, that the preview release of a beta version could be less stable as a software released 5 years ago is unheard of, i'd suggest you to sue Microsoft.
Not an extension, more than likely a Greasemonkey script for Slashdot, i'd bet on Slashdot: Live Comment Tree: Lets you expand and collapse entire threads in an article's comments.
It does
GCJ is not a VM, it's a compiler to native code. Kaffe, JamVM or SableVM on the other hand are open-source JVMs. IKVM.Net is also a JVM although a much stranger one since it's a JVM implemented in .Net (I must say that I couldn't, for the life of me, understand the point of doing that...).
I was using CLisp as the shortcut to Common Lisp, much easier to type.
Well, there is POSIX and there is Win32. And then you can go query the OS api itself.
And C and C++ are quite low level languages anyway, so people don't expect them to come bundled with anything. Common Lisp on the other hand is a very high level language, that doesn't really expose the OS api either, which means that you can't compare it to C/C++.
Perl has the whole CPAN, which is what you could call an extended standard library, which is why the language itself doesn't need a huge standard library. Each and every Perl user knows about CPAN, and the first reflex of a Perl guy looking for a module or a functionality (unless he really wants to reimplement it himself) is to browse CPAN, so that's a non issue.
Interresting, bookmarked.
Duh? Python doesn't even have the notion of variable. Python has names, and python has object. A name is bound to an object, and an object can have multiple names bound to it. A name has no value and no attribute (it's merely a kind of pointer) therefore can't have a type, and an object has a type.
You can explicitely do your typechecks if you consider that you need them (via type() or isinstance()), and some people have reimplemented attributes/return values typechecks via decorators if you feel lost without them.
Now please do tell me, how is python weakly typed (as in "not a strongly typed language at all")? Because it's not statically and explicitely typed? Is that all?
Good ol' SciTE.
The only pricing I found on Franz' website is AllegroCL 7.0 for Students and it's $99. There is no way in hell i'm going to pay $100 to learn CLisp.
There was none, your example was trivial, worthless and stupid which gained it an as trivial, worthless and stupid answer.
Definitely the parens, that's what I'm currently trying to get over atm (I'm just done learning the "basics" of Ruby [== I can start doing actual work in ruby] and have decided to pick CLisp as my next language, but I'm having trouble getting my mind to process the parens atm, they burn my brain and screw my eyes.
Oh well, that'll pass, i'm persistent.
That's probably the best way to get disgusted of Lisp for a long time.
Python version:
print "Hello World!"Ruby version:
puts "Hello World!"Well, even though all of them pretty much suck there is half a dozen open source JVMs out there.
Sad thing is... you can say exactly the same for the various Common Lisp implementations.
While there is an extensive (yet old) specification for the core language, the CLisp folks just didn't consider that standardizing a "standard library" would be a good idea, and as a result each and every implementation features it's very own implementation of threads, networking, GUI, ... completely incompatible with the implementation next door (and sometimes within an implementation from one platform to the other).
And the worst, I think, is that the Lisp community doesn't seem to see how some kind of standard library (as in, including the batteries in Clisp) would be useful to bring people new to the language in, or keep them there.
Then again, actually reading comp.lang.lisp (or -- god forbid -- asking a question there) is sadly more than enough to drive you very far from trying to code in lisp ever again.
Sorry, no, it doesn't. Try to apply a string operation to an array object in Ruby and see the interpreter tell you where you can stick it if you don't believe me.
Please, don't mix dynamic typing with loose/weak typing.
Smalltalk, Ruby or Python are dynamically strongly typed languages, this means that their typing is as strong as Java's or C#'s if not stronger (you can't actually cast in Ruby or Python, you have to convert, for example) but that the type checking is completely done at runtime, while Java or C# (due to "somewhat static" typing) do some type checking at compile time and some at runtime.
PHP or Javascript, on the other hand, are weakly dynamically typed languages, which means that very few typechecking is actually done and the language will do it's best (/worst) to coerce your values to a type compatible with the operation you try to apply to it.
"somewhat static" typing as implemented in Java or C# (which is extremely different than complete static typing such as Haskell's or Ada's) doesn't catch that many errors actually, and the few it could catch are catched by unit tests.
Thing is, ruby has them too, and it still manages to have readable code outside of the regexps.
This alone shows how you haven't even tried to know what Rails is.
Rails doesn't give you "a full website up in no time in a few commands", what it gives you is a mere base, something like 40locs you don't have to type for every table you have in your db.
Then, it gives you full and complete control over what you want or don't want to do, how you want to set your site, what you want to display and where.
Scaffolding is the little twinkie that gets you started, but by the time you get anything actually worth using 95% of the code generated by the scafolding util will have disappeared into oblivion, either edited or completely wiped out for being utterly unneeded.
I know you must be joking when you say that, but part of me fears you're serious.
Seeing as Matz intend to stay in command of Ruby (as he's been since he created it) and has started a complete, faster, more efficient rewrite of Ruby for Ruby 2.0 (without even excluding possible backward-compatibility breakage for the sake of sanity and efficiency), without the errors of the past (e.g. without the mistakes he made raising Ruby from the beginning to the current 1.8.4) and potentially with a JIT at the end, Ruby doesn't intend to take the path Java did.
And neither does Python, obviously.
So my guess on where they'll be in 10 years: leading, or evolved into a language transcending them both, a better smalltalk, something even closer to Lisp power while keeping a sane, clean, readable, expressive syntax.