"if you don't set up the MX record pointing to Google, but tell them that you want to run Google Apps for your domain, then no one can send email to you."
Wrong, sir, you are wrong.
I know because I've done it. It's neither difficult nor undocumented.
"Sometimes you need to leave a line like that in the code"
Wrong: you never will need to do that. The comment "Version XX removed code to do YY because ZZ" explains the history of that code and, as such, it belongs to the history-tracking tool. If you feel an explanation about why some code is in a particular way instead of another, go ahead and add a comment, but that's a completly different issue.
"I've heard in tales of legend that sharepoint is actually decent if you have an army of dedicated admins to keep it in some semblance of order."
Just a legend, of course.
The problem with Sharepoint is not that it's not easy to administrate. It's not even that it tends itself to create a disorganized nigthmare. The problem with Sharepoint is that it doesn't understand in the slightest the problem space it's supposed to fit in, sold to people absolutly ignorant to the problem they want to solve in first place.
"Send NOT ONE PENNY until all of our problems are taken care of, we out of debt, and can't think of anything else to spend it on domestically."
Are you really so dumb as to think that American growth along the last 50 to 100 years has been based on its internal market? They call "foreign aid" but it's foreign investments. But you are true in one thing: the major problem is efficiency... to the citizen; I'm sure that Halliburton, for instance, thinks USA efforts on foreign wars in the last decades have been quite efficient.
"I don't know why you went AC on this, but it is absolutely correct."
No, he isn't and it's easy to make it obvious: imagine a world with only light cars doing 55 mpg. Do you think that now the roads wouldn't need to be built or that that at least they wouldn't need maintenance? really?
So it's a matter of finding a more or less sensible manner to share the load. And that's what isn't obvious (except for lesser minds, of course): even if you don't own a car at all, do you really want to live in a country without roads? really?
"Why is it backwards for the state to expect that those that use the roads pay 'their fair share' for them like the rest of it's gas using users?"
It's backwards in so many ways it hurts. 1) First and foremost: if you want to be paid for road usage, damn do bill for road usage, not other concerns like your t-shirt color or how much gas your car burns (i.e.: toll roads). 2) Because of failing so bad in point 1 above, they find themselves now in the need for more failing movements. 3) A road doesn't require maintenance by gas expended but because of load. More economic cars weight less so they erode the road less. 4) More hungry cars means more oil consumption this higher gas prices. A road requires its fair share of petrochemicals which means that roads become more expensive to build and maintain while fuel efficient cars make them cheaper.
"This is why computers have interfaces with overlapping windows, and good computers have interfaces with virtual desktops"
Even using keyboard shortcuts you can't change desktops fast enough as to compare to parallel looking at the screen and a bunch of printed copies around your table.
No matter how brilliant you think you are, If you think you can go with just a screen (or two) is only because you haven't affront a complex enough task.
"no-one seems to be speculating on the atheists who frequently pronounce and exclaim the name of a deity on a daily basis: are they really true no-god followers, or are they like vegetarians who eat chicken and fish?"
You would have a point... if atheism was a religion. Hint: it is not.
It's me, or the redaction looks quite Monty Python-esque?
-The most popular religion is Jedi cult. -Hummm... no; Christianity is. -Well, the Jedi cult is the most popular after Christianity. -Hummm... no; Islam is. -Well, the Jedi cult is the most popular after Christianity and Islam. -Hummm... no; Hinduism is. -Well, the Jedi cult is the most popular after Christianity and Islam and Sikhism. -Hummm... no; Judaism is. -Well, the Jedi cult is the most popular after Christianity and Islam and Sikhism and Judaism. -Hummm... no; Buddhism is. -Well, the Jedi cult is the most popular after Christianity and Islam and Sikhism and Judaism and Buddhism. -Hummm... yes. -A-HA!
"The point is that library function A() failed to encapsulate some of the exceptions that B() can throw."
The problem is then, that it is badly code. Again, nothing to do with being open or closed source.
In the end, it's quite easy: Do I know what to do with this error/exception and/or can I add some context? Then, so I do, any other case, I just rise it as is.
"Library function A() calls some function B(), but you don't know this (closed source)."
It's not because it's closed source, it's because I neither give a damn nor I should. Don't they teach about encapsulation to you youngsters these days?
"I haven't done much windows development, are the semantics of C:\temp different from/tmp? Why is writing to it a bad idea?"
It's bad idea for at least two reasons: 1) You should never write to C:\temp, or/tmp for that matter. You should write to %TEMP% or $TMP instead. 2) Even if you write to %TEMP%, please think twice what you write there and where exactly within: i.e. to a non-predictable file name.
Slashdot Mirror
"Este puta es mierde, pendecho!
How'd I do? Does that prove I'm human?"
Worse!
It proves you are American.
"if you don't set up the MX record pointing to Google, but tell them that you want to run Google Apps for your domain, then no one can send email to you."
Wrong, sir, you are wrong.
I know because I've done it. It's neither difficult nor undocumented.
Dead or alive?
"Sometimes you need to leave a line like that in the code"
Wrong: you never will need to do that. The comment "Version XX removed code to do YY because ZZ" explains the history of that code and, as such, it belongs to the history-tracking tool. If you feel an explanation about why some code is in a particular way instead of another, go ahead and add a comment, but that's a completly different issue.
"Comments.
Leave a comment saying something like: Version XX removed code to do YY because ZZ."
Truly. You absolutly need to comment that... in the commit message.
"I've heard in tales of legend that sharepoint is actually decent if you have an army of dedicated admins to keep it in some semblance of order."
Just a legend, of course.
The problem with Sharepoint is not that it's not easy to administrate. It's not even that it tends itself to create a disorganized nigthmare. The problem with Sharepoint is that it doesn't understand in the slightest the problem space it's supposed to fit in, sold to people absolutly ignorant to the problem they want to solve in first place.
"When youre dealing with a $600 million contract, I have a feeling the customer gets pretty much whatever they want."
As in "absolutly nothing"?
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/11/15/0119212/us-air-force-scraps-erp-project-after-1-billion-spent
"I'd live in a country without roads if there was nothing to drive on them."
The point is that building roads creates places to drive to.
"Send NOT ONE PENNY until all of our problems are taken care of, we out of debt, and can't think of anything else to spend it on domestically."
Are you really so dumb as to think that American growth along the last 50 to 100 years has been based on its internal market? They call "foreign aid" but it's foreign investments. But you are true in one thing: the major problem is efficiency... to the citizen; I'm sure that Halliburton, for instance, thinks USA efforts on foreign wars in the last decades have been quite efficient.
"I don't know why you went AC on this, but it is absolutely correct."
No, he isn't and it's easy to make it obvious: imagine a world with only light cars doing 55 mpg. Do you think that now the roads wouldn't need to be built or that that at least they wouldn't need maintenance? really?
So it's a matter of finding a more or less sensible manner to share the load. And that's what isn't obvious (except for lesser minds, of course): even if you don't own a car at all, do you really want to live in a country without roads? really?
"Why is it backwards for the state to expect that those that use the roads pay 'their fair share' for them like the rest of it's gas using users?"
It's backwards in so many ways it hurts.
1) First and foremost: if you want to be paid for road usage, damn do bill for road usage, not other concerns like your t-shirt color or how much gas your car burns (i.e.: toll roads).
2) Because of failing so bad in point 1 above, they find themselves now in the need for more failing movements.
3) A road doesn't require maintenance by gas expended but because of load. More economic cars weight less so they erode the road less.
4) More hungry cars means more oil consumption this higher gas prices. A road requires its fair share of petrochemicals which means that roads become more expensive to build and maintain while fuel efficient cars make them cheaper.
"You could block their ability to add a new printer to their system"
So you can't avoid them buying a printer but you think you can avoid them buying a notebook?
How funny.
"This is why computers have interfaces with overlapping windows, and good computers have interfaces with virtual desktops"
Even using keyboard shortcuts you can't change desktops fast enough as to compare to parallel looking at the screen and a bunch of printed copies around your table.
No matter how brilliant you think you are, If you think you can go with just a screen (or two) is only because you haven't affront a complex enough task.
And then the IT team can impersonate the user. Well done, sir.
The IT team should handle authorization, but managing authentication handles must be done by the user himself.
"You're still thinking in Pascal. C should be 0th."
No, but you should learn the difference between cardinality and ordinality.
"The best 2nd language for a programmer is naturally English. What your first language is depends on your nationality."
You are only half true:
The best 2nd language for a programmer is naturally English.
The first one should be C.
"So crazy. This whole Mayan doomsday prophecy stuff all amounts to nothing more than an ancient form of the y2k bug."
Not even that. It amounts to looking at your wristwatch at five to twelve and saying "oh, my god, the world ends in five minutes".
"no-one seems to be speculating on the atheists who frequently pronounce and exclaim the name of a deity on a daily basis: are they really true no-god followers, or are they like vegetarians who eat chicken and fish?"
You would have a point... if atheism was a religion. Hint: it is not.
Title is misleading more than that.
On one hand, yes, automation makes human labor irrelevant disregarding unions.
And then, there's the strawman: unions are not there "to protect jobs", but to protect labour conditions, a very different thing.
Yes, and even then, they dropped by 50%.
It's me, or the redaction looks quite Monty Python-esque?
-The most popular religion is Jedi cult.
-Hummm... no; Christianity is.
-Well, the Jedi cult is the most popular after Christianity.
-Hummm... no; Islam is.
-Well, the Jedi cult is the most popular after Christianity and Islam.
-Hummm... no; Hinduism is.
-Well, the Jedi cult is the most popular after Christianity and Islam and Sikhism.
-Hummm... no; Judaism is.
-Well, the Jedi cult is the most popular after Christianity and Islam and Sikhism and Judaism.
-Hummm... no; Buddhism is.
-Well, the Jedi cult is the most popular after Christianity and Islam and Sikhism and Judaism and Buddhism.
-Hummm... yes.
-A-HA!
"Do you really belive the former is better for freedom? if so why?"
Certainly it's better. Because once bought the device is static while the OS is not.
In other words: you don't want not to be able to upgrade to 3.8 just because the vendor dropped support for your otherwise perfectly working device.
"The point is that library function A() failed to encapsulate some of the exceptions that B() can throw."
The problem is then, that it is badly code. Again, nothing to do with being open or closed source.
In the end, it's quite easy: Do I know what to do with this error/exception and/or can I add some context? Then, so I do, any other case, I just rise it as is.
"Library function A() calls some function B(), but you don't know this (closed source)."
It's not because it's closed source, it's because I neither give a damn nor I should. Don't they teach about encapsulation to you youngsters these days?
Yeah, sure. And I want head-mounted sharks on those lasers!
Oh, wait...
"I haven't done much windows development, are the semantics of C:\temp different from /tmp? Why is writing to it a bad idea?"
It's bad idea for at least two reasons: /tmp for that matter. You should write to %TEMP% or $TMP instead.
1) You should never write to C:\temp, or
2) Even if you write to %TEMP%, please think twice what you write there and where exactly within: i.e. to a non-predictable file name.