stupid ajaxy editor. s/(I played/(I played around in the closed beta)
also I've thought more about your post, and perhaps you are not a native engish speaker... Look up via in a dictionary, I don't think he's referring to vi software
I don't think you've understood the parent poster... There's a text edit mode, there's also a graphical edit mode. From memory (I played around the graphical edit mode comes with the client, you just click a button and all of a sudden you can move stuff around and add new models from other spaces.
It's not everyone else's fault if you can't express your examples clearly. Ease up on the rage, we're all friends here.
In the clarified example, you are correct, emacs/vim may not be able figure it out for you.
If you're using a python specific editor, it could have a function that takes either the selected region, or the most recently pasted region and indents it to match the context into which it was pasted. That's just how I'd solve that particular problem, I don't know if it's out there.
regardless of your specific example, your overall point has a lot of validity to it. Python is harder for editors to deal with than a lot of language.
This generally leads to the editors being able to take less load off the programmer, which means more effort to code in.
I haven't worked on large projects in python before. The largest being only about a thousand or two lines of code. At least at that scale I've been pretty pleased with python and not had any problem with the white spacing at all. In fact, at that scale I find the white spacing style better than delimited blocks.
Ignoring the problems that you may or may not encounter at larger scales (as I can't comment on them at all) being really good at programs that are a few thousand lines of code is not something to sneeze at, you can do a lot in a few thousand lines.
User Acceptance is a funny one, you're sort of right in that the ideal situation is for them to not bring anything up, however if they do bring something up (and they frequently do) then that's some data that can be measured and used to indicate something.
Quite frequently it can be attributed to a programmer, not always correctly but I've definitely seen instances where the programmer did something that was within bounds of the spec but obviously not going to be good for the user.
Those are all incomplete informations.
In general terms programmer 3 is not the best "programmer" but has great advantages over the others for having a skill set outside his/her role.
If you apply a metric to all programmers and say that the time vs maintainability/bugs found ratio is even for all programmers then the one who gets closest to the estimate/quote is the best. If there is no estimate/quote then the one who does it fastest is the best.
Future feature requests aren't a part of the current project.
If the current code meets the current requirements then you've got a good system, the cost of future changes to the system are not incurred by the current programmer. Unless of course the future changes are well scoped which makes them part of the spec.
At the same time I think most times if a spec is well written then meeting it in a good time tends to be easier with maintainable code than not, especially for longer projects.
Estimation time is an opinion, once established completion time and the variance is not an opinion. A poorly made estimate or an estimate that is not updated based on change requests is a broken implementation of the metric. You're complaining about people, not the metric.
The number of issues can generally be normalised using the number of hours put into the code by the developer. Severity is generally established before the project, you rate things based on how they effect the system as a whole, how many requirements cease to be fulfilled based on the issue, it's not an opinion, the only arguments that happen are whether people are correct in their count or not.
User acceptance does not take sofisticated users, if you've done the project right the user has a list of requirements and has a bunch of tasks that they've come up with to determine whether the requirement is met. At some level it is a duplication of internal QA, but it tests the teams ability to correctly interpret the clients needs, the programmer is a part of this, but perhaps not as great as the BA's/Document writers.
You can give feedback as soon as the project is finished and then make adjustments as the waranty time elapses, 3 years is a hell of a long waranty for software, don't mistake it for maintenance contracts, which is a separate ball game.
you can scale requirements based on priority, that one's a no brainer.
I don't see how comparing two different programmers using the above is a problem at all. 'john johnson worked on a project for a days, satisfied b requirement points and had c bug points, steve stephenson did x, z and y' score = bB-cC/a | zZ-yY/x, upper case letters represent a constant to put the right weighting on requirements vs bugs.
Science is the process of testing hypothesis, it's not really relevant here, we're just collecting data and doing statistical analysis on it.
I am a programmer, this is how I get measured, I understand it and think it's a good system. Your argument seems to be either that programmers can't be measured, or that measuring them is too hard to be valuable, I call BS and think you're just trying to avoid being measured. "I'm doing a better job than you could even imagine, it's very complicated, you wouldn't understand" bah!
Get yourself a software engineering text book, there are many well documented metrics for assessing programmers. Completion time vs estimation time, number of issues raised in testing times the severity of the issues, user acceptance, issues raised during waruntee time, percentage of requirements complete.
None of those items are opinion based, all processes have flaws in that they rely on people to implement them, however beyond that those metrics are pretty solid
Reading some of the responses and the hyped articles here and on kotaku is a bit of a laugh.
No where does it say that this group is lobbying for repression of the Wii, or any extra measures. So far as I can read they're mainly focusing on making parents aware that this capability exists. Jeesub people this is a GOOD THING!
They're damn right that the capability exists, and they're damn right that parents aren't going to know about it from either reading the manual or from the packaging and Nintendo marketing. This campaign should let them know, ok, naughty stuff is on there so I'll either keep an eye on it or keep my kids away from it if I don't have time to watch them, and also there's a switch on the box to turn off the naughty stuff, GREAT! problem solved.
Advertisement makes a parents job a lot trickier when considering tv, the lineup is not published or rated like regular shows.
Regardless of where you stand on regulation, shouldn't we the consumers be informed of what materials are going to be beamed down to our tubes so that we can make an informed decision before we polute our brains with brain washing propaganda? Remember that these adds are crafted by people who study the field of marketing, which has its roots in psychological warfare.
I think the decision isn't the best solution but it's a symptom of people working in a framework that is fundamentally dishonest and broken.
somebody think of the children?
You are likening CSR's to bullets? They are not inanimate, they have choices, in many cases more choices than spammers.
Spammers have about the same choice in the "Do what we tell you" or "Get fired" department. What point is your second statement making?
your third statement is not tackling the spammer analogy at all, and is getting more of a bun fight.
you've established that people need a job to get money, you've established that there are pin heads at Corporate who tell CSR's to do bad things, now you're trying to claim that it is not possible for CSR's to find gainful employment where they do not have to compromise their ethics.
You haven't put forward any argument to support that claim. The arguments exist but I'm not going to do your thinking for you.
If people refuse to work as CSR's then it will hurt. If people are willing to put up with crappy products only if they can bitch at CSR's then a lack of CSR's is a potential solution. You seem to be in the mindset that there will always be CSR's and there is no alternative and that people cannot make a difference.
You are indeed justifying the CSR's behavior of choosing a bad job.
1 - The job perpetuates a lie that corporations care about consumers. No one believes it, but that's the job and that's the lie.
2 - The lie allows corporations to continue to abuse consumers while claiming that they are trying to fix things. That's how it's harmful.
The defense of needing a pay check is weak, there do exist better ways to make money, more satisfying, more ethical just all around better.
You know why most applications are never ported?
Because lock down software is proliferating.
It's not a question of whether it will be ported, it's a question of making things that allow that question to be asked.
DRM is on it's way, and when it gets here there's going to be a lot of people wailing about how they can't change to a free/open system because there is too much software that won't be ported.
If you think about it long enough (and perhaps squint a bit) DRM and non-portable software share a lot of features. Mostly in lack of choice/freedom.
an app that uses 10's of megs!?! you mean like, on a SERVER!?!
OH NOES! It'll never handle it!
Are your win32 calls supported by WinXP and Win2000?(probably) How much effort would it take to port it to linux? Are you helping lock your organisation onto a single software platform?
The article does not read to me as an aggressive litigation stance by red cross. It sounds a lot more like they're trying to reason with developers and cooperate with them to resolve the issue.
Well, it sounds like you're using google differently to most users.
When I'm looking for something, I generally don't want the most obscure page, I generally want something on the trodden path, that other people have found usefull and linked to.
Your points are valid for your perspective, but I'd say the majority of google users do not share that perspective.
I'm not commenting on the China thing becuase I don't really know anything about that issue
Re:Although this seems "reasonable" in light of th
on
Google Delists BMW-Germany
·
· Score: 3, Informative
If you're after bmw in Germany generally you'll either type in bmw.de or bmw.com and look for the international link.
This doesn't affect people who are after bmw so much as it affects bmw's hits when people search for "luxury motor car" or "vehicle" or other terms that will now spit out a heap of other brands before bmw.com.
Additionally articles from BMW are going to be pretty far down the list so people will see more third party information than first hand biased as hell BMW articles.
Google isn't essential. They perform an essential service (page indexing, providing search functinalities) however there are many other providers that would love to step up to the plate if google left a gap.
If you want to use AJAX to do your whole site then only one page is indexable, as only one page can be directly linked. AJAX is not an index friendly technology, that has nothing to do with Googles preferences
If you count shoulder buttons then the DS has 6.
If you use the thumb tack strap the bumpy bus can be negated to some degree.
I hear you on the silliness of speaking to the games, but it's a feature I wouldn't be without, Two of my friends and I pulled out our DSes at a party and were blowing up our baloons at the start of every mario kart battle and people thought it was hysterical...
and then they all wanted a go.
As an aside, yes we played hand helds at a party, and about 40% of the people who go to the same parties as me are IT people (mostly sysadmins or programmers). Whoever said computer users were unsocial was obviously jealous:P
it is impossible to comb hair on a sphere so that no hair sticks up.
sure you could!
just comb all the same direction, and when you get to removing the comb curve it around to tamp down the remaining hair with the flat end.
Your complaints are more about lazy and/or stupid and/or under resourced sysadmins and bad security setups than security in itself.
Regardless the poor security is generally less of a dent on productivity than corporate lans without virus scanners or fire walls.
The number of CS students going down is a big plus
At least in Australia there are far too many CS students, most of whom don't really like computers but just want the big cash moneys.
We've got about a 60% graduate employment rate for CS (other engineering courses are up around 85%) and I found the uninterested students have reduced the quality of teaching that the universities offered and some of them actually get into the industry and create unspeakable chaos with their shoddy work.
That said, most penny arcade readers are more likely to be computer lovers, and therefore I agree with you... damn.
What about developers?
Every new technology makes things more complex/difficult.
If it improves the clients experience and the functionality of the application then the extra effort is worth it.
Your post reads like a big winge, yes it's hard, no the current tools aren't perfect. Once they become perfect you'll no longer get paid the 'big cash moneys' to develop them and it'll be time to move onto the next new technology.
And quit bashing javascript and xml, both of them are quite reasonable to develop in once you've learnt how to do it and some good practices to use.
Slashdot Mirror
stupid ajaxy editor. s/(I played/(I played around in the closed beta)
also I've thought more about your post, and perhaps you are not a native engish speaker... Look up via in a dictionary, I don't think he's referring to vi software
I don't think you've understood the parent poster... There's a text edit mode, there's also a graphical edit mode.
From memory (I played around the graphical edit mode comes with the client, you just click a button and all of a sudden you can move stuff around and add new models from other spaces.
So you're saying that cloud computing is infrastructure to support SOA?
Quite the opposite, cloud computing takes marketing savvy and buzzword compliance to understand.
It's re-branded SOA, end of story
It's not everyone else's fault if you can't express your examples clearly. Ease up on the rage, we're all friends here.
In the clarified example, you are correct, emacs/vim may not be able figure it out for you.
If you're using a python specific editor, it could have a function that takes either the selected region, or the most recently pasted region and indents it to match the context into which it was pasted. That's just how I'd solve that particular problem, I don't know if it's out there.
regardless of your specific example, your overall point has a lot of validity to it.
Python is harder for editors to deal with than a lot of language.
This generally leads to the editors being able to take less load off the programmer, which means more effort to code in.
I haven't worked on large projects in python before. The largest being only about a thousand or two lines of code.
At least at that scale I've been pretty pleased with python and not had any problem with the white spacing at all.
In fact, at that scale I find the white spacing style better than delimited blocks.
Ignoring the problems that you may or may not encounter at larger scales (as I can't comment on them at all) being really good at programs that are a few thousand lines of code is not something to sneeze at, you can do a lot in a few thousand lines.
User Acceptance is a funny one, you're sort of right in that the ideal situation is for them to not bring anything up, however if they do bring something up (and they frequently do) then that's some data that can be measured and used to indicate something. Quite frequently it can be attributed to a programmer, not always correctly but I've definitely seen instances where the programmer did something that was within bounds of the spec but obviously not going to be good for the user.
Those are all incomplete informations. In general terms programmer 3 is not the best "programmer" but has great advantages over the others for having a skill set outside his/her role. If you apply a metric to all programmers and say that the time vs maintainability/bugs found ratio is even for all programmers then the one who gets closest to the estimate/quote is the best. If there is no estimate/quote then the one who does it fastest is the best.
Future feature requests aren't a part of the current project. If the current code meets the current requirements then you've got a good system, the cost of future changes to the system are not incurred by the current programmer. Unless of course the future changes are well scoped which makes them part of the spec. At the same time I think most times if a spec is well written then meeting it in a good time tends to be easier with maintainable code than not, especially for longer projects.
Estimation time is an opinion, once established completion time and the variance is not an opinion.
A poorly made estimate or an estimate that is not updated based on change requests is a broken implementation of the metric. You're complaining about people, not the metric.
The number of issues can generally be normalised using the number of hours put into the code by the developer.
Severity is generally established before the project, you rate things based on how they effect the system as a whole, how many requirements cease to be fulfilled based on the issue, it's not an opinion, the only arguments that happen are whether people are correct in their count or not.
User acceptance does not take sofisticated users, if you've done the project right the user has a list of requirements and has a bunch of tasks that they've come up with to determine whether the requirement is met. At some level it is a duplication of internal QA, but it tests the teams ability to correctly interpret the clients needs, the programmer is a part of this, but perhaps not as great as the BA's/Document writers.
You can give feedback as soon as the project is finished and then make adjustments as the waranty time elapses, 3 years is a hell of a long waranty for software, don't mistake it for maintenance contracts, which is a separate ball game.
you can scale requirements based on priority, that one's a no brainer.
I don't see how comparing two different programmers using the above is a problem at all. 'john johnson worked on a project for a days, satisfied b requirement points and had c bug points, steve stephenson did x, z and y' score = bB-cC/a | zZ-yY/x, upper case letters represent a constant to put the right weighting on requirements vs bugs.
Science is the process of testing hypothesis, it's not really relevant here, we're just collecting data and doing statistical analysis on it.
I am a programmer, this is how I get measured, I understand it and think it's a good system.
Your argument seems to be either that programmers can't be measured, or that measuring them is too hard to be valuable, I call BS and think you're just trying to avoid being measured. "I'm doing a better job than you could even imagine, it's very complicated, you wouldn't understand" bah!
Get yourself a software engineering text book, there are many well documented metrics for assessing programmers. Completion time vs estimation time, number of issues raised in testing times the severity of the issues, user acceptance, issues raised during waruntee time, percentage of requirements complete. None of those items are opinion based, all processes have flaws in that they rely on people to implement them, however beyond that those metrics are pretty solid
Reading some of the responses and the hyped articles here and on kotaku is a bit of a laugh.
No where does it say that this group is lobbying for repression of the Wii, or any extra measures.
So far as I can read they're mainly focusing on making parents aware that this capability exists.
Jeesub people this is a GOOD THING!
They're damn right that the capability exists, and they're damn right that parents aren't going to know about it from either reading the manual or from the packaging and Nintendo marketing. This campaign should let them know, ok, naughty stuff is on there so I'll either keep an eye on it or keep my kids away from it if I don't have time to watch them, and also there's a switch on the box to turn off the naughty stuff, GREAT! problem solved.
Advertisement makes a parents job a lot trickier when considering tv, the lineup is not published or rated like regular shows. Regardless of where you stand on regulation, shouldn't we the consumers be informed of what materials are going to be beamed down to our tubes so that we can make an informed decision before we polute our brains with brain washing propaganda? Remember that these adds are crafted by people who study the field of marketing, which has its roots in psychological warfare. I think the decision isn't the best solution but it's a symptom of people working in a framework that is fundamentally dishonest and broken. somebody think of the children?
You are likening CSR's to bullets? They are not inanimate, they have choices, in many cases more choices than spammers. Spammers have about the same choice in the "Do what we tell you" or "Get fired" department. What point is your second statement making? your third statement is not tackling the spammer analogy at all, and is getting more of a bun fight. you've established that people need a job to get money, you've established that there are pin heads at Corporate who tell CSR's to do bad things, now you're trying to claim that it is not possible for CSR's to find gainful employment where they do not have to compromise their ethics. You haven't put forward any argument to support that claim. The arguments exist but I'm not going to do your thinking for you. If people refuse to work as CSR's then it will hurt. If people are willing to put up with crappy products only if they can bitch at CSR's then a lack of CSR's is a potential solution. You seem to be in the mindset that there will always be CSR's and there is no alternative and that people cannot make a difference. You are indeed justifying the CSR's behavior of choosing a bad job. 1 - The job perpetuates a lie that corporations care about consumers. No one believes it, but that's the job and that's the lie. 2 - The lie allows corporations to continue to abuse consumers while claiming that they are trying to fix things. That's how it's harmful. The defense of needing a pay check is weak, there do exist better ways to make money, more satisfying, more ethical just all around better.
But I'll bet my beer to your freedom that he didn't.
You know why most applications are never ported? Because lock down software is proliferating. It's not a question of whether it will be ported, it's a question of making things that allow that question to be asked. DRM is on it's way, and when it gets here there's going to be a lot of people wailing about how they can't change to a free/open system because there is too much software that won't be ported. If you think about it long enough (and perhaps squint a bit) DRM and non-portable software share a lot of features. Mostly in lack of choice/freedom.
an app that uses 10's of megs!?! you mean like, on a SERVER!?!
OH NOES! It'll never handle it!
Are your win32 calls supported by WinXP and Win2000?(probably) How much effort would it take to port it to linux? Are you helping lock your organisation onto a single software platform?
The article does not read to me as an aggressive litigation stance by red cross. It sounds a lot more like they're trying to reason with developers and cooperate with them to resolve the issue.
Well, it sounds like you're using google differently to most users.
When I'm looking for something, I generally don't want the most obscure page, I generally want something on the trodden path, that other people have found usefull and linked to.
Your points are valid for your perspective, but I'd say the majority of google users do not share that perspective.
I'm not commenting on the China thing becuase I don't really know anything about that issue
If you're after bmw in Germany generally you'll either type in bmw.de or bmw.com and look for the international link. This doesn't affect people who are after bmw so much as it affects bmw's hits when people search for "luxury motor car" or "vehicle" or other terms that will now spit out a heap of other brands before bmw.com. Additionally articles from BMW are going to be pretty far down the list so people will see more third party information than first hand biased as hell BMW articles. Google isn't essential. They perform an essential service (page indexing, providing search functinalities) however there are many other providers that would love to step up to the plate if google left a gap. If you want to use AJAX to do your whole site then only one page is indexable, as only one page can be directly linked. AJAX is not an index friendly technology, that has nothing to do with Googles preferences
If you use the thumb tack strap the bumpy bus can be negated to some degree.
I hear you on the silliness of speaking to the games, but it's a feature I wouldn't be without, Two of my friends and I pulled out our DSes at a party and were blowing up our baloons at the start of every mario kart battle and people thought it was hysterical...
and then they all wanted a go.
As an aside, yes we played hand helds at a party, and about 40% of the people who go to the same parties as me are IT people (mostly sysadmins or programmers). Whoever said computer users were unsocial was obviously jealous :P
...And would Like to offer my services in rounding up the inevidable mutants to work in their giant underground msg mines!
sure you could!
just comb all the same direction, and when you get to removing the comb curve it around to tamp down the remaining hair with the flat end.
any good barber could tell you that!
Your complaints are more about lazy and/or stupid and/or under resourced sysadmins and bad security setups than security in itself. Regardless the poor security is generally less of a dent on productivity than corporate lans without virus scanners or fire walls.
At least in Australia there are far too many CS students, most of whom don't really like computers but just want the big cash moneys.
We've got about a 60% graduate employment rate for CS (other engineering courses are up around 85%) and I found the uninterested students have reduced the quality of teaching that the universities offered and some of them actually get into the industry and create unspeakable chaos with their shoddy work.
That said, most penny arcade readers are more likely to be computer lovers, and therefore I agree with you... damn.
What about developers? Every new technology makes things more complex/difficult. If it improves the clients experience and the functionality of the application then the extra effort is worth it. Your post reads like a big winge, yes it's hard, no the current tools aren't perfect. Once they become perfect you'll no longer get paid the 'big cash moneys' to develop them and it'll be time to move onto the next new technology. And quit bashing javascript and xml, both of them are quite reasonable to develop in once you've learnt how to do it and some good practices to use.