Assuming we're speaking about VB.NET here, how on earth can you justify
a) comments about stability - VB.NET runs on the.NET runtime like all other CLR languages, so this has ~nothing~ to do with the language itself.
b) comments about type enforcement - VB.NET is a fully OO, strongly typed language, so you're just plain wrong.
Then you say you'll stick with PHP, I guess because it's typing system is much more robust than that of VB.NET.
Even though the decision is totally asinine, the downloaders are the ones who create a market for this kind of stuff. In my opinion the sentences should be much harsher than four years for possession.
The main issue with gaming becoming mainstream is that it's such a fast-paced industry that can change at the drop of the hat. If you take more established competitive sports, like football or soccer, the basic rules have remained very similar for the past hundred years, with the odd tweak here or there. In contrast, watch what happens when a patch is released for a particular game (once every year or so?). The rules change, balance changes, some things become more powerful, others weaker and it can change the game dynamics greatly.
This also completely ignores technology advances which generally means the latest and greatest games will become more popular.
Frankly, there isn't much in it for the spectators.
I don't think it's necessarily frameworks that are the problem, but there are some issues associated with it that could lead to a few common misconceptions.
Stability - We see new frameworks popping up out of the blue all the time. Even thought like RoR that are getting a decent amount of publicity are still generally quite young in the SDLC. So how stable/scalable is RoR, Tapestry et al?
Features - While developers might be a bit more savvy, you will often get middle managers seeing a press release like this and expect that you be able to build a complex web application in minutes using 'the new framework.' While this isn't necessarily a problem with the frameworks themselves, it does become a chore explaining that they only provide a very basic skeleton, handling only the most simple of tasks.
Extensibility - Once you do have your base code written, how easy is it to add/refactor code to perform more advanced functionality? I haven't had much experience with them, so I can't really comment, but this would most definitely be an issue, especially with regards to maintaining code.
The truth of the matter is, no matter how hard we try, very few people were actually "meant" to code.
That's like saying there are only very few of us who were "meant" to serve my burgers. In a majority of cases, most people can be quite passable at any task, especially if it is mental as opposed to physical, in general it just takes the time and effort to acquire the appropriate skills. What's with the elitist attitude amongst CS folk?
Slashdot Mirror
I think somebody replaced your 'S' key with the '$' key.
You're welcome.
Assuming we're speaking about VB.NET here, how on earth can you justify .NET runtime like all other CLR languages, so this has ~nothing~ to do with the language itself.
a) comments about stability - VB.NET runs on the
b) comments about type enforcement - VB.NET is a fully OO, strongly typed language, so you're just plain wrong.
Then you say you'll stick with PHP, I guess because it's typing system is much more robust than that of VB.NET.
Way to spread FUD.
So integrated is good if it comes from Apple, but horrible if it comes from Microsoft?
So in other words:
I don't know how to administer my copy of Windows, therefore it sucks?
Convincing argument.
Minesweeper.
The only game for talking on the phone to clients.
Even though the decision is totally asinine, the downloaders are the ones who create a market for this kind of stuff. In my opinion the sentences should be much harsher than four years for possession.
Sick mofos.
Rule #1:
You do not talk about Fight Club.
The main issue with gaming becoming mainstream is that it's such a fast-paced industry that can change at the drop of the hat. If you take more established competitive sports, like football or soccer, the basic rules have remained very similar for the past hundred years, with the odd tweak here or there. In contrast, watch what happens when a patch is released for a particular game (once every year or so?). The rules change, balance changes, some things become more powerful, others weaker and it can change the game dynamics greatly.
This also completely ignores technology advances which generally means the latest and greatest games will become more popular.
Frankly, there isn't much in it for the spectators.
Does this count as Godwins law?
Why people feel the need to post the same comments from the previous story into this one? Is it just karma whoring or am I missing something?
Television! Teacher, mother, secret lover.
Theft!
He is making them steal MEGAHERTZ!
The truth of the matter is, no matter how hard we try, very few people were actually "meant" to code.
That's like saying there are only very few of us who were "meant" to serve my burgers. In a majority of cases, most people can be quite passable at any task, especially if it is mental as opposed to physical, in general it just takes the time and effort to acquire the appropriate skills. What's with the elitist attitude amongst CS folk?