Scientifically prove that claim. Dare ya. It was a side mention anyhow; the key points were not directly tied to "him". It's thus a complaint as small as his hands. Oops, did it again.
Rather than write yet more material, why not make a way to consolidate links to various topics in a convenient way so that one can read multiple viewpoints? That way I can see what Fox News says about any given topic, but also what NBC says about the same topic. Use the fancy dancy AI, probably with human helpers, to match up articles about given events.
"Computer Science" is indeed not really computer science. It's math + speculation. It should be renamed to "computology": the study of computers and computations.
plastic-eating microbes could get loose and destroy everything made of plastic...But, that's just science fiction.
For 30 odd million years after trees evolved, nothing could eat dead wood. Dead trees piled up and their accumulated weight created the coal deposits that Trump knows and loves so well today.
Then after a few handy mutations, a microbe learned to eat wood. These microbes then learned to cohabitate in the gut of insects we now call termites in order to get around better. Together they eat houses.
I've been using functional languages for the past 10 years to put out successful commercial products and didn't even know it was supposed to be [problematic as described]
The real test is when you leave that company and somebody else has to read and maintain your code.
If I wrote my code using just my favorite paradigms and techniques, it would probably kill the future maintainer.
I tried a websearch the other day on "functional programming considered harmful" and found remarkably few hits...
That's old-school. Try searching "Functional Programming Sucks". Most won't know about the "considered harmful" reference when issuing criticism.
(By the way, they never objectively proved goto's are "harmful". Their model is merely an assumption about how human programmer brains work. I don't necessarily entirely disagree with the model, but it's never been scientifically validated.)
I've had heated debates at the c2.com wiki (now half-defunct) with FP fanboys. I will agree there may be legitimate niches, but the value of it is greatly over-hyped as a general-purpose technique. As I've stated elsewhere in this topic, most "realistic" examples are a result of comparisons to bad API's and/or languages. They are often defending FP against strawmen.
Of course in GUI development, Lambda can also be very convenient.
Example? I've only seen examples that expose weaknesses in Java and/or its GUI libraries.
For example, if the distinction between on object and class were blurred, then each GUI push-button could and should have an OnClick method. (Language could include an option to add or change the method away from object declaration.)
Instead, one has to "register" the on-click code with a "listener" via a lambda. Why the fock should a typical coder have to care about a fricken GUI listener? That should be under-the-hood guts, or at least something you only care about (mostly just inspect) if there is a tricky bug. The coder mentally associates the on-click behavior with its button, and the GUI API should reflect that common sense. Java's doing it wrong; lambda's are merely a band-aid over bad design in that case.
"We forgot to think this through so instead we randomly shoehorn behavior into the gui via lambda's"
I've seen other "justifications" for lambda's that are usually a kludge over bad languages and/or libraries.
Structs do, however, make the critical aspects of an object oriented approach practical in c. They can carry data, function pointers, etc., and they can be passed around.
You are just reinventing machine language where data, instructions, and address pointers can be mixed willy-nilly. Higher-level languages merely try to introduce discipline and consistency to such practices.
Regarding data parallelism: most rank-and-file big-scale data chomping is expected to be done by the database. For example, if you request "ORDER BY" in an SQL query, the database engine may indeed use parallelism under the hood to sort. But that's typically not a concern of the app developer or query writer. The DB engine builder worries about that. (It does help to know a bit about parallelism when considering query performance profiles.)
Yeap but when the free money came to Michelle, did she complain? Nope, she accepted it happily.
She contradicted herself: she said tax refunds are good, but ALSO complained about the deficit a decade later. In other words, a hypocrite. If cornered, she'll blame it all on Democrat spending bills and ignore GOP spending bills. If cornered on that, she tout the great benefits of the GOP bills and rant on the "badness" of the Dem ones. Same ol' same ol'.
"socialism." When they hear it, they think, "I will pay higher taxes."... But if it's just, "here, free money!" then Rush Limbaugh and Michelle Bachman will even start favoring it.
No, because it's higher taxes for the rich. Rush and Michelle are shills for the rich. They will claim it hurts the incentive for the rich to invent. I know most of us agree that's pretty silly, in part because most inventions come from peons, but if their listeners hear that meme enough, many will just believe it.
For the record, I'm not limiting the discussion to any particular type of "flying car". There's a lot of different designs floating around (pun intended) and what kind of "wing" is used or not used hasn't been settled yet.
Remember when Bush (and Obama) sent a check to everyone in the mail? How many people complained about that?
True. And many of the same people hypocritically complained loudly about the deficit a decade later. Voters are fickle and forgetful. Damned humans! (National debt problems are usually long in the making and long in the fixing. Ideally it's paid down during good times so that there's a rainy day fund. GOP wanted it paid down during a slump, which is dumb.)
how quickly people can come up with a justification for [getting] free money.
It's true once the money starts flowing it's harder to yank it away politically. But the hard part may be starting the flow of the "robot compensation check".
Correction: "still stifle incentive for innovation"
Should be: "will stifle incentive for innovation"
Yes, I did proof-read it. My head kept interpreting it based on what I intended to say, blinding me to what it actually says. My head has a glitch that way and I don't know how to fix it. Repeat proofing rarely fixes it. I could wait a day or two to have a fresh perspective, but that's no good.
Slashdot Mirror
Scientifically prove that claim. Dare ya. It was a side mention anyhow; the key points were not directly tied to "him". It's thus a complaint as small as his hands. Oops, did it again.
That's what you git for losing O's birth certificate!
Rather than write yet more material, why not make a way to consolidate links to various topics in a convenient way so that one can read multiple viewpoints? That way I can see what Fox News says about any given topic, but also what NBC says about the same topic. Use the fancy dancy AI, probably with human helpers, to match up articles about given events.
"Computer Science" is indeed not really computer science. It's math + speculation. It should be renamed to "computology": the study of computers and computations.
Hey, that would make an excellent children's tale. Let's share royalties.
Hold it, California earthquakes take down brick. Back to the drawing board...
For 30 odd million years after trees evolved, nothing could eat dead wood. Dead trees piled up and their accumulated weight created the coal deposits that Trump knows and loves so well today.
Then after a few handy mutations, a microbe learned to eat wood. These microbes then learned to cohabitate in the gut of insects we now call termites in order to get around better. Together they eat houses.
Could happen with plastic.
And guitars.
The real test is when you leave that company and somebody else has to read and maintain your code.
If I wrote my code using just my favorite paradigms and techniques, it would probably kill the future maintainer.
That's old-school. Try searching "Functional Programming Sucks". Most won't know about the "considered harmful" reference when issuing criticism.
(By the way, they never objectively proved goto's are "harmful". Their model is merely an assumption about how human programmer brains work. I don't necessarily entirely disagree with the model, but it's never been scientifically validated.)
I've had heated debates at the c2.com wiki (now half-defunct) with FP fanboys. I will agree there may be legitimate niches, but the value of it is greatly over-hyped as a general-purpose technique. As I've stated elsewhere in this topic, most "realistic" examples are a result of comparisons to bad API's and/or languages. They are often defending FP against strawmen.
Example? I've only seen examples that expose weaknesses in Java and/or its GUI libraries.
For example, if the distinction between on object and class were blurred, then each GUI push-button could and should have an OnClick method. (Language could include an option to add or change the method away from object declaration.)
Instead, one has to "register" the on-click code with a "listener" via a lambda. Why the fock should a typical coder have to care about a fricken GUI listener? That should be under-the-hood guts, or at least something you only care about (mostly just inspect) if there is a tricky bug. The coder mentally associates the on-click behavior with its button, and the GUI API should reflect that common sense. Java's doing it wrong; lambda's are merely a band-aid over bad design in that case.
"We forgot to think this through so instead we randomly shoehorn behavior into the gui via lambda's"
I've seen other "justifications" for lambda's that are usually a kludge over bad languages and/or libraries.
You are just reinventing machine language where data, instructions, and address pointers can be mixed willy-nilly. Higher-level languages merely try to introduce discipline and consistency to such practices.
That explains it! The coder who came before me at this org must have been a [bleepin'] Pastafarian. Next time I'll apply at a Catholic org.
Regarding data parallelism: most rank-and-file big-scale data chomping is expected to be done by the database. For example, if you request "ORDER BY" in an SQL query, the database engine may indeed use parallelism under the hood to sort. But that's typically not a concern of the app developer or query writer. The DB engine builder worries about that. (It does help to know a bit about parallelism when considering query performance profiles.)
In fairness, most politicians are hypocrites and liars. Honest ones rarely survive in the mud-slinging world of sound-bite politics.
Maybe it's the other way around; ya never know these days. The hair may simply be a flattened orange turban.
She contradicted herself: she said tax refunds are good, but ALSO complained about the deficit a decade later. In other words, a hypocrite. If cornered, she'll blame it all on Democrat spending bills and ignore GOP spending bills. If cornered on that, she tout the great benefits of the GOP bills and rant on the "badness" of the Dem ones. Same ol' same ol'.
That committee did an excellent job of annoying me. Now, there's a guy with funny orange hair I'd like to send them to. (No, NOT Carrot-Top)
No, use set lists, like VB.Net does. Pseudocode example:
select on x
case 1,2,7
doSomethingA()
case 3,8,12,41
doSomethingB()
case 54
doSomethingC()
case else
doDefault()
end select
I don't know if they can be 100% equivalent, but usually pretty close.
I find it conceptually far cleaner. (VB.net even does ranges.)
[Re: Golang got rid of it]
Great, by why are C, C++, C#, Java, Php, and JavaScript all holding back?
The 8-Ball can't suck the board's giblets.
Sets instead of fall-through. See how VB.net does multiple set matches.
No, because it's higher taxes for the rich. Rush and Michelle are shills for the rich. They will claim it hurts the incentive for the rich to invent. I know most of us agree that's pretty silly, in part because most inventions come from peons, but if their listeners hear that meme enough, many will just believe it.
For the record, I'm not limiting the discussion to any particular type of "flying car". There's a lot of different designs floating around (pun intended) and what kind of "wing" is used or not used hasn't been settled yet.
Why don't C-ish languages do away with "break"? That's archaic crap. Burnit!
True. And many of the same people hypocritically complained loudly about the deficit a decade later. Voters are fickle and forgetful. Damned humans! (National debt problems are usually long in the making and long in the fixing. Ideally it's paid down during good times so that there's a rainy day fund.
GOP wanted it paid down during a slump, which is dumb.)
It's true once the money starts flowing it's harder to yank it away politically. But the hard part may be starting the flow of the "robot compensation check".
Correction: "still stifle incentive for innovation"
Should be: "will stifle incentive for innovation"
Yes, I did proof-read it. My head kept interpreting it based on what I intended to say, blinding me to what it actually says. My head has a glitch that way and I don't know how to fix it. Repeat proofing rarely fixes it. I could wait a day or two to have a fresh perspective, but that's no good.