If you're genuinely curious, people who are casually happy generally care less about what other people think. Your theory seems to be that they worry more. No, those aren't happy people, those are the bland sheep that turn smiles outwards for you to view regardless of what is happening inside.
If somebody is happy and comfortable inside, they can just give you their real opinion, they don't need to be validated by your approval of their opinion, so if it is "patronizing" or not is just a distraction; they're probably happy because they ignore those types of distractions!
In this case, it is not a happy person. But still, his unhappiness is irrelevant to the issue of being patronizing. Is the way people stare at their phone all day for perceived comfort not childlike and maladaptive? Why would it not be looked down on in exactly the way that would be described as "patronizing?" Isn't that going to be how things are described whenever you're honest about a harmful behavior born from unrestrained childlike emotional impulses?
Very few people consider a cloned plant to be the same individual. It has the same DNA, but it seems to be starting over and growing a new individual from a reproductive budding site; it uses its reproductive machinery to copy itself instead of for sexual reproduction.
I know it makes a better story that way, but still.
No, when a good craftsman buys a new tool and it is better than the old one, he says, "gosh, this new tool is better than the old one." He doesn't go all macho-moron and insist, "meh, tools are all the same, no difference."
Actually, the master craftsman is almost certainly a master in tools, and probably has tool preferences.
I'm not going to watch binny boy's pr0n stash, I don't care if the CIA says it is the good stuff. For the same reason I wouldn't click on an image link from slashdot. I don't care if it is an ironic goat.
Python became the default language for beginners with minimal programming experience, so it gets used in teaching introductions to a lot of different programming topics, and it is certainly used by hobbyists a lot, but I don't really see the traditional use cases for Perl getting replaced by Python very often.
Once upon a time I wrote web scripts in Perl, but now if I need to make a web interface I'm either using Ruby on a server or C on a microcontroller. Hobbyists often are using Lua or Python on the same microcontroller.
I use PL/pgSQL and it is great! But PL/Ruby is better.
I'm not actually sure what you said though.
I was stuck using the Microsoft variant one time and it was hell, it was like programming a donkey... every other line telling it GO GO GO GO GO and its like, do these fuckers realize that every other company has SQL scripting that just keeps going? Like, automatically, from one line of code, on to the next line of code?
It can be a legit problem with Makefiles, where horizontal tab characters have to be in the correct place, but are not generally rendered to the screen.
Also a COBOL problem that varies with compiler.
Not really a "problem" in modern languages, but the main arguments are around the potential utility of punctuation.
The problem was we had advanced server tools like mod_perl and no high level frameworks that had the features to work for the full range of web applications, so we were cobbling web apps together with a bunch of different crap out of CPAN and everybody had a different basket.
RubyOnRails came out and showed everybody the power of frameworks, and they jumped off of Perl to Ruby, or else they used one of the many copies of RoR for other languages. If the first popular web framework had been PerlOnRails, or if people had figured out the need for a better single framework sooner, then Perl would have continued to thrive in the web niche.
I don't think it was a culture problem, it was mostly just timing. (That's only a user theory, I'm not an armchair language designer)
I don't mind figuring out somebody else's old Perl script; I expect any code NIH to suck as bad as the rest of the NIH code!
What really torques my twizzle about Perl is looking at my own old code, and realizing, "I spent a whole day making this code this ugly, and I was really happy with how perfectly the semantics matched the use case and how clear everything was. I just want to hide under a rock."
I know it is possible to write clear Perl. I've even seen such code. But high level languages are supposed to be easier, and for me it is easier to write clear C than clear Perl. And Ruby, no problem.
Figuring out what old code does? Not that hard. Tolerating looking at it? Harder.
Be warned, that was true about Javascript when you learned it, but it stopped being true about 10 years ago and now they're using it everywhere. Sad but true!
That's funny, and probably true; those of us who don't use Perl but use a lot of regular expressions are unlikely to feel the hate.
That said, even though I used to use Perl on a daily basis since I don't use it frequently anymore I'm more likely to reach for sed than perl on the command line if I need to edit a file with a regex.
Actually, even when I used Perl a lot I would often still use sed to make small source changes across the whole project.
A few times in my life I've been asked to debug PHP. 100% of the time it was a regex bug and I never had to learn any PHP.:)
Probably over 90% of the SQL bugs I get are regex-related, too.
Perhaps the generalized rule is, "People who hate Perl should stay inside their wheelhouse."
My old Perl code looked like line noise. To me, after 6 months. Oh, I could clean it up, but it took me a lot of effort.
My Ruby code looks a lot like C; which is nice because half my methods are also implemented in C. And I can easily read it, even years later.
There is so much overlap between the use cases of Perl and Ruby it just didn't make sense to me to keep using Perl since I suck at making it maintainable; it is just so expressive, it is too easy to let the needs of the use case bleed into the code organization. It feels too elegant while doing that sort of thing; it can feel stifling to refuse to use that power when it is at your fingertips.
If most of my code was one-liners I'd have stuck with Perl.
I was in college taking first year Computer Science classes in C/C++ when I found my first Perl book, it was just warm fuzzies flowing off the pages compared to the crap we were subjected to in class!
Ruby wasn't a Python replacement, it was more of a Perl replacement, and Python was simply rejected as a Perl replacement. That's why Python is in the story.
The goal was Perl/C style syntax and Smalltalk style OO semantics.
A few things were borrowed from Python, but it wasn't a main influence and doesn't make it into the one-line "why" statements.
As Larry Wall himself described it, Perl 5 was his rewrite of Perl 4, and Perl 6 was the community's rewrite of Perl 5.
I doubt he's actually upset at all that everybody is still using Perl 5 because his ideas were better than "the community's" horse-by-committee. Perl 6 was created because there were things the community wanted that were different than what Larry wanted from Perl, that's the reason the community was doing it; Perl 5 was already a mostly finished language.
As a Ruby programmer I have to say that I agree entirely, but the good news is that programming is best kept between the programmer and the computer; you have to learn from documentation, stop trying to ask the Ruby programmers.
Ruby is simply too easy a language for Ruby programmers to have time to suffer idiots, because the language is easy enough for most of the idiots. They just kept pouring through the door until we started shouting at them to go read a fucking book and eventually they started switching to JS.
If you want to use an easy language and still be able to have a community where experienced programmers help new people, you have to be able to chase off the people who are simply not well suited to programming or else they will totally swamp everything will "hello world" questions.
With Perl there is so much to confuse the idiots that they run away just from looking at the code, allowing the programmers to have a more decent communication environment. After about 5 years of using Perl I started running away from my own code; that's when I switched to Ruby. Also, Ruby has much better C integration and most of the Ruby stdlib is just wrappers around the C stdlib.
I can build a smartphone with ARM, so why would I want to shoehorn a desktop CPU in? It is just more complication with no benefit. Why would any engineer prefer that to what they have? On the hardware side, it is a nice ecosystem for the product designer!
They're going to have a hard time competing with Texas Instruments when it comes to designing an easy to use chip around the licensed arm core, and the compiler toolchain is exactly the same as it would be with intel or amd. The only thing you could possibly try to compete on is price, and how are you going to do that if you're using a more complicated CPU?
AMD is right not to try to compete in microcontrollers, it is saturated and the prices are nearly at commodity level already. Intel is competing for the high end sensor market, but they're not doing very well. They have the money to waste trying though, so no problem.
Slashdot Mirror
If you're genuinely curious, people who are casually happy generally care less about what other people think. Your theory seems to be that they worry more. No, those aren't happy people, those are the bland sheep that turn smiles outwards for you to view regardless of what is happening inside.
If somebody is happy and comfortable inside, they can just give you their real opinion, they don't need to be validated by your approval of their opinion, so if it is "patronizing" or not is just a distraction; they're probably happy because they ignore those types of distractions!
In this case, it is not a happy person. But still, his unhappiness is irrelevant to the issue of being patronizing. Is the way people stare at their phone all day for perceived comfort not childlike and maladaptive? Why would it not be looked down on in exactly the way that would be described as "patronizing?" Isn't that going to be how things are described whenever you're honest about a harmful behavior born from unrestrained childlike emotional impulses?
Very few people consider a cloned plant to be the same individual. It has the same DNA, but it seems to be starting over and growing a new individual from a reproductive budding site; it uses its reproductive machinery to copy itself instead of for sexual reproduction.
I know it makes a better story that way, but still.
Sure, but those don't count as parts for this analysis.
No, when a good craftsman buys a new tool and it is better than the old one, he says, "gosh, this new tool is better than the old one." He doesn't go all macho-moron and insist, "meh, tools are all the same, no difference."
Actually, the master craftsman is almost certainly a master in tools, and probably has tool preferences.
It all comes down to The Rule of Goats: even if you say you're only fucking goats ironically, you're still a goatfucker.
https://twitter.com/popehat/st...
https://www.popehat.com/2017/0...
I'm not going to watch binny boy's pr0n stash, I don't care if the CIA says it is the good stuff. For the same reason I wouldn't click on an image link from slashdot. I don't care if it is an ironic goat.
Why do people think this is unique to perl? I get this with whatever I do.
That's the point, for many of us we don't get that feeling using other languages.
You can't even read any reports if you think it is was reported that the F-35 underperforms some other aircraft.
Do me a favor and give me a laugh and tell me which aircraft you think outperforms the F-35? This is going to be hilarious!
Why people snear is a whole different type of problem, though. Most of the people snearing were using C++ and everybody just laughed when they did it.
Python became the default language for beginners with minimal programming experience, so it gets used in teaching introductions to a lot of different programming topics, and it is certainly used by hobbyists a lot, but I don't really see the traditional use cases for Perl getting replaced by Python very often.
Once upon a time I wrote web scripts in Perl, but now if I need to make a web interface I'm either using Ruby on a server or C on a microcontroller. Hobbyists often are using Lua or Python on the same microcontroller.
That explains it; I think most of the market for these are as linux devices.
I use PL/pgSQL and it is great! But PL/Ruby is better.
I'm not actually sure what you said though.
I was stuck using the Microsoft variant one time and it was hell, it was like programming a donkey... every other line telling it GO GO GO GO GO and its like, do these fuckers realize that every other company has SQL scripting that just keeps going? Like, automatically, from one line of code, on to the next line of code?
It can be a legit problem with Makefiles, where horizontal tab characters have to be in the correct place, but are not generally rendered to the screen.
Also a COBOL problem that varies with compiler.
Not really a "problem" in modern languages, but the main arguments are around the potential utility of punctuation.
Not to mention having to exactly preserve the white-space when copying any code around
The grey beards on Slashdot continually bring this up. I have this yet to be an actual problem, ever. Are you guys that inept at copy and pasting?
COBOL flashbacks, combined with sendmail-induced PTSD.
The problem was we had advanced server tools like mod_perl and no high level frameworks that had the features to work for the full range of web applications, so we were cobbling web apps together with a bunch of different crap out of CPAN and everybody had a different basket.
RubyOnRails came out and showed everybody the power of frameworks, and they jumped off of Perl to Ruby, or else they used one of the many copies of RoR for other languages. If the first popular web framework had been PerlOnRails, or if people had figured out the need for a better single framework sooner, then Perl would have continued to thrive in the web niche.
I don't think it was a culture problem, it was mostly just timing. (That's only a user theory, I'm not an armchair language designer)
I don't mind figuring out somebody else's old Perl script; I expect any code NIH to suck as bad as the rest of the NIH code!
What really torques my twizzle about Perl is looking at my own old code, and realizing, "I spent a whole day making this code this ugly, and I was really happy with how perfectly the semantics matched the use case and how clear everything was. I just want to hide under a rock."
I know it is possible to write clear Perl. I've even seen such code. But high level languages are supposed to be easier, and for me it is easier to write clear C than clear Perl. And Ruby, no problem.
Figuring out what old code does? Not that hard. Tolerating looking at it? Harder.
Be warned, that was true about Javascript when you learned it, but it stopped being true about 10 years ago and now they're using it everywhere. Sad but true!
That's funny, and probably true; those of us who don't use Perl but use a lot of regular expressions are unlikely to feel the hate.
That said, even though I used to use Perl on a daily basis since I don't use it frequently anymore I'm more likely to reach for sed than perl on the command line if I need to edit a file with a regex.
Actually, even when I used Perl a lot I would often still use sed to make small source changes across the whole project.
A few times in my life I've been asked to debug PHP. 100% of the time it was a regex bug and I never had to learn any PHP. :)
Probably over 90% of the SQL bugs I get are regex-related, too.
Perhaps the generalized rule is, "People who hate Perl should stay inside their wheelhouse."
This is why I switched from Perl to Ruby.
My old Perl code looked like line noise. To me, after 6 months. Oh, I could clean it up, but it took me a lot of effort.
My Ruby code looks a lot like C; which is nice because half my methods are also implemented in C. And I can easily read it, even years later.
There is so much overlap between the use cases of Perl and Ruby it just didn't make sense to me to keep using Perl since I suck at making it maintainable; it is just so expressive, it is too easy to let the needs of the use case bleed into the code organization. It feels too elegant while doing that sort of thing; it can feel stifling to refuse to use that power when it is at your fingertips.
If most of my code was one-liners I'd have stuck with Perl.
I was in college taking first year Computer Science classes in C/C++ when I found my first Perl book, it was just warm fuzzies flowing off the pages compared to the crap we were subjected to in class!
Ruby wasn't a Python replacement, it was more of a Perl replacement, and Python was simply rejected as a Perl replacement. That's why Python is in the story.
The goal was Perl/C style syntax and Smalltalk style OO semantics.
A few things were borrowed from Python, but it wasn't a main influence and doesn't make it into the one-line "why" statements.
Living people rarely roll over inside graves.
As Larry Wall himself described it, Perl 5 was his rewrite of Perl 4, and Perl 6 was the community's rewrite of Perl 5.
I doubt he's actually upset at all that everybody is still using Perl 5 because his ideas were better than "the community's" horse-by-committee. Perl 6 was created because there were things the community wanted that were different than what Larry wanted from Perl, that's the reason the community was doing it; Perl 5 was already a mostly finished language.
As a Ruby programmer I have to say that I agree entirely, but the good news is that programming is best kept between the programmer and the computer; you have to learn from documentation, stop trying to ask the Ruby programmers.
Ruby is simply too easy a language for Ruby programmers to have time to suffer idiots, because the language is easy enough for most of the idiots. They just kept pouring through the door until we started shouting at them to go read a fucking book and eventually they started switching to JS.
If you want to use an easy language and still be able to have a community where experienced programmers help new people, you have to be able to chase off the people who are simply not well suited to programming or else they will totally swamp everything will "hello world" questions.
With Perl there is so much to confuse the idiots that they run away just from looking at the code, allowing the programmers to have a more decent communication environment. After about 5 years of using Perl I started running away from my own code; that's when I switched to Ruby. Also, Ruby has much better C integration and most of the Ruby stdlib is just wrappers around the C stdlib.
They'll probably also use some potato extract in there.
I can build a smartphone with ARM, so why would I want to shoehorn a desktop CPU in? It is just more complication with no benefit. Why would any engineer prefer that to what they have? On the hardware side, it is a nice ecosystem for the product designer!
They're going to have a hard time competing with Texas Instruments when it comes to designing an easy to use chip around the licensed arm core, and the compiler toolchain is exactly the same as it would be with intel or amd. The only thing you could possibly try to compete on is price, and how are you going to do that if you're using a more complicated CPU?
AMD is right not to try to compete in microcontrollers, it is saturated and the prices are nearly at commodity level already. Intel is competing for the high end sensor market, but they're not doing very well. They have the money to waste trying though, so no problem.
That depends; if that is already priced into the stock, then they're effectively exactly the same on that metric.
The problem for investors would be if they were expecting 60% and only got 30%.
AMD isn't the big fish, but everybody knew that already.