C++ - a can of worms which only a language lawyer could love - probably hit the big time because of MS Visual C++ and the MS Foundation Classes. That and the fact that C programmers didn't think they had to learn a whole new language (see earlier comment about cans of worms).
Or maybe C++ became popular because it introduced the object-oriented paradigm while retaining compatibility with C.
Can of worms? You know you don't have to get into template programming and other complex C++ STL guts, right?
Look at Objective-C. No pressure for years let this language mature and not have to be a stakced series of kludges. It's a language that hasn't gone off the rails like Java did and now python is about to.
Interesting that you should say that, as Objective-C has to be the biggest kludge of a programming language that I have ever come into contact with. The fact that it began as a C preprocessor language is still apparent today from its messy syntax.
I wish Nintendo would let players *choose* if they want to use the motion sensor, or a controller. I wasted 3 hours trying to beat the *first* boss in Metroid Prime 3. If I had been able to use the standard Gamecube controller as the previous games, it would have been dead in mere minutes.
3 hours?! If you had that much difficulty with using the Wiimote's pointer (not motion) functionality, you'd likely not be much better with a GameCube controller. The boss hit hard, but it was pretty easy to hit the glowing orbs.
There was nothing wrong with the controls, in my opinion. But there was something wrong with the rest of the game. The excellence of the original Metroid Prime was likely a happy accident.
Considering your entire comment it's more likely that you have a problem pointing at things because it really isn't a pain in the ass.
Sonic Adventure 5(?)
What's wrong with using the actual name of the game?
My recommendation is not to buy a laptop. They're designed to break easily and repairing one will cost you a small fortune. At which point you may as well buy a new one, and the cycle repeats. Quality just isn't a factor.
I fail to see any worthwhile arguments on that page
Nice argument, well cited, and highly intelligent. I can't disagree. Oh wait, you didn't actually have an argument.
Even then my point was absolutely not that XHTML2 was some super perfect spec - to anyone that isn't some mental HTML5 fanboy that much should have been pretty obvious - I was merely stating it was going in the right direction.
And it is this right direction that I took issue with.
Exactly. A generic flexible tree that can be dealt with as you need to.
Semantics are so tightly coupled to structure that you'd end up right back where we started. There is nothing to be gained by stripping out the semantics. There's a reason HTML was designed from the outset with them in mind.
It's called separation of concerns, it's incredibly important in modern software, it's sad so many people like you don't get this vital concept in software design.
Except that we're not talking about software. We're talking about web pages. It's beyond obvious now that you're thinking of them like a programmer, which is missing the point.
That's if you prefix my use of the term "older browsers" with the word "all". I can't really be held responsible for what fucked up logic you carry out in your head to create disagreement for the sake of creating disagreement.
When "older browsers" really means "IE browsers", you're being misleading as there are many other older browsers out there. Hence, whether you like it or not, my disagreement was called for.
Imagine a "less" command that had major version number changes every week, and the only change the end users noticed was they swapped the pgup and pgdn keys because the UI designers said it was more intuitive. After all, when you hit page down, the page doesn't actually go down in your viewport, the imaginary paper is scrolling upwards past your viewpoint, right? So hit page up to read the next screen of the scroll.
You mean like in Mac OS X where they inverted the vertical scroll direction when using the mouse scroll wheel?
Nice argument, well cited, and highly intelligent. I can't disagree. Oh wait, you didn't actually have an argument.
Neither did you. You just namedropped XHTML2 and that was it.
Good software development is all about modularity, ensuring a spec is can grow to the dynamic needs of something like the web demands that you define the generic building blocks, and let people build whatever they need from there. XHTML2 was trying to do both of these things.
It was trying to do it in a bad way through XML namespaces, leading to namespace confusion.
No, it's about defining document structure.
That, too. They go hand in hand.
HTML still defines structure regardless of any semantic meaning.
The only structure it would define is that of a tree devoid of meaning.
Wrong because it's right? what???
If all older web browsers were IE browsers, you'd be right. But there are lots more of them out there that will render HTML5 just fine.
As opposed to a mishmash of ill defined tags with arbitrary meanings?
They're not ill defined tags with arbitrary meanings.
If there's disagreement about something fundamental within the spec then the spec has failed to define something properly
Disagreement about the semantic meaning of a bunch of elements is hardly fundamental. Besides, the spec isn't even done. If no one disagreed on things we wouldn't need anyone to work on specs.
Yes, well that's one advantage of a living spec I suppose.
We're talking about HTML5, not the versionless living spec living at the WHATWG. Did you forget that the W3C embraced the WHATWG's work and used that as a basis for HTML5?
He's probably referring to XHTML, whilst XHTML2 wasn't really ideal, it was at least going down the right path in terms of doing just that.
No, it wasn't.
Personally I'm not keen on semantics been wedged into the HTML5 spec though, I think that's a concern that could be far better dealt with like stylesheets.
HTML has always been about semantics. What HTML5 does is update them and introduce elements that web developers have been needing.
Without the semantics HTML is meaningless. Stripping off the semantics is crazy talk.
There are other issues with semantic tags - older browsers just don't even recognise them and fail to render those blocks
Wrong. IE is the only web browser that doesn't render them. All other older browsers render them just fine.
The other argument for the tags is to get rid of div soup, and sure it's a pain, but honestly? the benefit of divs is that they're generic, and by keeping your tags generic and applying additional information (i.e. styling) using the ids/classes, you're maintaining flexibility and keeping things both futureproof, and backwards compatible at the same time
No, you're just creating a maintenance nightmare.
Even now the semantic meanings of the semantic tags have become meaningless anyway as there's so much disagreement for example as to what should be an article.
It makes me nervous when I'm registering for an account they require you to pick a secret question and a secret answer. What I end up doing is pounding on my keyboard so the answer is some gibberish before submitting.
Back under your bridge, troll: "Belgium" doesn't exist.
This site has been blocked by the Ministry of Truth
You are trying to access a site that contains content classified into the following prohibited categories:
Seditious Statements
Disruption of the Social Order
Attempting to Convert Belgian Citizens
Libel Against His Majesty The King of The Belgians
General Anti-Belgian Lies
Belgian Citizens are not allowed to access this site. Please stand by until authorities can contact you. If you have been linked here by a fellow Belgian Citizen, please report him or her to: misbruik@miniver.fedict.be.
They are in the business to sell advertising. If you do not buy advertising, then you have probably never paid a dime directly to Google. I hate to say it, but invading privacy is just part of the business.
What the hell are you talking about? Selling advertising doesn't require privacy violations at all.
I think you underestimate the problem that self-diagnosis is. There are so many people who claim to have Asperger's Syndrome today that 1) the numbers seem worse than they're already are and 2) those who claim to have it are often not taken seriously.
Slashdot Mirror
I have never encountered this problem. Make sure the sensor bar is placed well such that the top of the Wiimote can easily see it.
I started by writing QBasic and I find the ALGOL-derived syntax of C to be easier to read and type.
Or maybe C++ became popular because it introduced the object-oriented paradigm while retaining compatibility with C.
Can of worms? You know you don't have to get into template programming and other complex C++ STL guts, right?
Interesting that you should say that, as Objective-C has to be the biggest kludge of a programming language that I have ever come into contact with. The fact that it began as a C preprocessor language is still apparent today from its messy syntax.
3 hours?! If you had that much difficulty with using the Wiimote's pointer (not motion) functionality, you'd likely not be much better with a GameCube controller. The boss hit hard, but it was pretty easy to hit the glowing orbs.
There was nothing wrong with the controls, in my opinion. But there was something wrong with the rest of the game. The excellence of the original Metroid Prime was likely a happy accident.
Considering your entire comment it's more likely that you have a problem pointing at things because it really isn't a pain in the ass.
What's wrong with using the actual name of the game?
My recommendation is not to buy a laptop. They're designed to break easily and repairing one will cost you a small fortune. At which point you may as well buy a new one, and the cycle repeats. Quality just isn't a factor.
Brave Soul
Don't expect a traditional JRPG, though. It's point & click.
And Brave Soul is available in English! No need to learn Japanese!
Nice argument, well cited, and highly intelligent. I can't disagree. Oh wait, you didn't actually have an argument.
And it is this right direction that I took issue with.
Semantics are so tightly coupled to structure that you'd end up right back where we started. There is nothing to be gained by stripping out the semantics. There's a reason HTML was designed from the outset with them in mind.
Except that we're not talking about software. We're talking about web pages. It's beyond obvious now that you're thinking of them like a programmer, which is missing the point.
When "older browsers" really means "IE browsers", you're being misleading as there are many other older browsers out there. Hence, whether you like it or not, my disagreement was called for.
You mean like in Mac OS X where they inverted the vertical scroll direction when using the mouse scroll wheel?
Neither did you. You just namedropped XHTML2 and that was it.
It was trying to do it in a bad way through XML namespaces, leading to namespace confusion.
That, too. They go hand in hand.
The only structure it would define is that of a tree devoid of meaning.
If all older web browsers were IE browsers, you'd be right. But there are lots more of them out there that will render HTML5 just fine.
They're not ill defined tags with arbitrary meanings.
Disagreement about the semantic meaning of a bunch of elements is hardly fundamental. Besides, the spec isn't even done. If no one disagreed on things we wouldn't need anyone to work on specs.
We're talking about HTML5, not the versionless living spec living at the WHATWG. Did you forget that the W3C embraced the WHATWG's work and used that as a basis for HTML5?
Come back when you're living in reality again.
All they know is the User-agent header which they sniff all the time to decide which version of their pages to show you.
They can't even output valid HTML.
No, it wasn't.
HTML has always been about semantics. What HTML5 does is update them and introduce elements that web developers have been needing.
Without the semantics HTML is meaningless. Stripping off the semantics is crazy talk.
Wrong. IE is the only web browser that doesn't render them. All other older browsers render them just fine.
No, you're just creating a maintenance nightmare.
ohnoes there's disagreement let's throw everything out.
The spec isn't even done yet.
Microsoft Security Essentials made them obsolete years ago. Don't bother with the crippling alternatives.
It makes me nervous when I'm registering for an account they require you to pick a secret question and a secret answer. What I end up doing is pounding on my keyboard so the answer is some gibberish before submitting.
Array indexOf method
The suspense is killing me! What happened next?!
I must have spent too much time on Slashdot because I get the reference. D:
This site has been blocked by the Ministry of Truth
You are trying to access a site that contains content classified into the following prohibited categories:
Belgian Citizens are not allowed to access this site. Please stand by until authorities can contact you. If you have been linked here by a fellow Belgian Citizen, please report him or her to: misbruik@miniver.fedict.be.
You think tying a mobile phone contract to the use of a mobile phone (to take the iPhone case as an example) is a good thing? You can't be serious.
It's a good thing that practices like these are illegal in Belgium. That's why it took so long for the iPhone to be released here.
What the hell are you talking about? Selling advertising doesn't require privacy violations at all.
Dude, this about a computer, not a kitchen aid.
I think you underestimate the problem that self-diagnosis is. There are so many people who claim to have Asperger's Syndrome today that 1) the numbers seem worse than they're already are and 2) those who claim to have it are often not taken seriously.
Unfortunately, every time one makes such an argument someone comes along and says that the rich shouldn't be punished for being rich.
I still don't know what to say to that.