having a generation of students that don't know how to use pointers seems, rather scary to me.

We've managed to get along with the first one, so another one won't be much worse.

You know, for things like memory allocation, pointers, and so on?

Compared to Java? I think it would hold its own.

I think there are good arguments for being exposed to C early, but I wouldn't say it necessarily should be a first language.

For example, when adding some new code I will often put it at the beginning of the line (ie with no indent) so I can see it more clearly whilst coding (usually this is for temporary tracing lines), and only indent it before commit.

I do that in C++ all the time, especially when it's something I don't intend to keep. This is definitely something that you can't do in Python, but that doesn't keep me from liking it.

With Python, on the other hand, I'm actually more likely to have an error in the indenting, because there's no easy way to see how many blocks I'm terminating when I outdent by an arbitrary amount.

I've never really had that problem, but then I always break up code into reasonable sized functions so the nesting doesn't get too deep. Perhaps that's what you need to change.

I thought the whole whitespace-dependent thing was a crock too, coming from 20 years of mostly C++, but since I'm already obsessive about code formatting, I found it very natural and comfortable once I started using Python.

I used Pascal for almost all of my CS courses (but this was in the mid 80s). I got my first job as a C programmer with no formal C experience, but that wasn't a problem, and I never had any problems adapting to new languages during my career as needed. I like some languages more than others, but I can get the job done in anything needed with a short learning curve. I've done mostly C++, which I enjoy, and picked up Python on my own a couple years ago, which I love. I wouldn't call myself a Python expert by any stretch, but I could become one in short order if the need arose. It's all about the programming: Thinking logically, breaking tasks down in discrete steps that do the right thing, knowing what can go wrong. The language is just syntax. It might make some things easier and some things harder, but they're all doable.

Because if we knew Esperanto, we could follow that Esperanto movie William Shatner starred in in 1965. That's pretty useful.

It's not a spin at all. In order for Microsoft to prove to governments that their software does what it's supposed to, they are willing to share the source, because that's the only way you can really trust software. It's not spin to say that you cannot truly trust software unless you can see the source (and understand it, and be able to build it, etc., etc.)

Microsoft isn't implying that. They trying to convince customers they don't have NSA backdoors. ... by opening the source to their products (to certain parties). In other words, you cannot trust software unless you can see the source. It's a pretty clear implication to me.

Yes. That is just such an appropriate thing to suggest to an Apple user.

"You know that company you use because you are a n00b or just lazy? You now need to become a network admin to deal with the stupid stuff they do."

Well, Microsoft users have been dealing with this for 25 years.

I'm sure you're right. Tailgaters too.

I've been doing C++ on and off for more than 20 years (mostly on) and just for that, I'm going to have to friend you.

Wow, so one of their major goals is to release something people actually want to upgrade to.

Way to set your sights low, Microsoft.

Perhaps you should admit that Metro was nothing other than your executives suffering from collective lust explosion over Apple taking 30% off the top of every app sale and hoping that MS could force Windows users into the same situation.

We have all that, but not the automated tests for the stuff I'm involved with (other departments probably do). It's something my manager has been making a push for in the past few months (and I'm totally on board with), but it's going to take a lot of time because of the sheer amount of legacy code.

Then there are all the incentives to make traffic worse... stop light cameras that generate revenue but don't increase safety because the yellows are too short. Or the urban legend that shopkeepers push to get lights timed so more cars are stopped out in front of their shops, an idea that's believable, although I don't know if it's true. Then of course, there are bad driving habits, and the fact that one tailgater or one slowpoke can cause major cascades that lead to huge backups (and I'm not talking about accidents).