How USA of them

That reminds me of this spoof: http://www.c2.com/cgi/wiki?Ayn...

The total angular momentum of all solar system objects remain the same, correct? So if we ignore those flung out of the solar system for now (assuming it's not a signif. factor), if Jupiter increases its angular momentum (moves "outward"), then a good many objects will lose angular momentum to counter. Where did it go? Do many "long orbit" objects that once had a semi-circular orbits now have highly elliptical orbits (as many comets do)?

But readable code is often preferred over clever code by team members.

... a patchwork of open-source freebies.

So, what's it like to work for FaceBook?

I suppose all those "// damn U bill gates!" comments gave me away

The real Justin B crashes cars, and the Justin B app crashes phones.

This seems backwards; I'm missing something. Remember, I'm asking about Jupiter moving back out, not in toward the sun (which the article suggests is from friction with dust etc.). Other objects would have to lose orbital momentum for Jupiter to gain. Jup moving out would push the space junk inward, not outward.

I don't believe the expansion of the universe makes any notable difference on the scale of a solar system.

The idea that Jupiter moved inwards then back out would have the back out movement come from flinging smaller planetoids out of their orbit and exchanging angular momentum.

But Jupiter is massively massive, to misuse English. It's hard to believe all those small asteroids and junk would have enough bulk and momentum to make a difference on it.

Was there a lot more junk flinging around back then? I don't get it.

To get it to pass, rename it JobCreator++

Let me clarify. It may be "software engineering science" to study reasons existing code bases need changes (written in varied languages and paradigms), but as given, it is not OOP-specific science. The /. intro says "object-oriented computer science". That study is not "object-oriented computer science" because it doesn't split it up by paradigm (OOP versus procedural versus functional, etc). To me "object-oriented computer science" is measuring OOP's impact.

I do not believe there are ANY field studies in Meyer's book that show OOP "being better". You are welcome to prove me wrong.

Maybe what he really wants is logic programming, along Prolog's line.

civilization reaches a point where its porn and virtual reality [preoccupy them]

Until..."I've been hacked! She has 3 green dicks! That I can live with, but not her looking like Kim Jong-Un now."

Next you'll be telling me you can create operating systems in less than 15GB!

If you complain, we'll re-write it in Java and make it 30GB