Sanskrit is presumably readable by those who need to read it. I would assume scholars in antiquity from the region and period would be well versed in Sanskrit.
Mr Gristwood justifies the age old saying "Those who can, do; Those who can't, teach".
It's annoying that he doesn't substantiate nuggets of "wisdom" like:
- Python based on C
- Complex constructs impossible in Python that have to be done in C.
- Implied in the previous point, such impossible constructs are possible in VB.
Also, there are obviously ways to check if the source code shown is the source code used.
Even tiny differences such as the compiler flags used affects the final binary. How do you know that the source code presented is the source code used for any non-trivial program?
On the other hand, jQuery does make code a lot neater. Especially with judicious use of selectors
p.s. Nice going trying to pin the Obamacare fiasco on jQuery. I don't think I've heard that one before.
That's a useful list, especially if you have no clue as to what to actually search for. Like me.
However it's very clear that you are just winding me up for a bit of fun and nowhere near as ignorant and stupid as you are pretending to be.
Seeing as you're genuinely confused as to what I'm talking about, we've been running tasks in parallel in Python ever since the beginning. Just use processes instead of threads. There are differences (no shared heap, IPC) but there are benefits (no shared heap!). If you're used to the thread pool paradigm, Python has both a thread pool and process pool with the thread pool obviously limited by the GIL while the process pool isn't.
So what's with the thread obsession? It's not the only way to run tasks in parallel.
What the hell is ACM and why would it benefit me to join them?
If you were a halfway competent software developer, you'd already know, and if you were an elite software developer, you'd already have joined...
If you were an elite software developer, you'd be too busy to join a jumped up organisation like the ACM.
(silly in my opinion, apparently they haven't heard of "partners" or considered requiring such cars have a police controlled "slow down" command)
Why is that silly? Do we really think crooks will not find some way of overriding the "slow down" command? As for "partners", a computer does not get stressed or feel under pressure when chased by cops and thus will be less likely to make mistakes.
Why is worrying about this silly?