|
|
Same here, except that it annoys me to the point where I don't use it. Too bad Python doesn't have a CLI switch to turn on braces instead of spaces.
I am reminded of a university professor who was supposed to be teaching C/C++ to first year Comp. Sci. and spent most of one of the first lectures demonstrating that you could basically write Pascal instead and leverage the pre-processor to generate C at compile time.
This is not someone I would trust with a firearm as they seem to believe a real gun is just like the ones in all the 3d shooters they have played.
"Guns don't kill people, idiots with guns kill people."
Yeah, exactly. What the writeup calls "appeasing a ceremonial type checker" is more properly called "debugging".
Don't get me wrong, I like the thrill of the chase, the satisfaction of tracking down a really hard bug, as much as anyone. But I like programming even more. Using a well-designed type checker, I can find bugs in my program and convince myself that I'm programming rather than debugging.
Agreed. The languages I've used the most would be Smalltalk, C++, Javascript and Java (in rough chronological order, some overlaps), two are weak typed two are strong typed.
After a day grinding out hundreds of lines of productive Java trying to do anything in javascript just makes me want to drown kittens... well perhaps kittens named Brandon Eich. (Sorry Brandon... I've just seen too many sins committed with your language.)
And then there's Python.
people bitch about python. at least I do.
whitespace has effect. who has time for that..
Same, but it's almost my only complaint. Other than that it's an elegant language, my favorite for scripting.
Those people always bitch about and those no one uses.
Since I have yet to hear any complaints about Dart, I can only assume it's in the latter category and no one cares.
We need these languages, not necessarily for working with them, but to inspire others. The experimental languages of the 60's and 70's begat Smalltalk, which influenced C++ and Objective C, they all lead nicely to Java and C#.
All of these influence the current batch of experimental languages.
What I want is the beauty of Smalltalk, the rapid development of Python, the library depth of Java, the speed of C++ and the pervasive platform of javascript.
If I could do web-client side scripting in a language like that I'd be happier than a pig in shit.
Here’s to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The troublemakers. The round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see things differently. They’re not fond of rules. And they have no respect for the status quo. You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them. About the only thing you can’t do is ignore them. Because they change things. They push the human race forward. While some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius. Because the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world, are the ones who do.
Once the idea is tested and youâ(TM)re comfortable with the design, you can add type annotations.
I've been doing this with comments since 1999 and it works great! Of course I still haven't gotten around to that final step of going back and adding all those comments but I love the flexibility!
Unless you like bugs, type-checking is a good thing. Lack of type enforcement encourages what -- lack of forethought?
Exactly, this is one of the things that crippled large smalltalk projects back in the day; it was almost impossible to figure out how to call someone elses code without invoking the wrath of doesNotUnderstand.
It ain't done till Lotus won't run.
I guess it's done.
Interestingly, I think you're right, Windows is done.
ohnotheskyisfalling
People said the same thing after Vista, though as far as I can see, Windows 8 is far worse for end users than Vista.
as he came over you could tell that everyone stiffened up and our attitudes changed. It changes how you respond to people's questions, how you act./quote
In other words people behaved the same way they would if it had been a video camera.
So if this were both widely deployed and effective it would just force these hypothetical dirty bomb enthusiasts to line the bomb container with lead. Lead which would become toxic shrapnel on detonation. The potential for many false positives has already been mentioned, but this system could be easily defeated by a thin lead lining. Lead lining has the further benefit of shielding a non-suicidal bomber from his own radiation.
That's easy, we just ban well shielded dirty bombs. *rimshot*
we do understand atmosphere, and yes that does make sense becasue it's trapping the heatr. OCntrary to what the media, tlaking heads, and ignorant politician tell you its a fact.
You don't have to understand every single fact of something for it to be true.
That would be akin to saying gravity isn't real.
We know, for a fact, we are increasing CO2.
we know, for a fact, that CO2 traps heat.
We know, for a fact, the heating is occurring in the lower parts of the atmosphere
We know, for a fact, that there is a trend happening on top of normal historic cycles.
Exactly. The point was, even if we didn't know all that, altering the chemical composition of the atmosphere is a mindbogglingly stupid thing to do.
It does feel good to have it stated though... a nice warm fuzzy feeling...
Regardless, we should focus on cutting pollution even if global warming is not man-made.
I wish this was more obvious to more people.
If there is no relationship between atmospheric CO2 levels and global temperatures then that means we have absolutely no idea how planetary ecosystems work at all.
If we don't understand our atmosphere does it make any sense to be modifying as a side effect of industrialization?
My only hope is we actually figure out how all this works and become environmentally neutral before it's too late.
Firefox just comes with the Social API, as with addon APIs, you have to install something, otherwise it's just potential.
There you go again, bringing logic and reason to an emotional argument. Won't somebody think of the delusional paranoids!
Consuming one alcoholic beverage does not make a person an unsafe driver, therefore making the limit so low that consuming one beverage is illegal is wrong.
I disagree.
I think we have proven that there is a point at which all people are "too drunk to drive", the only question is what is that limit.
I think that's it's high time we considers zero tolerance.
A single beer could put someone over
I realize that my own physical alcohol tolerance is quite low, and that one person does not constitute evidence, but that said:
If I consume any normal serving of alcohol, a pint of beer, a glass of wine, a shot of something stronger, I am probably not fit to drive immediately. I must consume food and plan any driving carefully. Can I have a beer at lunch with the guys? Yes, ONE... if it's more than one drink it's going to be a long "lunch".
Everyone is different, however the standard being bandied about is four drinks in an hour, even with food that leaves me incapable of driving safely. I have observed myself and others in these scenarios and as a result I do not believe (and again this is about belief and personal experience) that driving with 0.08 levels is safe, consequently I would be strongly in favor of reducing the legal limits.
For me the calculus is very simple, either restrict consumption to a bare minimum or just don't drive.
(Now this may make me sound boring, but when I don't have to go anywhere, say a nice cottage party where the stagger home is 200 feet, I do drink enough to make the most alcohol resistant at least tipsy... )
The upside of low alcohol tolerance? Drinking all evening is very cheap if you're only downing a drink or two per hour.
Yeah, because this is the first time any of us have ever heard it mentioned. (Rolls eyes)
Ah well... like dey sey, de nile is not a river in Africa...
Does the name Pavlov ring a bell?