No... I'm pretty sure it would inject water.
I honestly wasn't aware of the Enumerable extension methods. I haven't used C# is quite awhile, so I haven't kept up with my C# knowledge. I was comparing the DSL style to streams. Looking at the article the AC posted above, it looks like the enumerable extension methods and streams would be a fairer comparison. In which case, they look very similar.
Thanks for the article. It's been awhile since I've had the opportunity to work with C#. To be fair, when I worked with LINQ last time it was brand new and I was less experienced of a developer. Looking at it today, it looks very similar to Java 8's streams except with the benefit of C# having extension methods and being a bit more mature.
Migrate to Java 8. I think that both languages are excellent, but I must say that Java 8's "stream" API is much easier to understand and work with than LINQ.
It amazes me how people write stuff in Java without having a decent "Date" data type. Why should I have to use a third party library to get decent date support?
Java 8 introduced a new date time API. Admittedly I haven't used it as all of my code uses the old API. As far as the old API, one would use a Calendar when they are working with social dates and times and use a Date when working with an exact point in time. It isn't difficult.
The problem is that a computer cannot will. A computer simply takes inputs and puts out output. And no amount of programming can change that. There is not a math problem that can will an answer. We can kinda sorta fake it with psuedo randomness, but there isn't a will. Any kind of AI is just that. Artificial. It's an illusion.
For the record, I agree that "MightyMartian" was a bit harsh, and I did enjoy reading your rebuttal. But with that said, I have a question. My understanding of the "big bang" is that the singularity began to exist and was all of space. And that it began to expand and continues to expand today. And that the expansion has not reached the point where we can no longer observe the beginning of space/time. Is this inaccurate?
Space is not infinite. It is expanding.
This is the first time the "first post" post is somewhat related to the article. Well done, Tablizer.
It depends on how you define inferior. That's why I put them in quotes. If you define it as which hardware can process more data per second then the Wii U is inferior. If you judge on which hardware provides the best entertainment, then I don't know how anyone can say that the Wii U is inferior. The games are fun, they look pretty, and they are memorable. Personally I think a platform that consistently hosts glitchy boring games is an inferior platform.
Everybody's complaining about Assassin's Creed... and I'm just here playing Mario Kart 8 at 1080p/60fps on my "inferior" game console.
Good thing someone came from the future to warn us. Whew!
Quite simple: The idea of a God does not make any sense. At all.
I agree that a contingent God does not make sense since you go into an infinite regress. Instead if we must have a first cause (which is demanded by the Big Bang), then this cause must exist by necessity. Which isn't a far fetched idea. Numbers, for example, exist by necessity. Nobody created 4. It just is.
But now we're left with a problem. We need a causal something that exists by necessity. And given that the universe exists with contingent laws and contingent constants that just so happen to be necessary for even chemistry to happen, we have an intelligent causal entity that exists by necessity. Call that what you will, but I call it God.
If you take those three attributes away you get something that's worse than magic. Somehow a causal necessary thing just so happen to get the right laws and constants? Or an intelligent necessary thing with no causal power? Or a contingent causal thing (what you think about when you say God)? No. The prime cause of everything must have all three attributes.
why care about "naturally occuring"? Dogs are not naturally occuring. Neither are GMO crops. They are alive.
They use natural process to exist and they come from naturally existing life. A scientist doesn't create a tomato from scratch. He reprograms existing life to manipulate life. Same with dogs. Dogs are breed using natural mechanism (fertilizing eggs, etc...) Nobody just builds a dog from scratch.