Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:"Easy to read" is non-sense (Score 3, Interesting) 349

by jfdavis668 (#49742871) Attached to: The Reason For Java's Staying Power: It's Easy To Read
That would make sense, but the system I am referring to doesn't. There is a "Q" class, but it is not a queue. I don't think the people who wrote this know what a queue is. Took us a while to figure out that "rlogic" was the actions initiated from the right side of the screen. Doesn't tell us what they do, but it made some sense. The amazing thing is the system works, even if we don't know what the parts do. The naming standards look more like algebra than Java. We think the whole system must be trying to solve for "x".

Comment: Re:"Easy to read" is non-sense (Score 4, Insightful) 349

by jfdavis668 (#49742709) Attached to: The Reason For Java's Staying Power: It's Easy To Read
His point is that it doesn't contain strange syntax that isn't easy to follow at first glance. One of the original purposes of Java was to eliminate the complexity of C++ has from its C legacy. When you use a command in Java, it does what its supposed to do. They are not using it as some obscure purpose to take advantage of some quirk in the hardware. Java did this by defining its own hardware of sorts, the JVM. It moves the complexity of the actual system to a group of programmers who specialize in that arena, the JVM developers. It's not that all Java is readable, we maintain one system we inherited that was developed by a poorly trained group of developers. The names of classes provide no help in understanding the code. One of the main classes is "M". They also put things together in classes that have nothing to do with each other. We are re-developing that system from scratch to fix it. Even with this, there are no commands in the system that we don't understand when we read them.

Comment: Re:Earlier background? (Score 1) 64

When the first stars formed, the energy released re-ionized the entire universe, so that first-last burst of radiation was absorbed by electrons. The second last-burst is what we see now, when the universe cooled to allow the electrons to re-combine. Some of it has been absorbed over time. But, the universe is now transparent. Much of it hasn't met anything that could stop it from the time it was created until it hits one of our antenna. BTW, being absorbed by a microwave radio antenna does destroy the radiation received. It's not the amount that we are measuring, but the wavelength that is critical. When creating the CMB maps, they do have to take into account relatively nearby objects that could stop it, including the plane of our galaxy.

Comment: Re:Well written article (Score 1) 64

We already know how to build one. See: Current ones are looking for neutrinos at a different energy level, since we are looking for solar and supernova neutrinos. We need a very large one built to a different standard. The hard part is determining the direction where each neutrino is coming from.

Comment: Well written article (Score 1) 64

Amongst all the /. arguments, I would like to say that that is a well written article. It gets a very complex point across in a way that is easily understood. I didn't realize previously that our view of the CMB would change over time. Makes sense, we see the CMB who's light happens to get here now.

"Buy land. They've stopped making it." -- Mark Twain