I don't consider implementing well established, well documented algorithms as requiring "advanced" programming. You're translating pseudo code to language do jour. That requires basic competency at the craft and nothing more.
This is also how California works (where Apple is located). But NOT how Massachusetts works (where A123 is located).
My thoughts exactly. AT&T needs to be making this comparison in their marketing materials. Otherwise it sounds like they're trying to gouge the customer.
The second form is only more readable if the greaterThan10 function is in some library somewhere globally available. Inner functions distract from reading code by breaking up control flow and computation. Now I have to at least skim that inner function as I'm trying to understand the outer function's behavior. It's noise. It doesn't belong there. It's like writing x = x;
So, even though software developers consistently say naming things is one of the most difficult parts of their job, and the thesaurus is one of the most useful books for a programmer, you want to introduce more pointless names? Why do you need to name something to understand it? Why can't you just understand the abstraction?
Python's approach is to force you to indent to avoid writing the horrible code you just wrote.
More languages are getting these types of syntaxes because people have broken free of the LL(x)/LR parser myopia from academia and are more comfortable with hand-coded parsers which are designed for the person who actually has to get shit done and not just write papers about ways in which other people can get shit done.
I feel for you. I feel even more for all the blind programmers who still manage to program in silly languages that require you to look at code.
How is (a+1)*b any more readable than a+1 * b ? Spaces aren't invisible; they take up SPACE. If you're not using a monospaced font, maybe there's an issue. But otherwise, it seems you're just whining about a feature you're not used to. Or maybe you're one of those programmers who has problems properly spacing their code in the first place. Maybe all your code sucks and languages like this are designed to avoid programmers like you?
...says a person with fundamentally limited functional programming experience.
Forcing code indentation is LESS invasive than forcing semicolons and braces everywhere. You're already going to be typing that tab character in (if you're not, you're a shitty programmer). Why does the language need me to type in more fucking nonsense to understand what is obvious to anyone with a weekend of programming experience?
Nope, but if you can say it - whether or not you should say it - you should be able to say it.
Those Chinese banks are going to be the target of a huge amount of hacking. It's like an invitation. We've built a way for you to take over our system. Please try and find it.
I've tried many cheap versions of electronic chess, and most of them have no support for en passant (a couple don't have support for castling either). Not only that, but playing against other players, most people who play chess for recreation don't seem to know about an passant, anyway. So, let's call it's chess 2.0. Streamlined for the modern audience.
Start with a precise explanation. If anyone is too ignorant to understand the precise explanation, they should speak up and ask questions. People who don't speak up; THEY have the problem communicating. Not the people explaining things.