Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Haskell? (Score 2) 138

Haskell doesn't really have an "if" statement as such. It has an "if" expression (analogous to C's [expr] ? [expr] : [expr] conditional expression) but it's not widely used in my experience. Haskell folks would rather use guards and pattern matching to do the same job.

Comment mobile sites are a disease (Score 4, Insightful) 356

The whole point of HTML and CSS is that all this markup are suggestions to the client, who is free to rearrange elements, use different fonts or otherwise handle things differently for the benefit of the viewer. Making an entirely different, dumber, website for the benefit of some particular class of device defeats the purpose of a "world-wide web".

Make the devices better, not the websites worse.

Comment Re:Not all in the implementation (Score 1) 252

That's what I'm saying though, it's not all in the implementation, tail call recursion relies pretty heavily on the code being set up (and kept up) properly so that it is possible.

Writing code such that the last call in the function is always another call to itself isn't some deep mystery, though. The only question is whether the language is guaranteed to optimize that case.

Um, is that not sneaking in a normal iterative loop with a conditional check that's always true? What would be the difference from the code that generates and "while (1 == 1)"?

Since Haskell has no built-in "while" statement as such, you're going to need to either write an explicit recursive loop or just use one that's already been pre-built for running some action forever. It's just more obvious what's going on by using the latter.

Comment Re:I'm weary of recursion (Score 1) 252

Of course, in someplace like Haskell one can just use the "forever" function which loops some action forever rather than implementing an explicit tail-call loop and making sure to get it right. I'm just saying that recursion isn't guaranteed to blow up one's stack in all cases - it's all in the implementation.

Comment Re:Well, that's cool I guess (Score 1) 125

Browsers pushing stuff outside the standard may have given us the <marquee> and <blink> tags, but it also gave us the <table> tag. The good thing about having a standards body is that it can incorporate the useful stuff into the next standard while (hopefully) relegating the junk to permanent outcast status.

Comment Re:OS X (Score 1) 611

I go back and forth between OS X and Linux daily and a lot of OS X's window management is still sub-par. Its virtual desktop management still needs work, sloppy focus is never going to be an option, and hacks for tiling window management are about as terrible as one would expect.

It has its good points, but its double-buffered windows and nice aesthetics aren't enough to make me want to use OS X full-time while Linux environments do things better.

Comment Re:most lego's are a rip off (Score 3, Informative) 355

To be honest, I'm really disappointed with the modern lego sets. When I was a kid, I had the city sets, and for the most part they were buildings that you made from brick-shaped bricks with only a few uniquely molded parts for that set. Today there's barely any blocks. They're all cross-licensed tie-ins with movies or cartoons, and so in order to get the assembled set to look like something from The Lord of the Rings or Star Wars, 75% of the blocks are special molds.

There's almost no point in it being a lego toy, because you're just assembling a crude model of an x-wing, and the only thing you can make with the set x-wing. Why not with a model x-wing?

This is completely wrong. Here's the instructions to the latest X-Wing. Flip to the back and count the number of "special molds" yourself. Do you see anything in there that can't be used for anything but an X-Wing?

Slashdot Top Deals

Getting the job done is no excuse for not following the rules. Corollary: Following the rules will not get the job done.