Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:They took the worst part of Python (Score 1) 195

It isn't personal preferences. Braces are completely superior, using indentation alone causes problems:

*Mixing of the two causes programs to perform differently, but the bug isn't visible. This once cost me 3 weeks to track down a bug where one line in 30K from a contractor used a tab instead of spaces. This isn't the only time I've seen it cause bugs, just the worse.

*Copy pasting from the web is nearly impossible.

*When editing other people's code you don't know what to use. I actually just copy paste the line above every time, its the only way to assure it uses the right thing.

This stupid concept has cost more time than any other language decisions I've ever dealt with.

Now you're going to say "if you just follow the style guide...". That's not an answer. If you just wrote code the right way there'd never be a memory issue in C++ either. If you want the style guide to be necessary, make everything other than the style guide a syntax error.

Python is completely unusable just due to this issue.

Comment Re:What about Scheme? (Score 1) 205

SQL isn't a programming language. Its a database language used with other languages. You wouldn't decide to use it instead of anything on the list above.

Nobody actually uses Ruby or Eiffel for anything serious. I'll accept the addition of FORTRAN but purely for legacy reasons, nobody does new development in it.

Comment Re:What about Scheme? (Score 1) 205

Yes, but the only reason anyone programs in it is that it was one of only 2 supported languages for MacOS and the only supported language for iOS for a very long time. Nobody actually liked the language. There was no critical mass of people begging Apple to make their platforms work for Objective C, they wanted to try and lock developers into a skillset that didn't transfer.

Comment Re:500,000 job openings (Score 1) 196

I was just on the market (new job started Monday). I told every company who asked me I was looking for 180+. I ended up with offers coming on over that. So it isn't the money. And while I'm not in my 50s, many of my new coworkers are. SO it isn't the age. Right now in this market if you can't find a job programming, PEBKAC.

Comment Re: Better to spend on education than salaries (Score 3, Interesting) 196

No there aren't. Not unless you're counting the retired by choice. I just went through a job search. I had more companies begging to interview me than I could reasonably handle. Salaries for experienced devs are hitting the 200K/yr range because there aren't enough of them.

What there are is way too many intro level people who take a bootcap or make a website or two and call themselves programmers, making it hard to find quality to fill low level jobs. But there aren't anywhere near enough seniors on the market at the moment.

Comment Re:What about Scheme? (Score 1, Interesting) 205

No. But in reality nothing other than C, C++, C#, Java, Javascript, Perl, PHP, Python, Objective C, and Swift are. You can find one or two instances of something else, but basically it means the lead programmer had a hardon for the language- everything else combines makes up about 1-2% of all programs written. And really the last 2 in the above list exist only because Apple decided they wanted to try for developer lockin.

Comment Re:Welcome Back to DrudgeDot! (Score 1) 408

Except we don't. There is no replacement in the middle range (longer than suburb to city, but shorter than 800-1000 miles). Planes are much more expensive, much more polluting, much less pleasant. Self driving cars are just inefficient at that distance due to fuel use and the amount of traffic they'd cause. Hyperloop isn't proven to work yet, and may end up being far more expensive to maintain- it may be the answer in 20 years, but it isn't ready.

Or to take an idea from programming "The perfect is the enemy of the good". It you keep waiting for the next "perfect" solution, you'll never have anything. Better to build something good enough now, and consider building the next best thing when its ready.

Comment Re:There will be no train (Score 1) 408

It sure looks like it is to me. It may be the hyperloop some day, but that isn't a proven technology. It isn't self driving cars- those will exist for short distance travel, but aren't efficient in energy or traffic flow for medium distances. Right now there is no better solution, and nothing realistically likely to come into being this decade.

Comment Re:Welcome Back to DrudgeDot! (Score 1) 408

There's an old Chinese saying- "The best time to plant a tree was 100 years ago. The second best time is today." It isn't going to get any cheaper. If it provides value, lets do it now before its even more expensive.

And guess what- people said the same shit in the 60s about it being too expensive. But the country would be far less successful if we hadn't done it anyway. Same thing here.

Comment Re:Projections are always horseshit (Score 2) 408

Pretty much no construction project, public or private, is done with fixed price bidding. Its done with costs+ bidding. No construction company in the world would touch a contract where they're on the hook for the overruns. And no insurance company would ever issue such insurance, for any cost.

I mean really- would you accept a software project where you're told when it has to be done, all the features in it with no changes, a fixed budget, and if it goes over you have to pay everything? Nobody would agree to that.

Comment Re:There will be no train (Score 4, Insightful) 408

Now add in 90 minutes at the airport before and after which don't exist on trains. Now add in the extra pollution and carbon usage of the planes. Now add in lower prices because rail is cheaper to run and uses less gas. Now add in the lower congestion at airports because some percentage is now using rail. You end up with a trip that's cheaper, barely if at all longer, more comfortable, less polluting, and improves things for everyone else too. I'm very glad to have voted for it.

Comment Re:There will be no train (Score 5, Informative) 408

YOu need to get out of the US. Throughout Europe they use trains. They go 200 miles per hour. They're more comfortable than a plane (more leg room, dining cars, etc), cheaper to operate, and when you count the time it takes to get through security faster. Also far more likely to be on time. The only way planes win is if the trip is at least 800 miles so the speed difference beats the amount of time wasted at an airport. Anything else, take a train. Literally nobody in Europe or Asia prefers planes for medium distance travel.

Except in America of course where we're decades behind on rail technology and have trains limited to 50-60 mph. Its about time we catch up with the rest of the world.

Slashdot Top Deals

You need tender loving care once a week - so that I can slap you into shape. - Ellyn Mustard