Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:seriously? (Score 1) 236

Wow, you have a warped view of reality if you think today's Democrats are the same as those. The white mobs were conservative, not progressive. They were holding onto an old way of doing things. One that discriminated against blacks. That's pretty much textbook conservative, but go ahead and put your head in the sand.

Comment Re:Ten years too late... (Score 1) 45

OK, if nobody would hire you for "white box", why couldn't you continue "black box" testing with responsible disclosure. There is a lot of money in that.
I was confused because you indicated an inability to break into the industry and assume you misspoke trying to indicate what you where doing was unsanctioned and not necessarily legal.

Comment Re:seriously? (Score 1) 236

Like, for example, when people propose cutting public funding for education, healthcare, welfare, abortion, and all that

or you propose doing away with corporate welfare, rural subsidies, mortgage deductions, etc...

Here are the examples you asked for: http://www.ebony.com/black-his...
Heck, you should even count the US Civil War.

Note the lack of official punishment for any of these acts. They were tacitly condoned. Even the Civil War instigators were pardoned and allowed to reintegrate.

Comment Re:seriously? (Score 1) 236

Riots, looting, and violent political actions are overwhelmingly carried out by leftists (and I include fascists in that), not by conservatives or libertarians.

Well...who needs to riot or loot when you can twist the laws to do your bidding. As conservatives become unable to do so, you'll see much more rioting, looting,and violence; rest assured.

Comment Re:yeah (Score 1) 236

I remember you preaching in another thread. Do you follow the bible and kill unbelievers?

"If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you ... Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die." -- Dt.13:6-10

Comment Writing, technical and otherwise (Score 1) 380

Wow, you wrote that entire rant over a single letter. That's pathetic.

Language is an art, like painting. Technical language is an art where miscommunication leads to real world problems, and where evidence of lack of expertise leads to well justified lack of confidence up front.

With language, as with painting, you can paint like a master, or you can finger-paint like an addled child.

Which do you think will carry you further in life and in your career? Which do you think will result in more actual pathos?

Comment structs and fundamental OO (Score 2) 316

Just having higher-order functions doesn't make a language a functional language any more than having structs makes C an object-oriented language.

Structs do, however, make the critical aspects of an object oriented approach practical in c. They can carry data, function pointers, etc., and they can be passed around.

I've been writing my c code like that since the 1980's. There are significant benefits.

Comment Hard stuff is, in fact, hard (Score 4, Interesting) 316

I would add to this that reducing the complexity by turning everything into separate functions tends to also increase what I call "opacity by non-locality."

Not only are some things hard, some things benefit from having the logic right there in front of your face; not in a header, not in some function elsewhere, not in a library.

Benefits in both comprehension, and so ease of construction, but also in execution time and smaller executables depending on just how smart the language is in constructing its own executables.

Comment function dictionaries in Python (Score 1) 316

So, for example, by storing functions as values in a dict you can build complex structures of execution without using any conditional codes .

This is the core mechanism of my text markup language. Once the specific built-in tokens are parsed out, they are immediately accessed via the language's function dictionary. This approach is quick, ultimately low-complexity, trivially extensible, and highly maintainable.

Comment Fluid type manipulation with unions (Score 2) 316

Would you consider unions in c a "means to circumvent the type system" as compared to a language with strong up-front typing?

Unions are certainly a very powerful, useful, and concise tool for manipulating data across type boundaries. If you don't have them, in trying to accomplish similar tasks as those unions make easy, in many languages you're going to be a lot more verbose, and likely a lot less efficient, than if you do.

I am assuming competence. Strong typing is a safety net. The need for such a thing varies with one's skill set. The fewer the participants, the more likely it is that the skill sets can be arranged to be similar. With larger teams, the need for safety nets almost always increases.

Slashdot Top Deals

The power to destroy a planet is insignificant when compared to the power of the Force. - Darth Vader