4 ms·

A mindless keyboard stomper is trying to say something about a "reality". Funny. Go, solve your "2+2" problems. Hope you have a high enough character-per-secon

by sklogic 10y ago

A mindless keyboard stomper is trying to say something about a "reality". Funny. Go, solve your "2+2" problems. Hope you have a high enough character-per-second typing rate for this.

Clubber 10y ago
Let it go, you're wrong. It's obvious that you know you're wrong, otherwise you would argue your position rather than throwing personal insults and a hissy fit. Pseudocode is not code. Flowcharts are not pseudocode. You also didn't describe your stack. I just see some fresh meat who desperately wants people to take him seriously, but he has a hard time with it because he's kinda childish, very defensive, and can't argue his point. Anyway, this discussion is counterproductive, so I'm going to stop reading after this one.
- sklogic 10y ago
  > Pseudocode is not code. Flowcharts are not pseudocode. Pseudocode is code, no matter what uneducated pitiful code monkeys would say about it. Take any textbook on algorithms, and they would be most likely written in pseudocode. Also, in your shameful incompetence you apparently ignored (more than once) my reference to DSLs, which are very closely related to the notion of pseudocode. But, since you know nothing about programming even this was cryptic for you. > You also didn't describe your stack. I already told you that I'm not going to even answer a question worded in such a disgusting hipstor argot. I told you everything that is relevant. This idiotic "stack" of yours does not matter. I worked for some blue chips, used a very wide variety of technologies, for domains ranging from hardware design and verification to CADs, database engines and compilers, and everyone I worked with did more or less the same - used either a whiteboard or paper most of the time, with very little time on actual coding / designing / soldering / prototyping / whatever.

4 ms·

A mindless keyboard stomper is trying to say something about a "reality". Funny. Go, solve your "2+2" problems. Hope you have a high enough character-per-secon

by sklogic 10y ago

A mindless keyboard stomper is trying to say something about a "reality". Funny. Go, solve your "2+2" problems. Hope you have a high enough character-per-second typing rate for this.

Clubber 10y ago
Let it go, you're wrong. It's obvious that you know you're wrong, otherwise you would argue your position rather than throwing personal insults and a hissy fit. Pseudocode is not code. Flowcharts are not pseudocode. You also didn't describe your stack. I just see some fresh meat who desperately wants people to take him seriously, but he has a hard time with it because he's kinda childish, very defensive, and can't argue his point. Anyway, this discussion is counterproductive, so I'm going to stop reading after this one.
- sklogic 10y ago
  > Pseudocode is not code. Flowcharts are not pseudocode. Pseudocode is code, no matter what uneducated pitiful code monkeys would say about it. Take any textbook on algorithms, and they would be most likely written in pseudocode. Also, in your shameful incompetence you apparently ignored (more than once) my reference to DSLs, which are very closely related to the notion of pseudocode. But, since you know nothing about programming even this was cryptic for you. > You also didn't describe your stack. I already told you that I'm not going to even answer a question worded in such a disgusting hipstor argot. I told you everything that is relevant. This idiotic "stack" of yours does not matter. I worked for some blue chips, used a very wide variety of technologies, for domains ranging from hardware design and verification to CADs, database engines and compilers, and everyone I worked with did more or less the same - used either a whiteboard or paper most of the time, with very little time on actual coding / designing / soldering / prototyping / whatever.