3 ms·

Thanks. >(More on that here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18699718 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18699718) >BTW, there's a wonderful book calle

by vram22 8y ago

Thanks. >(More on that here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18699718 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18699718) >BTW, there's a wonderful book called “Exercises in Programming Style” (a review here: https://henrikwarne.com/2018/03/13/exercises-in-programming-... https://henrikwarne.com/2018/03/13/exercises-in-programming-...) that illustrates many different solutions to that problem (though as it happens it does not include Knuth's WEB program or McIllroy's Unix pipeline). I'm the same person who referred to my post with two solutions (in Python and shell) in that thread, here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18699656 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18699656 in reply to which, Henrik Warne talked about the book you mention above.

svat 8y ago
Ah, good luck. Please consider all the viewpoints when linking to that blog post; else we may keep having the same conversation every time. :-)
- vram22 8y ago
  >Please consider all the viewpoints when linking to that blog post; It should have been obvious to you, but maybe it wasn't: nobody always considers all viewpoints when making a comment, otherwise it would become a big essay. This is not a college debating forum. There is such a thing as "caveat lector", you know: https://www.google.co.in/search?q=caveat+lector https://www.google.co.in/search?q=caveat+lector >else we may keep having the same conversation every time. No, I'm quite sure we won't be. Nothing to gain :)
  - svat 8y ago
    Let me put it this way: the last time the link was posted, I pointed out many serious problems with the impression it gives. Now, if the same link is posted again with no disclaimer, then either: 1. You don't think the mentioned problems are serious, or 2. You agree there are serious problems but don't care and will just post it anyway. Not sure which one it is, but it doesn't cost much to add a simple disclaimer (or at least link to the original articles). Else as long as I have the energy (and notice it) I'll keep trying to correct the misunderstandings it's likely to lead to.

by vram22 8y ago

svat 8y ago

Ah, good luck. Please consider all the viewpoints when linking to that blog post; else we may keep having the same conversation every time. :-)

vram22 8y ago
>Please consider all the viewpoints when linking to that blog post; It should have been obvious to you, but maybe it wasn't: nobody always considers all viewpoints when making a comment, otherwise it would become a big essay. This is not a college debating forum. There is such a thing as "caveat lector", you know: https://www.google.co.in/search?q=caveat+lector https://www.google.co.in/search?q=caveat+lector >else we may keep having the same conversation every time. No, I'm quite sure we won't be. Nothing to gain :)
- svat 8y ago
  Let me put it this way: the last time the link was posted, I pointed out many serious problems with the impression it gives. Now, if the same link is posted again with no disclaimer, then either: 1. You don't think the mentioned problems are serious, or 2. You agree there are serious problems but don't care and will just post it anyway. Not sure which one it is, but it doesn't cost much to add a simple disclaimer (or at least link to the original articles). Else as long as I have the energy (and notice it) I'll keep trying to correct the misunderstandings it's likely to lead to.