3 ms·
Sounds like you have had a bad day, so I won't hold this too much against you. I suggest you not take all of this so personally. Have you read the lecture tha
by chill1 14y ago
Sounds like you have had a bad day, so I won't hold this too much against you.
I suggest you not take all of this so personally.
Have you read the lecture that okal posted the link to? It's from the early 1970's and speaks to the early days of when abstractions were first being implemented for computers in general. Perhaps it is you who does not understand what abstraction means.
- ulisesrmzroche 14y agoIt's not that I had a bad day, is that you used the age-old "REAL PROGRAMMER" argument, which is and remains, annoying since the 70's. Me? I write in machine code – in 'raw, unadorned, inscrutable hexadecimal numbers. Directly. http://www.ee.ryerson.ca/~elf/hack/realmen.html http://www.ee.ryerson.ca/~elf/hack/realmen.html
- chill1 14y agoI was not saying there is such a thing as a "real programmer." I am not sure where you're getting that from. I was merely attempting to spur some debate surrounding the recent trends towards very superficial "innovations" being put forth by many on Hacker News. I am not saying I have the answers to any of these questions. And, I don't think I am better than anyone for thinking a particular way. I just want to learn and try to understand the world around me. That's it.
- gems 14y agoWhat makes you think you can't be truly innovative by using somebody else's construction? There are new things to be done by building off of somebody else's work or by starting from the ground up. If you attempt the latter, you can almost be sure that your work will be less fruitful, unless you have some truly unique perspective.