axod

49 ms·

481.
by axod 16y ago
We've been told for around 10 years now that we'll soon have 128 cores in our laptops. It hasn't happened yet.
482.
by axod 16y ago
Name some technological advance or achievement that has only been possible through the creation of a new programming language. edit: Thanks for the downmod to 0. It really does speak volumes.
483.
by axod 16y ago
No one has discriminated against anyone. If it was an advert for a nursery assistant which said "Do you love acting all mommy to your kids?" etc no one would care either.
484.
by axod 16y ago
It's just so tiring people being offended by this sort of thing. Also, TBH, I kinda find it offensive to suggest that the only reason I started programming was because I'm a male, and because there's apparently some 'male friendly culture'.
485.
by axod 16y ago
Yeah. Because womens brains are exactly identical to mens brains. Same with their bodies. In fact I can't tell men apart from women. They're biologically identical! Have you actually had any interactions with real women?
486.
by axod 16y ago
I think you missed the point. It's not that the fashion world is not welcoming of straight men, it's that most straight men don't care about being in the fashion world.
487.
by axod 16y ago
Are you going to make the fashion world more welcoming of straight males as well?
488.
by axod 16y ago
I'm a male. I don't give a flying fuck about 'culture'. There is no culture. It matters not a jot to me. It never has. Why should it??? I grew up hacking away on my own in my bedroom floor hunched in front of a PC making raycasting demos at
489.
by axod 16y ago
Yes I would.
490.
by axod 16y ago
I think the people getting caught up with the sensitivity... wouldn't be a great fit for being allowed on the internet. I guess we can all see now why most job postings have comments disabled.
491.
by axod 16y ago
No. It absolutely does not IMHO. Our work just isn't appealing to most women.
492.
by axod 16y ago
There's a spectrum from machine code up to high level languages. Pretty much all the points on that spectrum already have languages on them. We absolutely don't need any more languages. Languages aren't a problem that needs fixing. But they
493.
by axod 16y ago
Don't be ridiculous. 1. It's not ugly 2. It's how CPUs work 3. It's how most people think
494.
by axod 16y ago
JSP taglibs? wtf are you talking about. I'm in no way defending the idiocy of 'enterprise java'. and your other points don't really make any sense at all. There is no such thing as 'fozen solid code'. Unless you're interfacing to external l
495.
by axod 16y ago
It certainly sounds like it would have made more profit, but less likely of getting bought. Reddit was a fantastic idea to getting acquired.
496.
by axod 16y ago
Trying to make a programming language modeled on plain english instructions is a recipe for disaster. Perhaps that's why I find your example at the end pretty ugly code.
497.
by axod 16y ago
idk I think it can mean that they're egotistical, stuck in their ways, believe their way is the only way to do things etc. (For example 37 signals type blogs) It can also mean they'd rather write blogs than code. Obviously it depends, but I
498.
by axod 16y ago
The last item is especially weird. "Has heard of them but never got the time." "Maintains a blog in which personal insights and thoughts on programming are shared" Why do I care if someone writes a blog or not?
499.
by axod 16y ago
The easy way is to not use a stupid function like md5(?, true) which returns binary data, and include it without escaping in your SQL. It's really not rocket science.
500.
by axod 16y ago
You don't explain in detail why you decided to go back on your decision... It seems like the decision to go back to 'non-clean' was purely short term profit driven. Seems like given more time and effort, keeping it clean may well have paid
501.
by axod 16y ago
That's a fine answer, and some people may find that a helpful way to organize programs. However, for me, and the CPU, we treat code execution differently to data access.
502.
by axod 16y ago
That's not really true. Why would you need a getBar() method in Java? public class Foo int bar; public Foo(int initBar) { bar = initBar; } public static void main(String[] args) { System
503.
by axod 16y ago
Never heard of it.
504.
by axod 16y ago
... and people complain that Java is verbose???
505.
by axod 16y ago
Not really. "public static final" is not particularly verbose. It's a one time upfront cost which defines a few flags. It's error free, since a typo in any of those keywords will be picked up. It can also be automated easily etc. But Ruby u
506.
by axod 16y ago
Ah I didn't realize Ruby does not have the ability to access properties of an object. That seems like a pretty big disadvantage.
507.
by axod 16y ago
I haven't studied OOP extensively in a strict setting, but I would have said that in the OO world, a property is completely separate to a method. For example, class flower property color property numberOfPetals method pluckPetal()
508.
by axod 16y ago
Negligible if any. Buying an SSL certificate is more expensive than registering a domain. edit: It'd also be likely someone would startup some 'free/cheap' subdomain hosting for people who don't want to pay the $1000... eg myapp.free.com
509.
by axod 16y ago
> "Removing the difference between accessing an attribute (variable) and invoking a method is a solid OO principle. You, as a client of the API, should not care how obj.foo is implemented." I disagree. Code execution is not data access.
510.
by axod 16y ago
Having optional beauty isn't really any beauty at all though. I'm just more at home with exact, specific concise well structured syntax. I know it's an extremely unpopular opinion to hold, especially round these parts, but I don't see any b

More ›