That would explain all the kleenexes.
97 karma · joined April 9, 2010
That would explain all the kleenexes.
Or, you know, stuff like Marinol, which is apparently as effective without the harmful effects of smoking. Hell, even the DEA likes Marinol: http://www.justice.gov/dea/ongoing/marinol.html
I'm fully in favor of legalization. I don't think it should be predicated on bogus reasons.
I can't let this stand as a blanket defense of crappy languages. We have Lua. We have Python. We have Scheme. We have multiple other languages that can be used as a good way to access the goodies provided by your wonderful hand-crafted libraries regardless of what they do. There is no reason for you to invent your own language just so people will be able to use your library code from a REPL.
Sadly, back in the dark ages, this was not true. However, in the future, anyone who tries to defend the horrible design of a new language with "Think of it as a DSL" gets to debug a 1000 KLOC application written in ANS COBOL 1968, which is a DSL for fixed-field database munging.
This blog posts points out a list of specific gripes about the language: http://tjic.com/?p=10739 There is some real weirdness to this language.
The R Programming Language for Programmers: http://www.johndcook.com/R_language_for_programmers.html does a lot to ameliorate this, but the fact the weirdness is there at all makes a programmer a little uneasy.
It is different from sculpture in that the artist does not have a free hand, much like the video game creators don't have a free hand compared to novelists or even cinematographers (who are limited compare to novelists and painters but not as much). Limitations are the bane of choice, and choice is the fundamental aspect of art.
How certain are you of this? Would you be able to successfully defend every photograph or email you have ever produced against obscenity charges? I think, if it came down to it, the courts could find a hell of a lot of inadvertent pornographers out there.
Note I said 'could': Selective enforcement of over-broad laws is a boon and a horrible threat, because it implies everyone is guilty of something, so the government could pound anyone who bothers them if it chose to.
But how much harm could they do in trying? That is the question you should ask. Look up Anthony Comstock if you want an example.
Never heard of it.
Right. It's to emphasize the fact that not only were they morally corrupt and doing horrible things, they were incompetent to the extent they though they could shut him up with a measly 16 grand.
If he gets a book deal out of this he'll be laughing pretty damn hard at a bribe attempt that, really, isn't even a house payment.
Also, the compiler must quit on the first error: Continuing with the known-bad state is not only asking for trouble, it's inviting it in and setting up the guest room for it to stay a month.
We aren't on mainframes anymore. Getting an error message means you go back to the editor immediately, not in a week when your next time slot comes around.
(Common Lisp has mature FFI and wrappers around things like DBI and graphics libraries. Clojure gives you the JVM libraries for your sins, and I dare you to seriously argue that the JVM has no libraries to its name.)
Now, how about explaining this for those poor benighted souls who speak English?
Things are usually only 'ahead of their time' if you ignore a lot of the implementation and operational details. For example, Vannevar Bush's famous Memex, always cited as the important precursor to hypertext, was flatly unworkable: A desk-sized machine built around microfilm? It makes as much sense to talk about Jules Verne as the father of manned spaceflight because he thought of firing men from cannons.
My point is that being the first to an idea is rarely the important thing. Being first to a good, solid implementation is what counts.
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=...
This post is the standout:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=1147211...
But didn't Apple also ban writing apps in, say, Haskell and all other non-C-family languages that compile to machine code? Writing in a language like that is no more a "meta-platform" than Objective-C itself is.
That is certainly a popular notion. Funny how other good authors are also prolific authors.
Heresy in Mac-land. This is contrary to just about everything the Mac GUI has historically tried to support/enforce.
It lets you in regardless of the username/password combination. I just logged in with this:
username: you morons
password: this defeats the whole damn purpose
I wonder if any of this gets logged at their end.
http://cpedia.com/search?q=william+s+burroughs
Had they positioned this as an art project applying the cut-up technique to the Web as a whole, it would be seen as a real success.
cpedia itself speaks:
"Along with JG Ballard, Angela Carter and Anna Kavan, William S. Burroughs has probably done more to influence my writing, my reading, and my appreciation of literature than any other writer."
(No attribution in article. I like to think of this as the software's own appreciation showing through.)