Addendum: High schools also used to teach typing (on typewriters). Now that keyboards are ubiquitous, typing classes have inexplicably been dropped. Go figure.
766 karma · joined December 13, 2013
For those entering CS, this is probably true. But it's also probably true that that's because of the students' own initiative to investigate a topic that interests them.
I think high schools have gone the opposite direction. In the 80s, most high schools had some sort of computer class (often taught on TRS-80s or C-64s). These were introductions to programming taught in Basic.
Nowadays, most high schools still have a computer class. But now its Word, Powerpoint, Excel, and build a (static) web page. (There are, of course, some high schools with much better programs.)
I was making the very opposite point. I think Java programmers tend to underestimate the circles where it is not used. In particular, it seems that those who would not describe themselves as professional programmers but who nevertheless need to program tend to not use Java. And it's not all Python/Perl/Basic/Tcl/Bash; C++ (and C) are also widely used.
Or Python+.
Interesting all the comparisons to Java, with me coming from an environment where Java is never used, never considered, largely never thought about. If Java is mentioned at all, it's usually something like "my kid took a programming class in college, and they used Java, why would they use something like that?". I suppose Cobol was like that: widely used, very widely used, but not used at all in many circles.
Is there any nice bundle of everything you need for ipython, for the Mac, that's both easy to install and uninstall?
A minor correction: the explanation for this heuristic was added later. (I first opened this in a tab, and then didn't read the tab till much later. I also wondered about the heuristic and didn't think to hit reload till I saw your reply.)
But you're right, there is certainly nothing ungenerous from Norvig here. Quite the opposite.
> though the study’s findings fit other recent indicators pointing to the app’s strength
And
> “Snapchat is really on the rise right now,” she says. “It’s been on our radar for some time, but we were pretty impressed with the number.”
Because there's a cycle. TV reflects reality, but it also shapes reality. It shapes us.
> the evidence was [...] unashamedly destroyed
And without protest. I believe TV has made our society comfortable with torture, and thus we allow it to happen.
In college one year, I worked 10 hours a week in a semiconductor testing facility. I plugged a chip into the tester, pushed the button, took the part out and penciled the two-letter code returned by the tester. Then I took the next chip, plugged it into the tester, ....
It did pay $13.xy/hr in the 80s, which was why I put up with it.
EDIT: The article speculates a cover-up. I'm speculating a make-this-messy-problem-go-away action, perhaps by someone who'd have to deal with the mess as opposed to someone who'd be embarrassed by it. On the other hand, I'm not denying that it's a cover-up.
There were reports of bad behavior from LG w.r.t smart TVs [1].
[1] http://arstechnica.com/security/2013/11/smart-tv-from-lg-pho...
(And I wasn't commenting on Black Swan, just on the concept of not finishing a book. I'm unfamiliar with Black Swan.)
Do they still have tramp steamers?
I'm not only willing, I'm eager to give up on a book I don't either enjoy or find interesting. But I know a surprising number of people who force themselves to finish any book that they start.
In any case, nothing looks odd with kerning on Mac/Safari or Firefox.
Independence. When you upgrade to RH7, you don't need to worry if all your scripts will run with Python 2.7, they'll still point to your own 2.6. You can decide to upgrade to 2.7 (or not) on your own time. You can do it before or after your migration to RH7; they're independent decisions. Even ignoring Python3, Python occasionally breaks backwards compatibility (the deprecate, warnings, then errors dance). It's nice to control your own situation.
But our programs are internal-use only. So we don't have the same concerns with security updates, ease of deployment to customers, etc., that you may face.
This is why it's important for its removal from soap to be public policy. We only benefit when we all stop using it. If I stop using it, but everyone else continues, I gain nothing (excluding reasons 3 and 4). So I have no individual motivation to stop.
(I hope it's obvious that I intend "I" in some sort of generic sense in the above.)
Also interesting that so many of these "gizmos" are more-or-less current today. We still use most of this stuff.
If Python were 10x slower than it is, I'd use Perl. When I started using Python for real (2004), I'd have stuck with Perl if Python had been 2x slower. (Note that I very much dislike Perl, and thought of Python as a nicer Perl when I first learned it.) I care about speed, and I also care about convenience. Python has a very nice balance of the two for me.
On the other hand, I only use threads in one script that I've ever written (and the GIL isn't a problem with it). So I just don't care about the GIL.
(Edit: re-worded second paragraph)
I just submitted a question. Under the entry in new is this text:
1 point by dded 0 minutes ago | discuss | edit | delete
1 point by dded 0 minutes ago | delete | edit | discuss