lqdshadow

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't it faster to use pointers to increment through the array rather than index the array on each successive char? If it is a particularly large string, the array-copy version of the algorithm would be slower. I have also learned to be concerned about page boundaries. Do modern compilers recognize the idiom and optimize this situation?

It's strange, but a simple text file always served my needs for TODO lists, even including notes and other information related to the TODOs. It is not pretty, but I do not have trouble finding my TODOs amidst the rest of the noise, since I am consistent with my left-side "start of a TODO line" and "start of a subTODO" symbols. Sometimes I think that having a neat, pretty TODO list program would be nice, but I learned that I find my text files much more portable (Notes on iPhone, a txt on Mac, txt in linux, txt on my Windows desktop).

I wonder if attention plays a part. I have noticed that people can interpret what I say if I start with a grunt or other vocal sound, but if I start off with the thing I want to say immediately, I have to start over. I realize that it can be explained by this "human brain interprets your two syllables" idea, but if a mere grunt also does the trick, this suggests to me that attention plays at least as much an important part.

If the general internet public liked amihotornot.com, they will probably like this site.

On the other hand, I think its only flaws are the absence of pictures and easy buttons and the login requirement. Fewer people want to take the time to actually type something out, and it is as likely they have already posted their opinion of someone in twitter if they are going to type it at all. With the login requirement, it is a lot less accessible for the critic and the critiqued.

The question is... How many others besides me searched the online reverse lookup databases to find the phrase? and did anyone succeed?

So boiled down to its fundamentals, lucky people are really those who open more doors to opportunities, notice the opportunities, and then take advantage of the opportunities. By increasing the possibilities, the probability rises that you will find good opportunities. To increase your ability to recognize opportunities rather than doubt and ignore them, you must be willing to fail many times in order to succeed the really good times. This is where the optimism and self-confidence come into play.

We see this same philosophy preached in other threads here with regard to successful businesses.

Is there a good alternative to PayPal? This tends to be one of the little issues I am concerned about when I think of starting my own online small business or am interested in donations for my free projects.

Or "vim". "vi" is the editor wars' straw man. Never heard of mg.

They left enough of a mark with their motion that you readily brought up names and thought of actions. Fame is enough reward for some people, as is power and money. I did not exclude the possibility of punishments.

The point is that, right or wrong, they made decisions. They lived. How many of us can say that we took a chance and really felt alive with that big decision? Maybe it is about starting a war with your neighboring country; maybe it is as thrilling as asking your sweetheart to marry you. The act of making the decision breathes life into you. And sure, maybe it is the wrong thing to do, but how do you measure that in good time before making your decision?

The act of making the decision is what separates leaders and followers.

Right or wrong, NOT acting is often a far worse sin. Do you live your life in hesitation, questioning your every move? The silver lining is that everyone is as equally wrong as you. The world rewards those who cause motion, who act. Energy excites.

It is also interesting to consider that you might be wrong about how wrong somebody is. What if you are both right, that you have not considered their issue in a context they perceive?

We perfectionists strive to be right and worry too much about being wrong. How complicated we make our lives.

I am confused by this assertion. I always thought the Who/What/When/Where were more useful, in general, than the Why. Why is tagged with bias; you are receiving somebody's perspective and interpretation of an event, especially as you look further from the source. Who/What/When/Where gives you the facts.