163 karma · joined June 12, 2012
That is, given your simple rings (the integers) and finite rings (modulo n), you get fields by introducing just division (integers -> rationals; mod-n -> mod-p for prime p).
The official stance on that issue is: yeah, but it's better than the hassle of supporting generics (compiler effort, object code size/slowness, and excessive high-level abstraction (a bad thing in the Go world).
I have a foot on both sides: I miss generics when I'm writing one-off low-scalability code, but it's nice to have the speed of low-level Go code, and perversely fun to actually spend some of my coding time writing all those low-level sorting and array-building routines that are the meat of programmer interviews.
Now, when a candidate asks "When will I need to write a method to sort the keys of a map?", I can answer "Every time you use a map[string]T for a novel T!"
I hate novel T now. (<-- This is also a design feature of Go, the passive pressure to not use large hierarchical types, and try to do your work with just maps and slices of primitives)
Obviously, the author chose a more wieldly title, but a far less correct wrong.
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1532461/stringbuilder-vs-...
Similar:
http://hackerne.ws/item?id=4062216 " Eulerian Video Magnification for Revealing Subtle Changes in the World (mit.edu) 555 points by clockwork_189 57 days ago | comments "
(But yes, to your point, Forbes is not a "journalism" site.)
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts,
by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right
to their respective Writings and Discoveries.In Washington State, an AA is 4 semesters * $1500 = $6000, completed part-time by people have jobs at Amazon.
The Amazon hate on this issue is bizarre.