I am a freelance web developer & generalist. Happy to work with Ruby/Rails/JavaScript/Python. I would also enjoy pairing on projects if you are a freelancer yourself.
Get in touch for a quick chat: matthieutc.com
396 karma · joined August 24, 2007
I am a freelance web developer & generalist. Happy to work with Ruby/Rails/JavaScript/Python. I would also enjoy pairing on projects if you are a freelancer yourself.
Get in touch for a quick chat: matthieutc.com
The extension does not work everywhere, but it works on wikipedia and articles from theatlantic.com if you want to try it out.
What do you think? Is this useful to you?
I always hated it when teachers would hold on to the solutions to the exercises in the textbook.
Also, in my experience, two developers working as a pair will have better work ethics and discipline than any of the two taken separately.
BTW, you're calling the one not typing the 'passive' one? That's the wrong attitude.
Although I'm wondering why companies even have a say in it. Isn't the aggregation involved fair use? If I start my own news aggregator do I have to ask publishing companies permission? I feel like I should be able to just aggregate them whether they like it or not.
I understand you want to emphasize business value and short-term returns but barring refactoring is taking it too far. Smart refactoring will pay off immediately by giving you faster turnaround for new features. And fast turnaround is a startup's edge.
I don't refactor for refactoring's sake but I do refactor every time I would benefit right away from the change. It also makes programming more interesting. Once lousy code is refactored, I can go back to solving the right problems and stop fighting with it.
I've heard this argument many times and I can't quite understand it. Even if the few supported operations like rename/pull up/inline/extract are only a subset of all possible refactorings, I still do these things multiple times an hour. I want them to be automated. I hate bloated IDEs just as much as the next guy, but I do miss automated refactorings when in vim or emacs.
* Structure your argument to fit the topic. There is very little chance that there are exactly 10 reasons for doing anything.
Good marketing event for sure.
Hm. To me that's pretty much all that matters. I want powerful features and a nice syntax.
> Python doesn't have lexical closures like Perl's
What does that mean? Doesn't Python have lexical closures?
And I am not submitting for the sake of submitting. I read the author's book on macroeconomics and got the link through his blog: this is not a random post. I also thought an article that sums up consensus among economists is relevant to a community of entrepreneurs.
sqrt(-1) = sqrt(e^Pi) = e^(Pi/2) = i
So the new concept was really a 2D plane for numbers, not a new definition for sqrt of negative integers.
Yes. And maps (e.g. :map <F12> :w<cr> to save with F12). And block mode (Ctrl-V) and text objects (e.g. ci" deletes the inside of parentheses and goes to insert mode) and a slew of others.
I find the idea that there are 100 vim commands every programmer should know a but ludicrous though.
<Alt> <.> brings out the last argument of the last command, and can be pressed multiple times.
<Alt> </> prints the contents of the cwd, or the directory from the path you're typing.
Also, as the article says, the initial impetus of connecting with friends of friends and old acquaintances from high school quickly wears off. Once that fun is gone, what is left is a broken and boring network that might not be so valuable to a business.
I would also add:
- The Little Schemer
- Linux in a Nutshell
- Unix power tools