http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2010/11/16/c-students-more-succ...
http://blog.pdus2go.com/special-edition/why-a-students-dont-...
186 karma · joined January 14, 2012
http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2010/11/16/c-students-more-succ...
http://blog.pdus2go.com/special-edition/why-a-students-dont-...
Can you automatically compute pixels or colors with CSS based on values of other elements in CSS? Or combined with values coming from a user's preferences?
Seemingly trivial logic can reduce presentation complexity enormously. With a powerful programming language you have a better grip over the complexity than you do with CSS.
Because they are not powerful enough.
An alternative would be to use a more powerful language that would let you express the kinds of things you often need with CSS as macros and have no CSS at all.
Why are two presentation frameworks used with a language called Javascript bolted on top, rather than a powerful programming language?
That's a special case of a more general solution. The best way to solve a problem is to not have to solve it.
You improve what you measure. Is points what you want to measure?
One of the most valuable opportunities with mobile is that current technologies can become irrelevant. A big success for L4 is that it made it into mobile phones.
The status quo of kernels is reminiscent of the status quo of programming languages in the 90s. Where people programmed in faster, static languages and looked down on dynamic ones. I wonder what we will think of monolithic kernels in 50 years from now.
EDIT: A binary injecting itself with multiple code (linkables) might not be bad. It's much like what a macro does to a program. You turn one flag on and the source gets populated with the appropriate code.
It is lack of a dynamic way of injecting it that can bite you. The inability to easily change what was injected.
http://ertos.nicta.com.au/research/l4/ http://ssrg.nicta.com.au/publications/papers/Heiser_08lca.sl...
What turned out to be the opposite of what you originally thought it would be?
On (2) MacKinnon suggested the successful creative individual had an ongoing belief in the worth of their creative efforts.
I don't claim these are the only two things to predict who will become a great programmer.
- They are naive and believe they can conquer the world - or are discouraged about their original inability and hide it.
- They share a sense of destiny in what they do. They can't imagine a world where they wouldn't be working any more in their medium.
So if you wanted to predict who will become a great programmer you could look for naivety and commitment. You could look for people who can't tell what they've accomplished. And which continue to obliviously work on (naively ambitious) things only because noone was around to stop them.
You do have some sense of what you are about to write. But it's not that clear. You are not exactly sure what the program will turn out to be until you sit down to start writing. Like writing, rampant thoughts pull you in multiple directions until one seduces you into following it.
It's surprising how seemingly irrelevant factors affect the program. A recent conversation with a non-programmer, a change in the weather, where you are sitting, or music are enough to set you off in a different direction. If a sense of design isn't precisely what shapes a program, a programmer would do well to pretend that it is.
The counterpoint to the binary search analogy is that there are infinite ways to avoid writing a program that needs a binary search and write a different program instead.
Why can't get row and span work without a container?
Twitter Bootstrap has been a disaster for me: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4651506
The center tag is the only tag that still centers correctly.