|
I'm sure he is a Apple fanboy...
|
|
|
|
|
And does not like other people to have opinions different from himself, but does not want anybody to know he is that much of a bigot.
|
|
|
|
|
The issue you have is with DRM, and that is a non issue now (maybe because I only have a handful of DRM protected AAC files and I don't listen to them often ( heck I don't remember which one they are).
iTunes work well, much better than Windows Media something that f*cks up my collection (well, not really, but importing the tracks into it just makes a mess of classification and does not "load" all tracks, or takes a hell of a long time to do it )
Watched code never compiles.
|
|
|
|
|
I use WMP for playing songs/movies, and that is it. I know about WMP screwing up customization of tags. It also seems to have problems some times keeping soundtracks and pictures in track. Not a fan of WMP, and would like something different, but just have not gone to the trouble of figuring out what to replace it with.
|
|
|
|
|
It was not so much the DRM, as the problems a friend of mine had with iTunes when she changed computers. Has a massive collection, and the export and import suck. I would have avoided iTunes for DRM also, but that is not what really pissed me off.
|
|
|
|
|
Mine is empty, so I don't care! 
Note that I do own an iPhone, but I refuse to install this iTunes crap onto my PC. So far I've been using the Capriccio app, and I just ftp my music onto it using Beyond Compare (marvelous synching tool!).
Wout
|
|
|
|
|
|
The hole idea of juries for civil lawsuits in my mind is crazy anyway. The reason for a Jury is to protect the people from the government. This is two independent organizations. Where there should always be juries is cases between individuals and the government. Also, presedence should be used in awarding damages. Why should one person get millions for a case almost identical to another case where there is almost no award. When i was on a jury I was amazed at how stupid some of the people could be. The system is out of control.
|
|
|
|
|
The microblogging company joins the Linux Foundation just days after imposing tighter restrictions on its APIs. [ITworld]
|
|
|
|
|
That's what happens to any company once you have two or more employees. The left hand doesn't know what the right one is doing. 
Chris Meech
I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar]
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. [Yogi Berra]
posting about Crystal Reports here is like discussing gay marriage on a catholic church’s website.[Nishant Sivakumar]
|
|
|
|
|
We need something to bridge the gap between the huge population of OO programmers, and the growing need for functional programmers. I’ve seen nothing else that fills this need so well. Here's a review of Brian Marick's new book and why it's important.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think using a Lisp - like language (Clojure) is the best way to make Java and C# programmers feel at home with functional programming
|
|
|
|
|
For a Java or C# programmer, functional programming would take away the imperative style, such as long sequence of commands and assignment. It will take some adjustment to use the language.
|
|
|
|
|
|
_beauw_ wrote: Object-oriented programming is eliminated entirely from the introductory curriculum
Oh good grief. OOP and FP are complementary - there are appropriate uses of each, and lots of inappropriate uses. I couldn't imagine writing an entire application in an FP language, but I can certainly see the benefits of writing pieces of it in FP.
Unfortunately there is always a trend to see one thing as completely better than the other rather than simply better at addressing needs in a specific area.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
|
OOP is a layer you can put on top of functional programming, too; add encapsulation, inheritance, and polymorphism to a functional language, and you've added OO features.
What constitutes OOP is actually well-defined, but people tend to think in a procedural manner (and produce code that mirrors their thinking).
|
|
|
|
|
jesarg wrote: OOP is a layer you can put on top of functional programming, too;
I struggle with that, because for some indefensible reason, I feel that strays from pure FP. Thoughts?
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: because for some indefensible reason, I feel that strays from pure FP.
Don't know about purity, but OOP was really invented with imperative programming in mind. Objects are all about state and FP is largely about stateless programming.
|
|
|
|
|
|
_beauw_ wrote: Many of the issues that lead to Gang-of-Four-style "design patterns" supposedly just disappear, for example.
That's a really good point. Hadn't realized that before. Of course, you know what this begs? A "Design Patterns for FP" book! 
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
That sounds more like just one person at MIT that doesn't like OO - (and both statements he makes about it are, in fact, incorrect)
|
|
|
|
|
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: I don't think using a Lisp - like language (Clojure) is the best way to make Java and C# programmers feel at home with functional programming
I was surprised by this too. Why not use OCaml or F#? Oh well.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Emphasizing the differences and avoiding readers creating false cognates by picking a totally foreign syntax?
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
If someone who really understands functional programming and how an object oriented programmer thinks would write an article it would be great.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
