bdfh42

Ha ha ha ha ha

3:0 to Physicists I think

Short answer no - programming would be just a little bit more difficult. Calculating an index can often be simplified if zero is not just a valid value but the first element in an array or character in a string or what have you.

I base this on the active experience of having worked (over the years) with 1 based index languages and (even) languages (VB Classic) where you could set the lower as well as upper bounds of an array. Zero based arrays (and such) are generally just that bit easier to work with.

I'm not totally convinced but it could work very well in a large format mobile context.

Listening to the radio - that's what cars are for.

Mind (in this context) I have the misfortune to live in the UK where music radio stations seem to think that their output should be constant banal chatter from a "DJ" with just the occasional tune slung in when they run out of things to jabber about.

I am always glad when I visit the USA and can find so many music stations - ones that actually play music.

Cool idea (great demo of the Roslyn tech) but you need to be able to write "Space Invaders" for that true taste of nostalgia.

I wonder now if I should have a go at re-creating VB3 - now that was a brilliant introductory programming language/version - particularly as it could get real things done.

OK I agree, XSD was just a way for pedants to be a pain.

But, any form of structured communication that works for humans (and this is a mark-up language that is supposed to work in the human as well as machine spheres) has to include a degree of apparent redundancy that actually applies clarity - well at least avoids ambiguity.

My preference is always JSON but XML is cool when it flows and has available tools.

The whole point of having two sets of comparitors (=== and == in this instance) is that you can use the correct one for any given circumstance. Proscribing the use of one in favour of the other is just woolly thinking.

An attempt to improve the quality of technical search results by using the power of the "crowd". Looks like this is an "add on" to Google so there is no loss of "raw" search data - just hopefully, seeing the better (curated) results highlighted.

I wish them luck and will give it a try.

Stack Overflow is an amazingly useful programming resource - but - like most things has problems.

From my viewpoint, the main problem is the drive for "karma". You may visit an interesting question and you will often find that partial solutions (or solutions to a re-phrasing of the question [thats as kindly as I can put it])have a high score while the true and, more importantly complete, answer (probably written a few days after the original question was posed) has zero points.

There are also those who answer a factual question with an opinion - I am sure that Dante would have added another level in hell for just that sin should he have lived in the modern age.

Points are not everything but there is a tendency for the scoring system to mislead the seeker after a solution unless they are aware that all factual answers have value.

Most of this post is wrong to one degree or another.

Ignore it.

If your boss was fired for justifiable reasons then perhaps staying is an option. If it feels that his/her departure was for financial reasons or just plain whimsy then it is time to explore the other options - as fast as you like.

Which at least gives balance to how I feel about Kings (Kings like Saudi Kings in particular) and those who would criminalise anyone who does not believe in their daft religions.

Know them for what they are - no friends of democracy, freedom or human rights.

Don't you just love statements like "and canned and frozen fruit appeared to increase risk of death by 17% per portion" - I could be dead by nightfall.

I do look forward to a proper statistical analysis of these results rather than this tabloid nonsense. It will be interesting to see if there is actually any measurable impact above (say) just some fruit or vegetable intake per day.

Surely "style" is more than "use === not ==". That's a tip - and perhaps not worth a lot as a tip if there is not a full explanation to back it up. "Why not?" and "What's wrong with that?"

Does not style devolve from structure? Hmn - maybe Structure devolves from Style. Tricky - thus I think that without a "long form" explanation of what you are trying to achieve and thus how each "tip" fits into the objectives then the contribution is lessened.

The original objective was to write "better" programs in a new language - a very worthy objective but without analyzing what "better" means and how any component contributes to "better" then I am not clear how you have advanced things.

I laud your objectives - and was just wondering about (grin) the style.

Ok - but do you think that (continuing the example) the JavaScript entries do add up to something more than just what Lint says to do? Cos I can see it.

I do think there are benefits in more assistance for people with style and structure - I was just wondering if a longer format would suite the need better.

But you could reduce the JavaScript style guide entries to just "Use JSLint and do what it says".

Perhaps the others are more helpful or perhaps (more likely) other languages do not have Lint.

I am sure there is more to it but does not require lengthier posts - perhaps essays?

An interesting arena for a start-up with 60% funding ready and waiting.

If there were a robust peer reviewed research report that detailed cancer cures in the manner this post suggests to be true it would be world headline news.

Claiming that is is somehow suppressed because it is not possible to patent the idea is just like the huckster trying to sell you a car that runs on water - but the oil companies are trying to suppress it.

It was all downhill after ASCII took over from EBCDIC http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EBCDIC from our beloved IBM

There seems to be a danger of a recursive loop as well.

Pardon me for being prickly - but is this a blog post, a question or a call to arms?

Not sure this is the correct format for any of those options.

When a new developer takes issue with decisions and practices adopted by their predecessors I often worry (usually correctly) that they do not understand the system/process/objectives.

With enlightenment comes an understanding of the choices already made. There might still be a case for revision but any such revision is now more likely to pay dividends.

Big yawn maybe as I can't see tablets being used to create large complex docs. I know all the arguments about modern 64 bit processors making tablets the future computational device but that is not how people are using them now.

Anyone remember the little "Office" apps on Windows Mobile? Of course not but even us early mobile adopters who used and built apps for such devices did not use Office on them. Again the counter argument is going to be that using Office with the toothpick that you used to operate those devices was just silly but I am not at all sure that my fat finger makes it any more straightforward.

Technologies go around and around. This is just like storing my Sinclair Spectrum programs on a cassette recorder.

Good stuff!

Mostly misinformed rubbish - don't waste any time on this.