On 2010-10-28 15:43, Patrick Elliott wrote:
> Man it would have been annoying
> otherwise, but, not as frustrating as the, "Dude, since you are looking
> for this, you must already understand everything I am telling you, even
> though I really don't clearly describe what is going on.", mentality you
> get from some articles. lol

It's because the articles don't go over stuff that was already in an 
article back in the '80s.  You're assumed to have had a subscription 
since then and the ability to look up (if you haven't already memorised) 
any arbitrary bit of information that's a prerequisite for a /current/ 
article.

That is to say, "you should have already learned the fundamentals of 
this, here's the next step you can take".

Ditto all the 3D libraries and stuff.  Either you already know all the 
math behind it, or you don't, but either way, why should they waste 
valuable magazine ad-space on material that's covered in your college 
compsci course (I am supposing, here...I would have taken some 
programming class or another when I went to NIU but they all had 50 math 
prereqs...even for the BASIC 101 where the final exam code was 10 print 
"hello world" 20 end.  ugh)?

-- 
Tim Cook

Post a reply to this message