 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp escreveu:
> Invisible <voi### [at] dev null> wrote:
>> AFAIK, when you install a C compiler, you don't get OpenGL bindings,
>
> It depends on the C compiler. Some come bundled with OpenGL libraries.
>
>> a parser library, 4 seperate multithreading tools, a set of container
>> libraries, graph theory libraries...
>
> C++ is a bit better in this regard. Just because of the C++ standard,
> compilers have to come with tons of libraries.
Why should a compiler project package together other project's
libraries, specially ones that are likely to be found on the host system?
The situation with Haskell is different: it doesn't come with "opengl
lib", it comes with a Haskell binding to opengl. C/C++ doesn't need
this, as it's perfectly fine calling the lib functions in the very same
syntax and calling conventions they were written in.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thx for the advise, I see I'm not alone in my POV (Point of View) and I
also see my common sesnse isn't far from the truth as I thought.
I thank everyone who cared on guiding me in this long Haskell road I
just started to crawl.
I have read in the Haskell site that the best way to learn Haskell is
from a book, so I've downloaded a couple (don't ask from where since
those are illegal ways, I have to, my salary is 180$us a month, I hope u
can understand if not well, I have no other choice) also Haskell98, the
most recent manual and other .pdf files and in other formats.
Also I've come aware of Leksah and how to COMPILE(darn) it. The screen
shots were from a Linux version (how convenient... for them! :D ).
I hope Haskell gets better soon, it has a SPECTACULAR FUTURE.
Well, I think I can raw my boat alone from here, again I thank you for
ur help. God bless you all.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Saul Luizaga" <sau### [at] netscapenet> wrote
> I have read in the Haskell site that the best way to learn Haskell is
> from a book, so I've downloaded a couple (don't ask from where since
> those are illegal ways,
[...]
>God bless you all.
To each his own, but no matter how many times I see or hear about the
apparently happy coexistence of blatantly conflicting ideologies within
people's minds, I cannot but grin.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
somebody wrote:
> To each his own, but no matter how many times I see or hear about the
> apparently happy coexistence of blatantly conflicting ideologies within
> people's minds, I cannot but grin.
To each his own, but no matter how many times I hear monotheists assume that
everyone referring to god must intend that monotheist's interpretation of
their own god's holy scriptures, I have to grimace.
Me, I think Pan and Loki would both be proud.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote in message
news:493343b7@news.povray.org...
> somebody wrote:
> > To each his own, but no matter how many times I see or hear about the
> > apparently happy coexistence of blatantly conflicting ideologies within
> > people's minds, I cannot but grin.
> To each his own, but no matter how many times I hear monotheists assume
that
> everyone referring to god must intend that monotheist's interpretation of
> their own god's holy scriptures, I have to grimace.
I've yet to see a polytheist (let's not split hairs with trinity, remnants
or elements of polytheism), and hardly a non-Christian for that matter,
utter the words "God bless you", so I tend to believe it's a comparatively
safe assumption. What is much less safe is to assume it's a monotheist doing
the aforementioned assuming.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
somebody wrote:
> "Saul Luizaga" <sau### [at] netscapenet> wrote
>
>> I have read in the Haskell site that the best way to learn Haskell is
>> from a book, so I've downloaded a couple (don't ask from where since
>> those are illegal ways,
>
> [...]
>
>> God bless you all.
>
> To each his own, but no matter how many times I see or hear about the
> apparently happy coexistence of blatantly conflicting ideologies within
> people's minds, I cannot but grin.
>
>
So u assume that If I belive in God (my conception is the maker of ALL
even your soul, I believe that He came to be with us a Jesus Christ) I'm
not Catholic anymore or any CHristian religion, I'm a spiritual
Christian) I'll not do wrong things? Well I have seen religious and
"better" Christian than me, act in the most hypocrite way possible to
their proxy, my fault is from need, this book wont be probably read by
anybody else in my whole Country and the BSA only make pay for software
licenses to institutions, Universities, companies and other entities
that can actually pay for it since they are making money our of it and
have enough, the BSA understands that a third world Country can't be
left out of modern technology coz would be even poorer and in a way of
helping ppl here they don't go house by house making an auditory of
software. I hope u understand why ppl in poor Countries need to pirate
software, and also against all odds ppl here also buy (legally) software
when is rare and they "don't have to".
Hence some software companies like Avast! and other give their
software free for home office. believe me I'd pay for software if I
could earn enough as some people actually do in my country although is
still rare.
I'm using utilities and other software to give support to PCs/Notebooks
as freeware as I can since they're are not only in many cases easy to
use and effective u don't need to download a crack/keygen that can
infect ur PC/Notebook with a lethal virus, or other inconvinients.
I'm not legal for these reasons but I feel no shame either, I hate MS
and I need the rest of the software.
I actually don't need/have to explain this to you but I do coz some ppl
here can't simply understand why oh why ppl pirate software since the
pirates actually bite the hand than gives them the bread.
Believe me, I have no conflict about it, but I know that I could do
better if I had more money. I'm working on getting my Eng. degree to
have more. Yeah I'M A PIRATE, u don't need to write to me at all.
Cheers.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Saul Luizaga wrote:
> Hence some software companies like Avast! and other give their
software
> free for home *use*.
I correct myself.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> better if I had more money. I'm working on getting my Eng. degree to have
> more.
Nah, just carry on stealing software, it's way easier than an Engineering
degree :-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Saul Luizaga" <sau### [at] netscapenet> wrote in message
news:4934e252@news.povray.org...
> somebody wrote:
> > "Saul Luizaga" <sau### [at] netscapenet> wrote
> >> I have read in the Haskell site that the best way to learn Haskell is
> >> from a book, so I've downloaded a couple (don't ask from where since
> >> those are illegal ways,
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >> God bless you all.
> > To each his own, but no matter how many times I see or hear about the
> > apparently happy coexistence of blatantly conflicting ideologies within
> > people's minds, I cannot but grin.
[...]
> Believe me, I have no conflict about it,
[...]
Yes, that's the part I said I found funny. And really, it's both unnecessary
and futile for you to try justify it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I know is unnecessary, I already wrote it, and I'm not just justifying
it but explaining it. I don't care it get justified I thought was
something I needed to write. I hope u never get to live in a 3rd world
country and live on a local salary to actually understand the why, u
don't care enough to imagine it and suffering it would be too much for u.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
>> better if I had more money. I'm working on getting my Eng. degree to
>> have more.
>
> Nah, just carry on stealing software, it's way easier than an
> Engineering degree :-)
Well if ppl in the USA don't mind well, ok, fine by me :)
Believe it or not ppl in here ger more and more conscious that they're
using pirated software. I'm hopping my Country gets to a 1st world like
EU or USA/Canada where we can live and buy as u do.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Saul Luizaga" <sau### [at] netscapenet> wrote
> I know is unnecessary, I already wrote it, and I'm not just justifying
> it but explaining it. I don't care it get justified I thought was
> something I needed to write. I hope u never get to live in a 3rd world
> country and live on a local salary to actually understand the why, u
> don't care enough to imagine it and suffering it would be too much for u.
Truth be told, I really cannot imagine a circumstance under which not
pirating Haskell books would cause suffering for me, but I'm ready to take
your word for it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
somebody wrote:
> "Saul Luizaga" <sau### [at] netscapenet> wrote
>
> Truth be told, I really cannot imagine a circumstance under which not
> pirating Haskell books would cause suffering for me, but I'm ready to take
> your word for it.
I once upon a time made a google search about PC tech jobs, I found an
offer in the UK that payed 200 Pounds a day for it, but the tech would
be available on call 24/7. For me wasn't a big deal for the amount of
money. Here in Bolivia i make 180 US$ a month which most of it if for
services and food, so u can see the differences, buying a PC is a
sacrifice, paying for software would be like buying another 2 PCs.
As a funny fact: the first time I saw a 'COMPUTER SHOPPER' magazine I
was surprised that they offered software for a price with a new PC since
here was always free for a new PC. U can buy very expensive programs
like AutoCAD 2008 for about 2 US$ if the program is 1 DVD, 1.5 US$ if
it's 1 CD, and so on. Now with torrents has become a way of living for
some ppl, the persons that sell are some times ppl that don't know what
they sell, they were hired to do the job. U can find a great variety of
the most popular software here, all kinds, some "stores" has a website
with a forums and has received formal threats from the BSA, but no
closure so far and other 'stores' are doing the same.
Another funny fact: For some software would be cheaper for any of u
"legal guys" to fly here "buy" the software and fly bak to ur countries :D.
U may thing is easy life here with such convenient software availability
but no actually things suck very much, u have almost no rights here even
when there is laws and Human Rights type organizations, justice is
luxury u must pay, here in my job my own boss stoles sells from me to
avoid giving me commissions, I can't quit coz I still need this
miserable job. So, the sacrifice would be stop eating, transporting to
my job or not having electricity, land phone or water or Internet to pay
any software. I have no social life coz I can't pay for it. Fair enough
for u? or I need to be more miserable to fit ur conscience criteria? I'm
asking this rhetorically, as I said my conscience is at peace.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Saul Luizaga" <sau### [at] netscapenet> wrote in message
news:493a882f@news.povray.org...
> somebody wrote:
> > "Saul Luizaga" <sau### [at] netscapenet> wrote
> > Truth be told, I really cannot imagine a circumstance under which not
> > pirating Haskell books would cause suffering for me, but I'm ready to
take
> > your word for it.
[...]
> miserable job. So, the sacrifice would be stop eating, transporting to
> my job or not having electricity, land phone or water or Internet to pay
> any software. I have no social life coz I can't pay for it. Fair enough
> for u? or I need to be more miserable to fit ur conscience criteria?
I don't remember saying stealing is OK so long as you are poor and
miserable. In fact, I think abiding by ethical principles only when
convenient is, well, not really much of a virtue, but that's just me. You
are entitled to your own philosophy.
> I'm asking this rhetorically, as I said my conscience is at peace.
Ah, then I'm answering rhetorically as well.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
somebody wrote:
> miserable. In fact, I think abiding by ethical principles only when
> convenient is, well, not really much of a virtue, but that's just me. You
Your statement would have value if abiding by ethical principles was a
binary state. Some don't see the world that way.
--
Feet Smell? Nose Run? Hey, you're upside down!
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Mueen Nawaz" <m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote in message
news:493c8410@news.povray.org...
> somebody wrote:
> > miserable. In fact, I think abiding by ethical principles only when
> > convenient is, well, not really much of a virtue, but that's just me.
You
> Your statement would have value if abiding by ethical principles was a
> binary state. Some don't see the world that way.
Fair enough. I freely admit that stealing a loaf of bread whilst starving is
vastly a different proposition than pirating Haskell books, and implied as
much (quoting myself; "...I really cannot imagine a circumstance under which
not pirating Haskell books would cause suffering for me"). In the former
case, I'd say that not stealing the bread is the unethical choice. On the
other hand, software, audio or media piracy doesn't follow from necessity at
all, the sob stories to justify it notwithstanding. It won't cause any sort
of suffering not to have an mp3 of the latest hit, or not to have a copy of
the latest version of Photoshop. It only follows from entitlement mentality,
not of necessity. There are literally millions of web pages with free
information about anything you can imagine, including Haskell, there is
radio, TV, libraries (the brick and mortar kind), OS or free software that
does pretty much anything you are likely to need... etc. Piracy
justification arguments are vacuous for that reason.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
somebody wrote:
> "Mueen Nawaz" <m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote in message
> news:493c8410@news.povray.org...
>> somebody wrote:
>
>>> miserable. In fact, I think abiding by ethical principles only when
>>> convenient is, well, not really much of a virtue, but that's just me.
> You
>
>> Your statement would have value if abiding by ethical principles was a
>> binary state. Some don't see the world that way.
>
> Fair enough. I freely admit that stealing a loaf of bread whilst starving is
> vastly a different proposition than pirating Haskell books, and implied as
> much (quoting myself; "...I really cannot imagine a circumstance under which
> not pirating Haskell books would cause suffering for me"). In the former
> case, I'd say that not stealing the bread is the unethical choice. On the
> other hand, software, audio or media piracy doesn't follow from necessity at
> all, the sob stories to justify it notwithstanding. It won't cause any sort
> of suffering not to have an mp3 of the latest hit, or not to have a copy of
> the latest version of Photoshop. It only follows from entitlement mentality,
> not of necessity. There are literally millions of web pages with free
> information about anything you can imagine, including Haskell, there is
> radio, TV, libraries (the brick and mortar kind), OS or free software that
> does pretty much anything you are likely to need... etc. Piracy
> justification arguments are vacuous for that reason.
U try to show urself tolerant and understanding but u don't see the big
picture and when I tried to show to u, u wrote that my ethics has no
much virtue and that utterly I have not valid excuse, yeah... right...
Totalitarian ppl like urself is what causes ppl to have all kinds of
trouble, like dictators for example or closed minded-regimens like
Communist Governments. That is simply not being tolerant or understanding.
I'm not saying I feel guilty, all the contrary, but narrowing the vision
because u assume "u know" my current condition and my Country's
therefore I'm totally guilty is wrong and pretentious assumption from u.
I wrote u once that u don't care enough to imagine less fortunate
conditions than urs and u still don't but u pretend to give me solutions
that are ethically correct and would simply be the "perfect" solution no
mather what I can argument. As I mentioned before u as other "perfect"
Christians (Catholic and Protestants included) are the first to betray
their ethics when things get hard, I laugh at "ethic" and "legal" ppl
claiming how perfect they behave, the higher they are the harder they
fall, I have seen it COUNTLESS times. Ppl that actually sees necessity
where there are some has true ethics and endures even prosper in harsh
times. I'm not one of them but I try to imitate them, I have ethics that
most technicians don't follow coz it's "too good". The only complain
u'll probably find on any of my clients or my Company's clients is that
I'm slow, coz I take 3 times the time to make a PC/Notebook, the fastest
and secured possible today with all the software they're gonna need.
The system tools and utilities I use to make my job are often google
searchs to find the best tools, some of them are freeware, those are
mostly the software I use not the latest mp3 or apps, even I could
EASILY download probably all that I would want. I have ethics, one that
can respect ppl and their property and can put food on my plate for me
and my family. U think what ever u want about it, u don't know me, my
situation and probably don't even know where Bolivia is a World map, let
alone the way of life here or any third world Country for that matter.
But u must be comfortably earning enough money to live and pay ur way
of life in a first world Country with all the things u want at pass of
ur credit card... so typical...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> Ah yes, Haskell's legendary documentation. It's scattered all over the
> place, half of it is published as academic papers that you and I can't
> access, much of it is written for compiler designers and academics
> rather than actual *programmers* who just want to know how to use the
> thing, and lots of stuff isn't documented _at all_.
>
> For example, laziness can be a bad thing. This is highly non-obvious,
> and it ISN'T EXPLAINED ANYWHERE. If you pop into the IRC channel and ask
> about it, somebody will explain it. But then it's *still* not written
> down for the next newbie who wants to know. It's sort of an oral
> tradition; there are many "well known" techniques, but nobody has
> written any of this stuff down anywhere, making it infuriatingly hard to
> learn about this stuff.
>
>
> ....which neatly demonstrates my point. Programs compiled with GHC
> contain C debugging symbols by default - even though these are
> completely useless in a *Haskell* program. By using a special
> command-line switch, you can "strip" the symbols, making a typical
> program about 200KB smaller. But this isn't written down anywhere; I
> found out about it by chatting to people on IRC.
>
> And yes, Haskell is designed for writing complex algorithms easily. If
> you want *speed*, it's very non-obvious how to do this. There is some
> scattered documentation about it, but currently the most expedient
> method is to post the source code and ask Don to look at it for you. ;-)
> It's the website for a book that just got released and is meant to
> explain all this stuff - not just the language syntax, but how to work
> the compiler, what the best coding strategies are, etc.
>
> I must say, I was very excited about this book, but having actually read
> it now it's out, I'm dissapointed. Still, it's a single *large*,
> coherant body of information, all in one place. That's a step in the
> right direction...
>
It sounds like you are getting / are very involved with Haskell and know
at least more than me about its inner workings.
FWIW Why not start writing some of the things that you just mentioned
down and make them available.
You could provide a web site with simple articles explaining some of
these things.
You could turn it into a <gasp> published book </gasp>.
Tom
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
FWIW, I'm more tolerant to some piracy than to people using "u" and "ppl"
and "coz" repeatedly >.<
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Saul Luizaga" <sau### [at] netscapenet> wrote
[snipped a bunch of ad hominems]
> of life in a first world Country with all the things u want at pass of
> ur credit card... so typical...
If "u" are going to pirate, pirate. That's your business. I doubt that
calling me a totalitarian dictator, communist, uncaring, pretentious,
ignorant... etc, as well as making quick (and wrong) assumptions about my
origins or beliefs will strengthen the argument that it's just fine for
those from the third world to pirate.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tom Austin wrote:
> It sounds like you are getting / are very involved with Haskell and know
> at least more than me about its inner workings.
>
> FWIW Why not start writing some of the things that you just mentioned
> down and make them available.
>
> You could provide a web site with simple articles explaining some of
> these things.
>
> You could turn it into a <gasp> published book </gasp>.
I have written one or two small things...
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/archives/332
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/archives/49
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/archives/40
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/archives/37
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/archives/38
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/archives/39
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/archives/34
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/archives/32
...just the odd item. I stopped when I realised that nobody ever reads
any of this stuff, because I am the only human alive who gives a ****
about Haskell.
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Tom Austin wrote:
>
>> It sounds like you are getting / are very involved with Haskell and
>> know at least more than me about its inner workings.
>>
>> FWIW Why not start writing some of the things that you just mentioned
>> down and make them available.
>>
>> You could provide a web site with simple articles explaining some of
>> these things.
>>
>> You could turn it into a <gasp> published book </gasp>.
>
> I have written one or two small things...
>
> http://blog.orphi.me.uk/archives/332
> http://blog.orphi.me.uk/archives/49
> http://blog.orphi.me.uk/archives/40
>
> http://blog.orphi.me.uk/archives/37
> http://blog.orphi.me.uk/archives/38
> http://blog.orphi.me.uk/archives/39
>
> http://blog.orphi.me.uk/archives/34
> http://blog.orphi.me.uk/archives/32
>
> ....just the odd item. I stopped when I realised that nobody ever reads
> any of this stuff, because I am the only human alive who gives a ****
> about Haskell.
>
I see that they are under a blog entry for Haskell.
There are 12 entries - but I bet you could write up a bunch more if you
thought about it.
Now, set up a web site that is dedicated to Haskell.
Web site hosting is cheap & setting up an actual site isn't too hard either.
I am saying this because I believe that your interest in Haskell can do
something for you besides being a nerdy pastime.
I am encouraging you to take something that you enjoy and have a passion
for and make it into something.
Who knows, you may actually be able to contribute some significant material.
Now, if I can only take my own advice.
Tom
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I see that they are under a blog entry for Haskell.
> There are 12 entries - but I bet you could write up a bunch more if you
> thought about it.
>
> Now, set up a web site that is dedicated to Haskell.
> Web site hosting is cheap & setting up an actual site isn't too hard
> either.
More to the point, I already have a web host. (Guess where my blog is...)
I guess I should work on getting Indoculate working properly again...
Then I can set about writing stuff. ;-)
> Now, if I can only take my own advice.
Well isn't *that* the thing? ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
>> I see that they are under a blog entry for Haskell.
>> There are 12 entries - but I bet you could write up a bunch more if
>> you thought about it.
>>
>> Now, set up a web site that is dedicated to Haskell.
>> Web site hosting is cheap & setting up an actual site isn't too hard
>> either.
>
> More to the point, I already have a web host. (Guess where my blog is...)
>
> I guess I should work on getting Indoculate working properly again...
> Then I can set about writing stuff. ;-)
>
I do believe that you have a wealth of knowledge that others can benefit
from - more than just on a blog or forum.
>> Now, if I can only take my own advice.
>
> Well isn't *that* the thing? ;-)
And having others encourage me and point out some directions makes it
all that much easier.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tom Austin wrote:
> I do believe that you have a wealth of knowledge that others can benefit
> from - more than just on a blog or forum.
Heh. The hard part is figuring out how to take a big heap of knowledge
and structure it into something coherant with a logical order to is that
somebody else might even be able to follow. ;-)
> And having others encourage me and point out some directions makes it
> all that much easier.
Amen!
Damn, if I had more friends, I'd probably get a whole lot more done... ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> Tom Austin wrote:
>
>> I do believe that you have a wealth of knowledge that others can
>> benefit from - more than just on a blog or forum.
>
> Heh. The hard part is figuring out how to take a big heap of knowledge
> and structure it into something coherant with a logical order to is that
> somebody else might even be able to follow. ;-)
>
you know the types of things you already have
some blog entries
some programs
etc...
Start putting together some data structure that you can 'copy' your
current data into and then add to at will.
databases
files
etc...
Don't worry to much about making it look perfect - just get the data out
there and have your backend fully functional. You can always change
what a web page looks like - CSS, but it can be a PITA to change how you
store the data.
>> And having others encourage me and point out some directions makes it
>> all that much easier.
>
> Amen!
>
> Damn, if I had more friends, I'd probably get a whole lot more done... ;-)
you do have friends here
you just don't know what they look like ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Heh. The hard part is figuring out how to take a big heap of knowledge
>> and structure it into something coherant with a logical order to is
>> that somebody else might even be able to follow. ;-)
>
> you know the types of things you already have
>
> Start putting together some data structure that you can 'copy' your
> current data into and then add to at will.
>
> Don't worry to much about making it look perfect - just get the data out
> there and have your backend fully functional. You can always change
> what a web page looks like - CSS, but it can be a PITA to change how you
> store the data.
Hence Indoculate - my tool that accepts a markup language I invented
which exactly matches the structure I want, and turns it into something
that a computer will accept. (Basically HTML or PDF.) But it's currently
broken... *sigh*
>> Damn, if I had more friends, I'd probably get a whole lot more done...
>> ;-)
>
> you do have friends here
>
> you just don't know what they look like ;-)
For somebody as lacking in motivation and self-belief as me, a much
higher level of encouragement would be useful... :-S
I could have written something today, but I've basically spent my entire
day sitting reading web comics because I couldn't be bothered to start
anything. "Who's going to read it anyway?"
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> Tom Austin wrote:
>
>> I do believe that you have a wealth of knowledge that others can benefit
>> from - more than just on a blog or forum.
>
> Heh. The hard part is figuring out how to take a big heap of knowledge
> and structure it into something coherant with a logical order to is that
> somebody else might even be able to follow. ;-)
Tip: don't structure it yet. Start with some content, once you have
something written you may have a clearer view of how to structure it.
I doubt anyone starts writing a book from the index.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> Heh. The hard part is figuring out how to take a big heap of knowledge
> and structure it into something coherant with a logical order to is that
> somebody else might even be able to follow. ;-)
Yes, that's the hard part. :-) It's one of the problems with open source
software that's doing something totally new, where there's two or three
people who know how it works inside and out, and they don't know how to
explain it to someone who doesn't already know what they're talking about.
It's a tremendously useful skill to have: the ability to explain to grandma
(or your boss) what she needs to know about the technology. (That's probably
one reason I use too many analogies - I find they work well with
non-technical people.)
It's also one of the important skills you learn from a PhD.
I'll second the notion that if you can sit down and write something like you
post here, and just churn it out, do so. Getting the ideas down is good.
After that, if you want to go further, sit down and make an outline (as in
"table of contents" type outline). Break it down until the structure has an
entry for each idea, where "each idea" is covered in a paragraph or two.
Then read the outline and make sure someone else could understand it on the
first read through. Then you just fill in the outline.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Heh. The hard part is figuring out how to take a big heap of knowledge
>> and structure it into something coherant with a logical order to is that
>> somebody else might even be able to follow. ;-)
>
> Tip: don't structure it yet. Start with some content, once you have
> something written you may have a clearer view of how to structure it.
>
> I doubt anyone starts writing a book from the index.
Some people might...
Heh, this tends to be *exactly* how I write programs, BTW. But then,
writing documentation is rather like programming... except that instead
of operating with the internal state of a machine, it's a human. But you
still have the same problems of figuring out the best way to structure
things, etc.
I have lost count of how many times I've written an authoritative tome
on Haskell, only to get about 8% of the way through the material and
think "meh, that's a silly approach, I should start by explaining X
first instead of starting from Y..." I've started and restarted writing
so many times I can't even count!
I've said it before and I'll say it again: The trouble with explaining
Haskell is that there's lots of interrelated concepts that you seemingly
need to grasp all at the same time, with no logical "place to start".
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Heh. The hard part is figuring out how to take a big heap of knowledge
>> and structure it into something coherant with a logical order to is
>> that somebody else might even be able to follow. ;-)
>
> Yes, that's the hard part. :-)
You noticed?
> It's one of the problems with open
> source software that's doing something totally new, where there's two or
> three people who know how it works inside and out, and they don't know
> how to explain it to someone who doesn't already know what they're
> talking about.
Welcome to Haskell!
I am *totally certain* that the guy who designed the undecidable
typeclass instance translation rules to System F knows *exactly* what
they're talking about and why it works... but they're far too busy
programming it to tell anybody about it in words of less than 6
syllables. o_O
> It's a tremendously useful skill to have: the ability to explain to
> grandma (or your boss) what she needs to know about the technology.
> (That's probably one reason I use too many analogies - I find they work
> well with non-technical people.)
Indeed.
IMHO, the *key* skill here is looking at a thing and figuring out what
*is* important, and what is *not* important, for the purposes of the
discussion in question.
A computer is a very large, complex device, and the software that powers
it is built from abstract concepts implemented on top of concepts
constructed from yet more concepts, in a mind-blowing vertical tower of
abstraction.
Just imagine trying to explain to a Victorian scientist how to design,
build and program a modern-day computer. I mean, apart from the minor
detail of needing semiconductor technology and microscopic lithography,
you'd have to give them a lecture in electronics, Boolean algebra, logic
gates, sequential logic design, binary encodings, processor design,
instruction sets, computer programming, subroutine calls, interrupt
handlers, I/O device design, system programming, compiler design,
language design, memory allocation and task scheduling algorithms...
shall I stop yet? :-P
Having just said all that, if somebody wants to know how to connect
several PCs to a single Internet connection, you *could* tell them about
IP addressing and subnet masks and the intricasies of NAT... or you
could just tell them to plug a few boxes together and it'll work. Guess
which answer most people want to hear. ;-)
> It's also one of the important skills you learn from a PhD.
I'll take your word for it, Dr New.
> I'll second the notion that if you can sit down and write something like
> you post here, and just churn it out, do so. Getting the ideas down is
> good.
I had an idea that I could produce a kind of "portfolio" of good-quality
written documents (various subject areas and target audiences) and I
could show it to people and say "hey dude, I'm clever!" The thing I
posted here is a first attempt at one such portfolio document.
(I'm polishing up my Parsec thing to make another such document. And I
may or may not to a layman's overview of computer hardware - I don't
know if I could do it justice...)
> After that, if you want to go further, sit down and make an outline (as
> in "table of contents" type outline). Break it down until the structure
> has an entry for each idea, where "each idea" is covered in a paragraph
> or two. Then read the outline and make sure someone else could
> understand it on the first read through. Then you just fill in the outline.
The trick to this seems to be figuring out which concepts "depend on"
which other concepts, which ideas "lead to" others, and finding an
optimal order to present the ideas. And some good metaphores and
examples usually help immensely... ;-)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> I had an idea that I could produce a kind of "portfolio" of good-quality
> written documents (various subject areas and target audiences) and I
> could show it to people and say "hey dude, I'm clever!" The thing I
> posted here is a first attempt at one such portfolio document.
That's an excellent idea.
> (I'm polishing up my Parsec thing to make another such document. And I
> may or may not to a layman's overview of computer hardware - I don't
> know if I could do it justice...)
Give it a go. Worst thing that happens is people say "don't put that one in
your portfolio."
Indeed, you might be in a good position to write documentation rather than
programs. Consider looking for work as a technical writer.
> The trick to this seems to be figuring out which concepts "depend on"
> which other concepts, which ideas "lead to" others, and finding an
> optimal order to present the ideas. And some good metaphores and
> examples usually help immensely... ;-)
Yep. It often takes me three or four start-from-scratch rewrites of an
outline before I fill it in. Often takes longer to do the TOC than the paper.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
somebody wrote:
> as well as making quick (and wrong) assumptions about my
> origins or beliefs
Yeah like u ddn't do it first. This proves u and and U is what matters,
Fine by me.
> will strengthen the argument that it's just fine for
> those from the third world to pirate.
yeah, what ever...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> FWIW, I'm more tolerant to some piracy than to people using "u" and "ppl"
> and "coz" repeatedly >.<
>
Don't like it, don't read it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Saul Luizaga wrote:
> Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
>> FWIW, I'm more tolerant to some piracy than to people using "u" and "ppl"
>> and "coz" repeatedly >.<
>>
> Don't like it, don't read it.
You're winning a lot of friends here...
--
Beware of quantum ducks. Quark! Quark!
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Tom Austin wrote:
>
>> It sounds like you are getting / are very involved with Haskell and
>> know at least more than me about its inner workings.
>>
>> FWIW Why not start writing some of the things that you just mentioned
>> down and make them available.
>>
>> You could provide a web site with simple articles explaining some of
>> these things.
>>
>> You could turn it into a <gasp> published book </gasp>.
>
> I have written one or two small things...
>
> http://blog.orphi.me.uk/archives/332
> http://blog.orphi.me.uk/archives/49
> http://blog.orphi.me.uk/archives/40
>
> http://blog.orphi.me.uk/archives/37
> http://blog.orphi.me.uk/archives/38
> http://blog.orphi.me.uk/archives/39
>
> http://blog.orphi.me.uk/archives/34
> http://blog.orphi.me.uk/archives/32
>
> ....just the odd item. I stopped when I realised that nobody ever reads
> any of this stuff, because I am the only human alive who gives a ****
> about Haskell.
>
U assume too much, I'm another fan, and congratz on the blog, one of the
coolest I've ever seen that also will help me when i decide to do as
complicated as those.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Saul Luizaga" <sau### [at] netscapenet> wrote in message
news:49430a1f$1@news.povray.org...
> somebody wrote:
> > as well as making quick (and wrong) assumptions about my
> > origins or beliefs
> Yeah like u ddn't do it first.
Difference is, I never mentioned "God" to suggest a belief in a deity on my
part. Little detail, but if "v" are going to be pedantic, let's get those
right.
> This proves u and and U is what matters,
> Fine by me.
Ah, something we can agree on.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> I had an idea that I could produce a kind of "portfolio" of
>> good-quality written documents (various subject areas and target
>> audiences) and I could show it to people and say "hey dude, I'm
>> clever!" The thing I posted here is a first attempt at one such
>> portfolio document.
>
> That's an excellent idea.
Yay, me!
>> (I'm polishing up my Parsec thing to make another such document. And I
>> may or may not to a layman's overview of computer hardware - I don't
>> know if I could do it justice...)
>
> Give it a go. Worst thing that happens is people say "don't put that one
> in your portfolio."
Yeah, I guess. (Oh, and on THAT subject there really WILL be some
large-scale simplifications!)
> Indeed, you might be in a good position to write documentation rather
> than programs. Consider looking for work as a technical writer.
You're not the first person to make this suggestion.
Unfortunately, technical writers seem to be even rarer than programmers! ;-)
> Yep. It often takes me three or four start-from-scratch rewrites of an
> outline before I fill it in. Often takes longer to do the TOC than the
> paper.
I've had *a tad* more than 4 rewrites on "explaining Haskell". Like, the
other day I found one version from 2004 or something, and I'm like
"JESUS, I've been using Haskell for THAT LONG?! I had no idea!"
But still, after all this time, I can't think of a good way to explain
it all in a coherant way. Have you looked at Real World Haskell? It's
very messy. And it's written by three experts!
Also, there's so many ways to explain Haskell... Do you want the "here's
the elegant theory that powers the language" intro? Or the "this is how
you write useful code" into? At which point to you mention lazy
evaluation? Monads? The type system? Concurrency primitives? Useful
libraries? Do you mention all the built-in list functions, or show how
to derive them from first principles? Does recursion come before ADTs?...
It's pretty hard to figure out! o_O
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>> Yep. It often takes me three or four start-from-scratch rewrites of an
>> outline before I fill it in. Often takes longer to do the TOC than the
>> paper.
>
> I've had *a tad* more than 4 rewrites on "explaining Haskell".
You didn't read. It takes me four complete rewrites of the *table of
contents* before I'm ready to write a 20 page paper.
> But still, after all this time, I can't think of a good way to explain
> it all in a coherant way. Have you looked at Real World Haskell? It's
> very messy. And it's written by three experts!
They may be *too* expert. That's often the problem. They already know it
all, so they can't easily put it down in an order that assumes you don't.
> It's pretty hard to figure out! o_O
All the more reason to give it a go, yes? :-) Just try to figure out what
order to introduce the concepts. Don't fear splitting up a concept into
smaller chunks that make sense in order.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Once u understand how short can sentences be just by adding "u" instead
of "you" and other abbreviations u read faster and u write faster BUT
NO, u can't simply make a small mental effort and take it as an internet
slang and get use to it, if not imitate it... is all the same, our
newsgroup, our way, or the highway... fine, so be it. Bye.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
somebody wrote:
> "Saul Luizaga" <sau### [at] netscapenet> wrote in message
> news:49430a1f$1@news.povray.org...
>> somebody wrote:
>
>>> as well as making quick (and wrong) assumptions about my
>>> origins or beliefs
>
>> Yeah like u ddn't do it first.
>
> Difference is, I never mentioned "God" to suggest a belief in a deity on my
> part. Little detail, but if "v" are going to be pedantic, let's get those
> right.
What has my belief in God anything to do with piracy, I cleared that
already, I believe in Him but I do wrong things to survive, read the
posts above and what about the pedantic? dude, u were saying u were
ready to take my word on why not pirating software would lead me to
suffering in my country and once I explained why, instead of actually
accept my word as u wrote u would u do exactly the opposite and I'm
pedant? hahaha.
>> This proves u and and U is what matters,
>> Fine by me.
>
> Ah, something we can agree on.
Again, I explained I have no choice and I'm right not coz I say so, but
coz my situation says so, but u again missed the point and come to make
redundant assumptions, so u take the fast and easy cynic highway to
criticize me, but I'm sure coz u r "legal" guy u will not cease to say u
r not the closed mineded but me, the infamous pirate, is laughable to
see how ppl that were once trying to understand u turns cynic and closed
mineded once u justify ur point and they can't beat the logic, so
keeping on writing to u is simply pointless, now I'm starting to notice
ur frustration and intolerant attitude calling me pedant when wasn't me
who broke his word about getting ready to take my word for it, dude the
more u write the more typically intolerant ur behave/attitude it is, so
be it; peace out.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 21:25:44 -0400, Saul Luizaga <sau### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
>Once u understand how short can sentences be just by adding "u" instead
>of "you" and other abbreviations u read faster and u write faster BUT
>NO, u can't simply make a small mental effort and take it as an internet
>slang and get use to it, if not imitate it... is all the same, our
>newsgroup, our way, or the highway... fine, so be it. Bye.
To a native English speaker it makes you sound juvenile or ignorant. Also other
people do not read your text faster.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7775013.stm
Hrd 2 rd
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 21:25:44 -0400, Saul Luizaga <sau### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
>
>> Once u understand how short can sentences be just by adding "u" instead
>> of "you" and other abbreviations u read faster and u write faster BUT
>> NO, u can't simply make a small mental effort and take it as an internet
>> slang and get use to it, if not imitate it... is all the same, our
>> newsgroup, our way, or the highway... fine, so be it. Bye.
>
> To a native English speaker it makes you sound juvenile or ignorant. Also other
> people do not read your text faster.
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7775013.stm
> Hrd 2 rd
"It's just another form of the Queen's English - not better, not worse,"
Once u get use to it u read a lot faster, but here most ppl presume of
making intellectual milestones writing or discovering intellectual
interesting stuff and mostly as a show-off of their mental capacity but
a small challenge and bam! oh is too hard... OK...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Stephen wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 21:25:44 -0400, Saul Luizaga <sau### [at] netscapenet>
> wrote:
>
>>Once u understand how short can sentences be just by adding "u" instead
>>of "you" and other abbreviations u read faster and u write faster BUT
>>NO, u can't simply make a small mental effort and take it as an internet
>>slang and get use to it, if not imitate it... is all the same, our
>>newsgroup, our way, or the highway... fine, so be it. Bye.
>
> To a native English speaker it makes you sound juvenile or ignorant. Also
> other people do not read your text faster.
I had to copy his message to a text editor and do s/u/you/ and other
replacements...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 10:55:32 -0400, Saul Luizaga <sau### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
>Stephen wrote:
>> On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 21:25:44 -0400, Saul Luizaga <sau### [at] netscapenet> wrote:
>>
>>> Once u understand how short can sentences be just by adding "u" instead
>>> of "you" and other abbreviations u read faster and u write faster BUT
>>> NO, u can't simply make a small mental effort and take it as an internet
>>> slang and get use to it, if not imitate it... is all the same, our
>>> newsgroup, our way, or the highway... fine, so be it. Bye.
>>
>> To a native English speaker it makes you sound juvenile or ignorant. Also other
>> people do not read your text faster.
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7775013.stm
>> Hrd 2 rd
>"It's just another form of the Queen's English - not better, not worse,"
>
LOL now you sound only juvenile.
Do you know what the "queen's English" means, nowadays?
>Once u get use to it u read a lot faster, but here most ppl presume of
>making intellectual milestones writing or discovering intellectual
>interesting stuff and mostly as a show-off of their mental capacity but
>a small challenge and bam! oh is too hard... OK...
BTW "u" is Dutch and ppl means Private Pilot License or Preferred Parts List
amongst other things.
I will most humbly take my leave of you. You cannot, sir, take from me anything
that I will not more willingly part withal.
(Kings English)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 13:46:57 -0200, Nicolas Alvarez <nic### [at] gmailcom>
wrote:
>
>I had to copy his message to a text editor and do s/u/you/ and other
>replacements...
Not worh it IMO ;)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 14-Dec-08 16:46, Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> Stephen wrote:
>> On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 21:25:44 -0400, Saul Luizaga <sau### [at] netscapenet>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Once u understand how short can sentences be just by adding "u" instead
>>> of "you" and other abbreviations u read faster and u write faster BUT
>>> NO, u can't simply make a small mental effort and take it as an internet
>>> slang and get use to it, if not imitate it... is all the same, our
>>> newsgroup, our way, or the highway... fine, so be it. Bye.
>> To a native English speaker it makes you sound juvenile or ignorant. Also
>> other people do not read your text faster.
>
> I had to copy his message to a text editor and do s/u/you/ and other
> replacements...
>
Something like: "Once you younderstand how short sentences can be jyoust
by adding "you" instead of "yoyou" and other abbreviations. You read
faster and you write faster. BYOUT NO, you can't simply make a small
mental effort and take it as an internet slang and get yoused to it, if
not imitate it... It is all the same to me, oyour newsgroyoup, oyour
way, or the highway... fine, so be it. Bye."?
I think Saul's original text was more readable.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 18:04:21 +0100, andrel <a_l### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
>Something like: "Once you younderstand how short sentences can be jyoust
>by adding "you" instead of "yoyou" and other abbreviations. You read
>faster and you write faster. BYOUT NO, you can't simply make a small
>mental effort and take it as an internet slang and get yoused to it, if
>not imitate it... It is all the same to me, oyour newsgroyoup, oyour
>way, or the highway... fine, so be it. Bye."?
I read it thus:
Once you get used to it you (can) read a lot faster, but here, most people
presume to make or write intellectual (of their) achievements. They do this
mostly to show off their mental capacity. But ask them (to do) a small challenge
and bam! (It) is too hard.
Now as someone who has battled with dyslexia I find it insulting to be spoken to
like that. Also on an international newsgroup it is only polite to write in a
way that you can be understood.
>I think Saul's original text was more readable.
I agree
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
andrel wrote:
> Something like: "Once you younderstand how short sentences can be jyoust
> by adding "you" instead of "yoyou" and other abbreviations. You read
> faster and you write faster. BYOUT NO, you can't simply make a small
> mental effort and take it as an internet slang and get yoused to it, if
> not imitate it... It is all the same to me, oyour newsgroyoup, oyour
> way, or the highway... fine, so be it. Bye."?
> I think Saul's original text was more readable.
I actually used s/\<u\>/you/ in vim, so it matched word boundaries.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 14-Dec-08 18:27, Stephen wrote:
>
> Now as someone who has battled with dyslexia I find it insulting to be spoken to
> like that. Also on an international newsgroup it is only polite to write in a
> way that you can be understood.
>
I can see your point, but the group is not only international, it is
also intercultural. You'd be amazed what is considered normal spelling
in some subcultures. Indeed we have had worse examples of 1337 here. If
I were you I would not bother too much. Kids will always want to show
that they are part of some interesting cultural development. I did it
when I was young, you probably did it too, though in our cases it was
not language that was the victim. It'll rub off when they get older
generally (or it becomes standard spelling).
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
