Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #26008

Re: Why “new”?

Show all headers | View raw

On Mon, 07 Feb 2011 15:48:06 +0800, Peter Duniho wrote:

> On 2/7/11 11:45 AM, Ken Wesson wrote:
>> On Mon, 07 Feb 2011 11:27:56 +0800, Peter Duniho wrote:
>>
>>> On 2/7/11 11:17 AM, Ken Wesson wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>>> J has arguably helped with that. Some. Fact is, if you apply
>>>>> yourself to learning and using J then it's not line-noise at all,
>>>>> it's just extremely terse. It's not symbol cruft in the same sense
>>>>> that Perl is.
>>>>
>>>> And what, pray tell, is J?
>>>
>>> http://www.lmgtfy.com/
>>
>> That is needlessly snarky. It's not as if one can google a one-letter
>> query and expect a useful result.
> 
> I note that you clipped the _useful_ part of the URL I offered.
> 
> If one is so inept at web searches that they cannot be bothered to add
> relevant terms that are obvious from the context in order to produce a
> useful result, then yes…I can see how that might cause a problem.  But
> such a person probably should not be involved in programming in any way.

See my response to Patricia. You added "programming language" to the 
query but the first post mentioning J did not make it clear that it was a 
programming language, only that learning it would make APL code seem less 
like line noise. Whether that meant it was an APL derivative, an APL IDE, 
a mathematical system using similar symbols, or some other tool was not 
made clear by that post.

Specifically, we had this exchange:

>> APL, in an ugly way.
>
> J has arguably helped with that. Some. Fact is, if you apply yourself
> to learning and using J then it's not line-noise at all, it's just
> extremely terse. It's not symbol cruft in the same sense that Perl is.

I read this as "J has arguably helped with APL's ugliness. Some. Fact is, 
if you apply yourself to learning and using J then APL's not line-noise 
at all, it's just extremely terse. It's not symbol cruft in the same 
sense that Perl is".

This makes it sound like J might be an APL derivative or relative, but is 
more likely an APL ecosystem tool created significantly later in time 
than APL itself. If that impression was misleading, well, Arved Sandstrom 
is the one who wrote it.

On a more general note, I've noticed since my arrival here that there are 
several people in this newsgroup with an abrupt manner and a tendency to 
disparage other people, especially their qualifications as programmers, 
if they miss seeing anything that the person considers (often wrongly) to 
be obvious.

I suggest all of those with that trait try to be a bit more circumspect 
with such opinions. Oftentimes what you thought was obvious wasn't. Tone 
of voice doesn't survive the transition to email and newsposts, so 
sometimes connotative content gets lost. You were thinking it when you 
posted it, and then you assume it's obvious to anyone reading it, but 
it's not. Or in the case at hand, you assume J will be vaguely familiar 
to someone else as being a programming language, when they may never have 
heard of it, or that there's only one way to read a piece of on-its-face-
ambiguous text and that's as meaning whatever you were thinking when you 
wrote it. In particular, you and Patricia seem to think the "it"s in 
Arved's post referred to J; Arved himsef may have meant it that way; but 
in context I read them as referring to APL, since right after a mention 
of APL's ugliness and in response to it was "J has arguably helped with 
that", suggesting "that" is "APL looking like line noise", and later 
"it's not line-noise" with APL-looking-like-line-noise being part of the 
context.

Not everything you were thinking when you wrote something actually makes 
it into the text. Not everything you know about some of the things you 
mention are known to every reader. Not every reader will take away 
exactly the same meaning you intended when you wrote it or took away when 
you read it. Not every reader who doesn't read it the same way you 
expected them to is an idiot, or a clueless newbie that knows nothing 
about programming. And, for that matter, not every reader who *is* a 
clueless newbie or an idiot requires being publicly called out as such 
anytime the thought happens to cross your mind that maybe they are such. 
Certainly, the atmosphere in this newsgroup would be nicer and you'd have 
fewer flamewars if you kept such thoughts to yourself; voicing them is 
pretty much never constructive. Indeed, really there's four categories of 
people you might be tempted to flame in such a manner and flaming 
actually helps with none of them:

1. People who just misunderstood something, or not even that; they
   interpreted an ambiguous phrase differently from what you expected, or
   didn't know something you assumed everybody (or every programmer) knew,
   or simply disagreed with you on some point where you're absolutely
   convinced you're right, or even that the rightness of your position is
   obvious.

   Flaming in this instance creates needless friction when what's needed
   is clearer communication instead.

2. People who actually are clueless newbies, but are trying to learn.

   Alienating them serves no useful purpose and they won't feel inclined
   to receive any free clues from you if every one of them comes coated in
   vinegar. They're liable to go elsewhere, such as C++ or Lisp, after
   getting the impression that "Java programmers are a bunch of stuck-up
   assholes". Some may even give up on programming altogether after
   getting a negative first impression of programmer culture.

3. People who are hopelessly clueless; bona fide idiots and assorted
   fruits and nuts.

   Nothing you say will help them. Flaming them will however waste
   bandwidth and possibly prompt them to flame back. Frustration and anger
   will make them prone to lash out at anyone perceived as taunting or
   humiliating them. This will waste still more bandwidth.

4. Trolls.

   Flaming trolls is a form of feeding trolls. Also see 3, particularly
   the bits about wasting bandwidth.

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: Why “new”? Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2011-02-07 15:48 +0800
  Re: Why “new”? Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com> - 2011-02-08 12:30 +0100
    Re: Why “new”? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-08 22:58 -0500
  Re: Why “new”? blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm@myrealbox.com> - 2011-02-09 15:31 +0000
  Re: Why “new”? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-07 19:10 -0500
  Re: Why “new”? Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com> - 2011-02-08 12:17 +0100
    Re: Why “new”? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-08 23:05 -0500
    Re: Why “new”? Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2011-02-08 20:24 +0800
  Re: Why “new”? Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com> - 2011-02-07 09:18 +0100
    Re: Why “new”? Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2011-02-07 16:38 +0800

csiph-web