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

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #25829

Re: Why “new”?

Show all headers | View raw

On 07-02-2011 03:18, Ken Wesson wrote:
> 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.

> 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.

It could have been other things than a programming language,
but a programming language should be one of the first
guesses.

> 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.

But I don't think much was lost in "J" and "APL".

>                                          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,

I am pretty sure that Peter had never heard of it either.

But has learned to use Google and Wikipedia.

> 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.

http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html#keepcool

Arne

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