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

Groups > comp.lang.c > #64364 > unrolled thread

[meta] how to attack a problem

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c

Contents

  [meta] how to attack a problem fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-06-28 06:15 -0700
    Re: [meta] how to attack a problem fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-06-28 06:26 -0700
    Re: [meta] how to attack a problem fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-06-28 06:34 -0700
      Re: [meta] how to attack a problem fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-06-28 06:35 -0700
        Re: [meta] how to attack a problem fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-06-28 06:51 -0700
    Re: [meta] how to attack a problem Aleksandar Kuktin <akuktin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-28 14:31 +0000
      Re: [meta] how to attack a problem fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-06-28 07:38 -0700
        Re: [meta] how to attack a problem Ed Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2015-06-28 14:50 -0700
          Re: [meta] how to attack a problem fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-06-28 15:16 -0700
            Re: [meta] how to attack a problem Ed Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2015-06-29 14:25 -0700
              Re: [meta] how to attack a problem fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-06-29 16:00 -0700
                Re: [meta] how to attack a problem fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-06-29 16:06 -0700
                  Re: [meta] how to attack a problem fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-06-30 12:21 -0700
                    Re: [meta] how to attack a problem maddoxr@acm.org - 2015-07-01 07:09 -0700
                      Re: [meta] how to attack a problem fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-07-01 11:01 -0700
                        Re: [meta] how to attack a problem fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-07-01 11:20 -0700
                          Re: [meta] how to attack a problem fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-07-01 11:33 -0700
                        Re: [meta] how to attack a problem Rosario19 <Ros@invalid.invalid> - 2015-07-02 08:35 +0200
                      Re: [meta] how to attack a problem August Karlstrom <fusionfile@gmail.com> - 2015-07-02 07:18 +0200
                        Re: [meta] how to attack a problem "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-07-01 23:48 -0700
                          Re: [meta] how to attack a problem Martin Shobe <martin.shobe@yahoo.com> - 2015-07-02 07:33 -0500
                            Re: [meta] how to attack a problem "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-07-02 09:44 -0700
                            Re: [meta] how to attack a problem fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-07-02 09:47 -0700
                              Re: [meta] how to attack a problem "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-07-02 09:58 -0700
                              Re: [meta] how to attack a problem Martin Shobe <martin.shobe@yahoo.com> - 2015-07-02 12:33 -0500
                                Re: [meta] how to attack a problem "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-07-02 10:37 -0700
                        Re: [meta] how to attack a problem maddoxr@acm.org - 2015-07-03 06:01 -0700
                          Re: [meta] how to attack a problem Martin Shobe <martin.shobe@yahoo.com> - 2015-07-03 10:58 -0500
                            Re: [meta] how to attack a problem David Kleinecke <dkleinecke@gmail.com> - 2015-07-03 09:07 -0700
                            Re: [meta] how to attack a problem gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2015-07-06 05:20 -0700
                              Re: [meta] how to attack a problem "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-07-06 05:23 -0700
                              Re: [meta] how to attack a problem James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-06 08:37 -0400
                                Re: [meta] how to attack a problem maddoxr@acm.org - 2015-07-06 07:01 -0700
                                  Re: [meta] how to attack a problem James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-07-06 10:31 -0400
                                  Re: [meta] how to attack a problem Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-06 07:48 -0700
                                    Re: [meta] how to attack a problem raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2015-07-06 19:07 +0000
                                      Re: [meta] how to attack a problem fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-07-06 12:32 -0700
                                  Re: [meta] how to attack a problem Martin Shobe <martin.shobe@yahoo.com> - 2015-07-06 10:06 -0500
                                Re: [meta] how to attack a problem gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2015-07-06 08:49 -0700
                      Re: [meta] how to attack a problem luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2015-07-06 14:03 -0700
                        Re: [meta] how to attack a problem fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-07-06 14:52 -0700
                          Re: [meta] how to attack a problem fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-07-08 14:05 -0700
                            Re: [meta] how to attack a problem fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-07-09 01:27 -0700
                        Re: [meta] how to attack a problem Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-06 16:19 -0700
                          Re: [meta] how to attack a problem luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2015-07-06 18:17 -0700
                            Re: [meta] how to attack a problem luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2015-07-06 18:58 -0700
                        Re: [meta] how to attack a problem Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2015-07-06 21:09 -0600
                          Re: [meta] how to attack a problem "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-07-07 15:14 -0500
                            Re: [meta] how to attack a problem Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-07 14:50 -0700
                            Re: [meta] how to attack a problem Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2015-07-07 21:20 -0600
                            Re: [meta] how to attack a problem gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2015-07-08 04:01 -0700
        Re: [meta] how to attack a problem Aleksandar Kuktin <akuktin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-29 00:58 +0000
          Re: [meta] how to attack a problem fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2015-06-29 10:31 -0700
      Re: [meta] how to attack a problem Ed Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2015-06-28 14:41 -0700
        Re: [meta] how to attack a problem Aleksandar Kuktin <akuktin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-29 00:57 +0000
    Re: [meta] how to attack a problem luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2015-07-06 19:32 -0700

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

#64804

W dniu poniedziałek, 6 lipca 2015 23:03:33 UTC+2 użytkownik luser droog napisał:
> On Wednesday, July 1, 2015 at 9:09:38 AM UTC-5, mad...@acm.org wrote:
> > On Tuesday, June 30, 2015 at 3:21:45 PM UTC-4, fir wrote:
> > > PS I may add much weaker question but boarding slightly on this perfect methodology topic"
> > > 
> > > is it better to attack a problems 
> > > - in a bit hurry 
> > > - in a bit lazy mode
> > > - in high hurry and tense
> > > - in big lazy mode
> > > 
> > > ?
> > > 
> > > imo when you work in hurry you get tired,
> > > so being a little slow may help you conservate (preserve) the energy - so this could be better
> > > - otherwise it may seem thoygh thet being a little hury could rise your level of focus and
> > > tempo (though i personally do not quite belive in this, but maybe, im not sure)
> > 
> > "Measure twice, cut once."
> > 
> > No hurry.  When you understand the problem, the solution will be obvious.  If the solution is not obvious, you do not yet understand the problem.
> > 
> > Randy.
> 
> While the wording has attracted some disagreement, this is
> IMO a very valuable notion. Perhaps if we replace 'problem'
> with 'problem statement', that might lead us in a useful
> direction.
> 
> The seeds of the answer are embedded in the question.
> 
> -- 
> There are no answers -- only choices.
> -Dr. Gibarian

i dont understand to be honest..
anyway i thinked yet that it could be suefull to hard define levels of understanding (lu) when coding, sometimes you got it slight, sometimes you got it mixed, sometimes better like 2/3 sometimes yet better (but probably never you go the full (and most satisfactionery lu today times, (those dam pseudo new technologies may even rise it down) ) 
It would be good to discus this interpersonal but needed naming is not sufficiently eleborated i am afraid.. (such lu-s for example are not interpersonally defined)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#64965

yet whan thinking a bit about this i may add i could symbolise two rough auras when doding one is
  ?  ?         ? ?        ? ?      
 ?? ?   ?  ?  ?     ?  ?  
        ?        ??? ??
and the second is like
  + +  +  +   +   +  +
+ +        + ++ +      +
 +   +   ++  +  +   =

this "?" aura is a curse of unexperienced 
(all?) programmer.. second is where ar building bricks are clear and avaliable (suprisingly not so often case in my sad life of the programmer)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#64974

W dniu środa, 8 lipca 2015 23:05:50 UTC+2 użytkownik fir napisał:
>could symbolise two rough auras when doding 

*coding (also = sign is mistype, many mistypes i make)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#64811

luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> writes:
> On Wednesday, July 1, 2015 at 9:09:38 AM UTC-5, mad...@acm.org wrote:
[...]
>> No hurry.  When you understand the problem, the solution will be
>> obvious.  If the solution is not obvious, you do not yet understand
>> the problem.
>> 
>> Randy.
>
> While the wording has attracted some disagreement, this is
> IMO a very valuable notion. Perhaps if we replace 'problem'
> with 'problem statement', that might lead us in a useful
> direction.
>
> The seeds of the answer are embedded in the question.

Really?  How do you respond to the several examples mentioned in this
thread where that just isn't true?  There are plenty of problems,
particularly in mathematics, where the problem statement is dead simple
but the solution is elusive (in some cases requiring decades or
centuries of work) or even provably impossible.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#64819

On Monday, July 6, 2015 at 6:20:04 PM UTC-5, Keith Thompson wrote:
> luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> writes:
> > On Wednesday, July 1, 2015 at 9:09:38 AM UTC-5, mad...@acm.org wrote:
> [...]
> >> No hurry.  When you understand the problem, the solution will be
> >> obvious.  If the solution is not obvious, you do not yet understand
> >> the problem.
> >> 
> >> Randy.
> >
> > While the wording has attracted some disagreement, this is
> > IMO a very valuable notion. Perhaps if we replace 'problem'
> > with 'problem statement', that might lead us in a useful
> > direction.
> >
> > The seeds of the answer are embedded in the question.
> 
> Really?  How do you respond to the several examples mentioned in this
> thread where that just isn't true?  There are plenty of problems,
> particularly in mathematics, where the problem statement is dead simple
> but the solution is elusive (in some cases requiring decades or
> centuries of work) or even provably impossible.
> 

Let me start with a quote that I hope will help set the proper mood
for answering.

> It is impossible to disassociate language from science or science from language, because every natural science always involves three things: the sequence of phenomena on which the science is based, the abstract concepts which call these phenomena to mind, and the words in which the concepts are expressed. To call forth a concept, a word is needed; to portray a phenomenon, a concept is needed. All three mirror one and the same reality.

Antoine Lavoisier, 1789

The particular example of Fermat's last theorem (I forget what others were
mentioned) was solved AFAIAA by advances in number theory. Advancing a theory,
I argue, is precisely the same thing as unfolding an answer from the teeth
of the question. Taking an initial nebulous concept and refining it against
the *known*, the data, the given problem as stated. 

My own example is (my pop-science understanding of) Einstein's Special
Relativity. In the quest to understand the failure of the Michaelson-
Morley experiment to detect an etheric wake, the data was accepted as true
and the component concepts refined to make sense within that given context.

And even if there exist some very hard problems which are not easily
solvable by focusing on the precise details of the question itself,
it is still a useful strategy for /many/ problems. 'What exactly is being
asked of me?' <-- very useful to understand this in order to perform
whatever the desired action is. That's what saying. IMO it does hold up
to scrutiny, but also this weaker claim may raise fewer heckles.

And on a mystical level, meditating on the words of a hard problem can 
help to set your unconscious apparatus to work, drawing in all the 
universal energies at your disposal. 

I don't see any sense in the alternative position:

- Don't focus on the question
- The answer is somewhere else

That's not a strategy. That's hopelessness.

I forgot the question.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#64820

On Monday, July 6, 2015 at 8:17:38 PM UTC-5, luser droog wrote:
> I don't see any sense in the alternative position:
> 
> - Don't focus on the question
> - The answer is somewhere else
> 
> That's not a strategy. That's hopelessness.
> 

Is that a false snowman?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#64824

luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> writes:

> On Wednesday, July 1, 2015 at 9:09:38 AM UTC-5, mad...@acm.org wrote:
>> On Tuesday, June 30, 2015 at 3:21:45 PM UTC-4, fir wrote:
>> > PS I may add much weaker question but boarding slightly on this
>> > perfect methodology topic"
>> > 
>> > is it better to attack a problems 
>> > - in a bit hurry 
>> > - in a bit lazy mode
>> > - in high hurry and tense
>> > - in big lazy mode
>> > 
>> > ?
>> > 
>> > imo when you work in hurry you get tired,
>> > so being a little slow may help you conservate (preserve) the
>> > energy - so this could be better
>> > - otherwise it may seem thoygh thet being a little hury could rise
>> > your level of focus and
>> > tempo (though i personally do not quite belive in this, but maybe,
>> > im not sure)
>> 
>> "Measure twice, cut once."
>> 
>> No hurry.  When you understand the problem, the solution will be
>> obvious.  If the solution is not obvious, you do not yet understand
>> the problem.
>> 
>> Randy.
>
> While the wording has attracted some disagreement, this is
> IMO a very valuable notion. Perhaps if we replace 'problem'
> with 'problem statement', that might lead us in a useful
> direction.
>
> The seeds of the answer are embedded in the question.

Sometimes.  If you're lucky.  Certainly not universally...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#64872

"Joe Pfeiffer" <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> wrote in message 
news:1bvbdwwtmt.fsf@pfeifferfamily.net...
> luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>            [snip...]                     [snip...] 
>> [snip...]
>>
>> The seeds of the answer are embedded in the question.
>
> Sometimes.  If you're lucky.  Certainly not universally...
>

To correctly formulate a question *implies* that there is an answer. 
There's a seed for you!

-- 

numerist at aquaporin4 dot com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#64879

"Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> writes:
> "Joe Pfeiffer" <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> wrote in message 
> news:1bvbdwwtmt.fsf@pfeifferfamily.net...
>> luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>            [snip...]                     [snip...] 
>>> [snip...]
>>>
>>> The seeds of the answer are embedded in the question.
>>
>> Sometimes.  If you're lucky.  Certainly not universally...
>>
>
> To correctly formulate a question *implies* that there is an answer. 
> There's a seed for you!

"What is the smallest odd prime number greater than 2?"

"What is the smallest even prime number greater than 2?"

Is the first questions correctly formulated, and the second incorrectly
formulated?

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#64891

"Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> writes:

> "Joe Pfeiffer" <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> wrote in message
> news:1bvbdwwtmt.fsf@pfeifferfamily.net...
>> luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>            [snip...]                     [snip...] [snip...]
>>>
>>> The seeds of the answer are embedded in the question.
>>
>> Sometimes.  If you're lucky.  Certainly not universally...
>>
>
> To correctly formulate a question *implies* that there is an
> answer. There's a seed for you!

Only in the weakest possible human language sense of "implies", and even
then not universally.  Certainly not in the logic sense of implication.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#64900

On Tuesday, July 7, 2015 at 9:15:08 PM UTC+1, Charles Richmond wrote:
> To correctly formulate a question *implies* that there is an answer. 
> There's a seed for you!

If by "seed" you mean "unsupportable bit of claptrap", its one of the greatest seeds ever written.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#64403

On Sun, 28 Jun 2015 07:38:57 -0700, fir wrote:

> W dniu niedziela, 28 czerwca 2015 16:32:06 UTC+2 użytkownik Aleksandar
> Kuktin napisał:
>> On Sun, 28 Jun 2015 06:15:34 -0700, fir wrote:
>> 
>> > this is a bit meta-questions but in the realm of c coder 'inner'
>> > skillset, (c coding is not only language but some maybe harder
>> > ability to fine resolve some problems needed to build/run something
>> > [i agre though that maybe other group may be more appropriate but i
>> > am not conscious of 'practically'
>> > (not only 'teoretically' better one)
>> 
>> Are sure you're not a robot?
> 
> ye im sure

OK. Just asking. The Internet is strange place, you have to be open for 
every possibility.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#64473

W dniu poniedziałek, 29 czerwca 2015 02:58:43 UTC+2 użytkownik Aleksandar Kuktin napisał:
> On Sun, 28 Jun 2015 07:38:57 -0700, fir wrote:
> 
> > W dniu niedziela, 28 czerwca 2015 16:32:06 UTC+2 użytkownik Aleksandar
> > Kuktin napisał:
> >> On Sun, 28 Jun 2015 06:15:34 -0700, fir wrote:
> >> 
> >> > this is a bit meta-questions but in the realm of c coder 'inner'
> >> > skillset, (c coding is not only language but some maybe harder
> >> > ability to fine resolve some problems needed to build/run something
> >> > [i agre though that maybe other group may be more appropriate but i
> >> > am not conscious of 'practically'
> >> > (not only 'teoretically' better one)
> >> 
> >> Are sure you're not a robot?
> > 
> > ye im sure
> 
> OK. Just asking. The Internet is strange place, you have to be open for 
> every possibility.

the internet near me is yet stranger

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#64395

On Sunday, June 28, 2015 at 10:32:06 AM UTC-4, Aleksandar Kuktin wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Jun 2015 06:15:34 -0700, fir wrote:
> 
> > this is a bit meta-questions but in the realm of c coder 'inner'
> > skillset, (c coding is not only language but some maybe harder ability
> > to fine resolve some problems needed to build/run something [i agre
> > though that maybe other group may be more appropriate but i am not
> > conscious of 'practically'
> > (not only 'teoretically' better one)
> 
> Are sure you're not a robot?

Perhaps he has no spell checker and English is not his primary language?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#64402

On Sun, 28 Jun 2015 14:41:43 -0700, Ed Prochak wrote:

> On Sunday, June 28, 2015 at 10:32:06 AM UTC-4, Aleksandar Kuktin wrote:
>> On Sun, 28 Jun 2015 06:15:34 -0700, fir wrote:
>> 
>> > this is a bit meta-questions but in the realm of c coder 'inner'
>> > skillset, (c coding is not only language but some maybe harder
>> > ability to fine resolve some problems needed to build/run something
>> > [i agre though that maybe other group may be more appropriate but i
>> > am not conscious of 'practically'
>> > (not only 'teoretically' better one)
>> 
>> Are sure you're not a robot?
> 
> Perhaps he has no spell checker and English is not his primary language?

I don't know.. I've seen Chinese who don't speak a word of English 
communicate through translation programs and their sentences were always 
complete. There was always an unbroken overarching idea in a sentence, 
similar to how Google-translated texts always have a flow in them.

The paragraph I quoted, and the rest of the post I did not does not have 
that. Instead, it consists of syntaxes taped end to end. That is very 
suspicious of machine generated speech.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#64822

On Sunday, June 28, 2015 at 8:15:41 AM UTC-5, fir wrote:
> this is a bit meta-questions but in the realm of c coder 'inner' skillset, (c coding is not only language but some maybe harder ability to fine 
> resolve some problems needed to build/run something
> [i agre though that maybe other group may be more appropriate but i am not conscious of 'practically'
> (not only 'teoretically' better one) 
> 
> The problem is how to attack specyfic case in programming, lets say on some example, how to attactk RawInput (this is part of winapi that allows you to code input devices in more depth,
> for example at higher probing resolution, using 
> more devices at once (like 5 mices at once etc)
> Second example could be writing 2d physics collision engine etc etc
> 
> There is a couple of ways in which you may try to attack this problem, as i am mostly lone  coder and i cannot observe many coders at work and learn how exactly they will attack it i am still curious how one would do that
> 



> 1. try to find a number of tutorials on that subject (how many time you would spend on searching? how many tutorials would you localize 5 ? 10? 15? 30?)

If I'm searching for tutorials, I'll start reading the first one
that comes up. It usually easy to tell roughly what material a
tutorial covers. Then you intersect that with the set of stuff 
you need to know. The size of the resulting set/no. of pages
tends to predict whether I'll keep reading or look for something
else.

> 2. in which order you will try to read them, shallow read on all then, choose the one, two?, three? that fits the most?

If I've collected several resources to consult ... hmm
sorry, can't generalize anything off of that.

> 3. will you do a lot of learning/reading as a pre step or try to minimalise it and maybe go to coding as soon as possible and try to avoid reading

Really really depends on how familiar one is with the domain.
You might even need a school to learn some things. 

> 4. you prefer official documentation or tutorials?

Depends on the respective merits of each. Mr Bunny's guide to Java
is not a bad book because it is not official. It is a bad book
because is has no informative content of any kind.

> 5. maybe you have some places that you expect are good info

Yeah. For manpages, die.net turned up in my google search enough
times that I often go straight there instead of "--> google.com -->
man whatever [enter] click the die.net link that I've come to
expect". Cygwin comes with crap for manpages.

Wikipedia often has useful links at the bottom and in the footnotes
for more details and supporting documents.

StackOverflow's tag info wikis are often very good for language
and library docs and tutorials.

archive.org for researching older stuff and to use the wayback
machine to make use of broken links to stuff.

> 6. will you use source of close thigs or maybe will do some theoretic/ground research..?

All of those things when they feel right. I know that doesn't
really answer.

> Will you try to reuse others code or code your own dont even looking on others code

I'm always trying to write everything myself. But I'm a complete
(college-educated) amateur. In a professional setting I would
use libraries when they felt appropriate and useful. You need
to develop some process of evaluating the libraries quality
and level of support (community-supported, stable company-
supported, lone-gunman<--that's the best!!:).


> 7. will you use forums or try to avoid them?

Ok, for my super-amazing super secret super duper stuff,
well, you just forget I ever said that much about it.

For most stuff, I'm trying to sell my image as a genius,
nonconformist, neoplatonic, hacker. So, all my code is
up for sharing. We're on the honor system. Or at least
I'm trying to be. I invite others to do the same. 
qapplaH.

> 8. will you maybe consult with your collegues at work etc?

I work at Starbucks. There are two guys taking/have taken an
intro the Python class. My explanations of things don't seem
to be very helpful. They're too polite to ask me to explain
the words they don't know. Or maybe I use so many that they
can't make a list of the needed definitions while also paying
attention to what I'm trying to say with these long sentences.
I speak like I write.

> 9. Other important ways to lead to succesfull solution..?

Drugs.

> 
> I think may way of resolving things is not to much effective.. my own way is sacn for number of tutorials read them in parts in somewchat chaotic order to gather some view, then truy to code, somewhat half-blindly till i get tired/bored
> (by half-blindly i didnt mean i wrote incorrect code but this is code based on partial knowledge because of lack of time) then if im bored i drop the topic (!) then i get back much later if it is still important and try to improve it in a second phase (this second phase is also far from perfect)
> 
> Some ideas maybe how to do it striight?

Sometimes try "not taking drugs" for a while. 

(^^^ this is 
"figurative" humour (perhaps in poor taste). I am not recommending
that anyone alter their consumption of drugs to satisfy my 
instructions.)

-- 
Mr Bunny's guide to Java
is not a bad book ...
-luser droog

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c

csiph-web