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

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #52536 > unrolled thread

I'm so conflicted...

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

Contents

  I'm so conflicted... Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-11-11 03:47 -0800
    I'm so conflicted... foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-11-11 04:37 -0800
    Re: I'm so conflicted... Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-11 05:29 -0800
      Re: I'm so conflicted... JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2016-11-11 05:33 -0800
      Re: I'm so conflicted... JUERGEN <epldfpga@aol.com> - 2016-11-11 05:35 -0800
      Re: I'm so conflicted... rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-11-11 20:02 -0500
        Re: I'm so conflicted... jim <anon@example.com> - 2016-11-12 10:59 +0000
          Re: I'm so conflicted... rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-11-12 11:21 -0500
            Re: I'm so conflicted... jim <anon@example.com> - 2016-11-12 21:30 +0000
              Re: I'm so conflicted... rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-11-12 23:18 -0500
                Re: I'm so conflicted... jim <anon@example.com> - 2016-11-13 12:28 +0000
                  Re: I'm so conflicted... Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-11-13 10:50 -0800
                    Re: I'm so conflicted... jim <anon@example.com> - 2016-11-13 19:14 +0000
                  Re: I'm so conflicted... rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-11-13 23:11 -0500
                    Re: I'm so conflicted... jim <anon@example.com> - 2016-11-14 09:44 +0000
          Re: I'm so conflicted... "Robert L." <No_spamming@noWhere_7073.org> - 2016-11-20 01:51 +0000
        Re: I'm so conflicted... Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-12 10:32 -0800
          Re: I'm so conflicted... rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-11-12 13:52 -0500
            Re: I'm so conflicted... Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-12 11:55 -0800
              Re: I'm so conflicted... rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-11-12 23:19 -0500
                Re: I'm so conflicted... Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-13 18:16 -0800
                  Re: I'm so conflicted... rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-11-13 23:14 -0500
                    Re: I'm so conflicted... jim <anon@example.com> - 2016-11-14 09:51 +0000
                    Re: I'm so conflicted... Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-14 04:04 -0800
                      Re: I'm so conflicted... Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-11-15 03:11 -0800
                        Re: I'm so conflicted... "Robert L." <No_spamming@noWhere_7073.org> - 2016-11-20 23:50 +0000
          Re: I'm so conflicted... albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-11-12 20:11 +0100
    Re: I'm so conflicted... "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-11-12 00:34 +1100
    Re: I'm so conflicted... hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-11-11 16:19 -0800
      Re: I'm so conflicted... Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-12 10:34 -0800
        Re: I'm so conflicted... november.nihal@gmail.com - 2016-11-12 12:35 -0800
          Re: I'm so conflicted... "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-11-12 11:46 -1000
            Re: I'm so conflicted... Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-12 15:23 -0800
              Re: I'm so conflicted... hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-11-12 18:13 -0800
              Re: I'm so conflicted... rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-11-12 23:23 -0500
                Re: I'm so conflicted... "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-11-12 20:55 -1000
              Re: I'm so conflicted... "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-11-12 20:46 -1000
                Re: I'm so conflicted... Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-11-13 01:06 -0800
                  Re: I'm so conflicted... Mikael Nordman <oh2aun@gmail.com> - 2016-11-13 12:59 -0800
                    Re: I'm so conflicted... Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-13 18:27 -0800
                      Re: I'm so conflicted... Mikael Nordman <oh2aun@gmail.com> - 2016-11-13 20:34 -0800
                Re: I'm so conflicted... Howerd <howerdo@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-11-13 17:56 -0800
                  Re: I'm so conflicted... "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-11-14 14:53 +1100
                  Re: I'm so conflicted... "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-11-13 22:04 -1000
            Re: I'm so conflicted... albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-11-13 10:51 +0100
    Re: I'm so conflicted... Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-11-14 03:10 -0800
      Re: I'm so conflicted... "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2016-11-15 01:03 +1100
        Re: I'm so conflicted... Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-11-14 07:31 -0800
          Re: I'm so conflicted... foxaudioresearch@gmail.com - 2016-11-14 13:29 -0800
            Re: I'm so conflicted... Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-11-15 03:02 -0800
              Re: I'm so conflicted... albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-11-15 13:39 +0100
          Re: I'm so conflicted... hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-11-15 18:22 -0800
            Re: I'm so conflicted... Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-11-16 01:32 -0800
              Re: I'm so conflicted... hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-11-16 13:00 -0800
                Re: I'm so conflicted... hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-11-16 13:04 -0800
                Re: I'm so conflicted... Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-11-16 13:42 -0800
                  Re: I'm so conflicted... hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-11-17 12:28 -0800
                    Re: I'm so conflicted... Raimond Dragomir <raimond.dragomir@gmail.com> - 2016-11-17 22:14 -0800
                    Re: I'm so conflicted... Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-11-19 15:01 -0800
                      Re: I'm so conflicted... hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-11-19 16:55 -0800
                        Re: I'm so conflicted... Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-11-20 10:36 -0800
                          Re: I'm so conflicted... Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-11-20 10:43 -0800
                          Re: I'm so conflicted... Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-11-20 11:15 -0800
                            Re: I'm so conflicted... Mark Wills <markwills1970@gmail.com> - 2016-11-20 13:57 -0800
                          Re: I'm so conflicted... Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2016-11-28 13:26 -0500
            Re: I'm so conflicted... Jan Coombs <jenfhaomndgfwutc@murmic.plus.com> - 2016-11-16 10:25 +0000
              Re: I'm so conflicted... hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-11-16 12:33 -0800

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

#52536 — I'm so conflicted...

Forth: You're in control. Everything is global. The system assumes
you're not an idiot. And I love it.

Python: You're in control. Everything is global. The system assumes
you're not an idiot. I hate it.

And I don't know why!

Aggggh! :-/

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#52537

I smell opportunity Mark.  Do you need a Forth/Python interface , like a sock puppet kind of thing maybe.

Or even simpler,  a forth system that can be called from Python to do the stuff you can't do in Python.

Maybe the world is waiting for you to write it.

Would that help?

BF

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

#52538

On Friday, 11 November 2016 12:47:20 UTC+1, Mark Wills  wrote:
> Forth: You're in control. Everything is global. The system assumes
> you're not an idiot. And I love it.
> 
> Python: You're in control. Everything is global. The system assumes
> you're not an idiot. I hate it.
> 
> And I don't know why!
> 
> Aggggh! :-/

Hi Mark,

With Python the system assumes that you are not an idiot, but that you are very busy, so you will use libraries written by someone else. If you want to see what is in the libraries the source is there, but do you really have the time?
Your job is to find and use exactly the right library - nothing to do with programming. 
When you have found your perfect library your job is to write wrapper code to call it from your program - also not really programming.
Then you run your program. Job done.

And remember how wonderful Python is compared to Perl :-)

Best regards,
Howerd 

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

#52539

On Friday, November 11, 2016 at 1:29:33 PM UTC, Howerd wrote:
> On Friday, 11 November 2016 12:47:20 UTC+1, Mark Wills  wrote:
> > Forth: You're in control. Everything is global. The system assumes
> > you're not an idiot. And I love it.
> > 
> > Python: You're in control. Everything is global. The system assumes
> > you're not an idiot. I hate it.
> > 
> > And I don't know why!
> > 
> > Aggggh! :-/
> 
> Hi Mark,
> 
> With Python the system assumes that you are not an idiot, but that you are very busy, so you will use libraries written by someone else. If you want to see what is in the libraries the source is there, but do you really have the time?
> Your job is to find and use exactly the right library - nothing to do with programming. 
> When you have found your perfect library your job is to write wrapper code to call it from your program - also not really programming.
> Then you run your program. Job done.
> 
> And remember how wonderful Python is compared to Perl :-)
> 
> Best regards,
> Howerd

But if somebody were to use them together - I assume an MPE SockPupprt should do the job?

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

#52541

On Friday, November 11, 2016 at 1:29:33 PM UTC, Howerd wrote:
> On Friday, 11 November 2016 12:47:20 UTC+1, Mark Wills  wrote:
> > Forth: You're in control. Everything is global. The system assumes
> > you're not an idiot. And I love it.
> > 
> > Python: You're in control. Everything is global. The system assumes
> > you're not an idiot. I hate it.
> > 
> > And I don't know why!
> > 
> > Aggggh! :-/
> 
> Hi Mark,
> 
> With Python the system assumes that you are not an idiot, but that you are very busy, so you will use libraries written by someone else. If you want to see what is in the libraries the source is there, but do you really have the time?
> Your job is to find and use exactly the right library - nothing to do with programming. 
> When you have found your perfect library your job is to write wrapper code to call it from your program - also not really programming.
> Then you run your program. Job done.
> 
> And remember how wonderful Python is compared to Perl :-)
> 
> Best regards,
> Howerd

and in another thread I had started regarding MicroBit I had asked if there is a Forth ( limited version ) is available written in Python

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

#52551

On 11/11/2016 8:29 AM, Howerd wrote:
> On Friday, 11 November 2016 12:47:20 UTC+1, Mark Wills  wrote:
>> Forth: You're in control. Everything is global. The system assumes
>> you're not an idiot. And I love it.
>>
>> Python: You're in control. Everything is global. The system assumes
>> you're not an idiot. I hate it.
>>
>> And I don't know why!
>>
>> Aggggh! :-/
>
> Hi Mark,
>
> With Python the system assumes that you are not an idiot, but that you are very busy, so you will use libraries written by someone else. If you want to see what is in the libraries the source is there, but do you really have the time?
> Your job is to find and use exactly the right library - nothing to do with programming.
> When you have found your perfect library your job is to write wrapper code to call it from your program - also not really programming.
> Then you run your program. Job done.

I find it amusing what programmers think programming is, or is not. 
What is wrong with using libraries for the grunt work and writing the 
"real" code that makes the application do what is needed?  Why is that 
not "programming"?

This sounds a bit arrogant.  "If they aren't programming the way I 
program, it isn't programming".

-- 

Rick C

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

#52552

> In article <o05pmf$q1q$1@dont-email.me>, gnuarm@gmail.com says...
>
> I find it amusing what programmers think programming is, or is not. 
> What is wrong with using libraries for the grunt work and writing the 
> "real" code that makes the application do what is needed?  Why is that 
> not "programming"?
> 
> This sounds a bit arrogant.  "If they aren't programming the way I 
> program, it isn't programming".


I would point out there is a big difference between "programming" and "coding"
and what people call programming today is little more than scripting.

What tends to happen over time is a large scale de-skilling and job title
and task renaming that seems designed to hide the widespread de-skilling.

How many companies employ "systems analysts" these day I wonder?
And what do they do in between toilet breaks.


 

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

#52560

On 11/12/2016 5:59 AM, jim wrote:
>> In article <o05pmf$q1q$1@dont-email.me>, gnuarm@gmail.com says...
>>
>> I find it amusing what programmers think programming is, or is not.
>> What is wrong with using libraries for the grunt work and writing the
>> "real" code that makes the application do what is needed?  Why is that
>> not "programming"?
>>
>> This sounds a bit arrogant.  "If they aren't programming the way I
>> program, it isn't programming".
>
>
> I would point out there is a big difference between "programming" and "coding"
> and what people call programming today is little more than scripting.
>
> What tends to happen over time is a large scale de-skilling and job title
> and task renaming that seems designed to hide the widespread de-skilling.
>
> How many companies employ "systems analysts" these day I wonder?
> And what do they do in between toilet breaks.

At some point are you going to define "programming" in a useful way?

-- 

Rick C

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

#52569

> In article <o07fgj$b1o$2@dont-email.me>, gnuarm@gmail.com says...
> 
> On 11/12/2016 5:59 AM, jim wrote:
> >> In article <o05pmf$q1q$1@dont-email.me>, gnuarm@gmail.com says...
> >>
> >> I find it amusing what programmers think programming is, or is not.
> >> What is wrong with using libraries for the grunt work and writing the
> >> "real" code that makes the application do what is needed?  Why is that
> >> not "programming"?
> >>
> >> This sounds a bit arrogant.  "If they aren't programming the way I
> >> program, it isn't programming".
> >
> >
> > I would point out there is a big difference between "programming" and "coding"
> > and what people call programming today is little more than scripting.
> >
> > What tends to happen over time is a large scale de-skilling and job title
> > and task renaming that seems designed to hide the widespread de-skilling.
> >
> > How many companies employ "systems analysts" these day I wonder?
> > And what do they do in between toilet breaks.
> 
> At some point are you going to define "programming" in a useful way?

I don't know about useful  but

I hadn't thought of it as an issue but sure- I tend to agree with F.P. Brooks
and his definition of a "Programming Systems Product" 
That is programming to me. It is rapidly becoming too physically dangerous 
to do it any other way.

Anything less is scripting, or hacking or whatever else you call it.
(I was trained in systems analysis and organisation and methods
in the 1970's - perhaps explaining my bias.. things were different.)

There's a big paragraph in his book I'll type out if you need it that
describes it better.   (Chapter 1 - I just looked it up) 

bashing out say a few forth words and sticking a stack effect picture
on the end doesn't even come close regardless of whether it performs a 
desired function or not.

You can go too far of course -  I had to suffer the use of SSADM once.
By the time I had single handedly deforrested the african continent 
the job was defunct anyway. That's a methodology I'll never use again.
It doesn't even perform its intended function most of the time.

I notice some people are using footers - If no one objects I'd like
to start adding my forum and johns site on something like this 
perhaps with an info line (dont know what yet).

jim

---------------------------------------
http://johntech.co.uk
http://johntech.co.uk/forum/ 
--------------------------------------


. 

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

#52576

On 11/12/2016 4:30 PM, jim wrote:
>> In article <o07fgj$b1o$2@dont-email.me>, gnuarm@gmail.com says...
>>
>> On 11/12/2016 5:59 AM, jim wrote:
>>>> In article <o05pmf$q1q$1@dont-email.me>, gnuarm@gmail.com says...
>>>>
>>>> I find it amusing what programmers think programming is, or is not.
>>>> What is wrong with using libraries for the grunt work and writing the
>>>> "real" code that makes the application do what is needed?  Why is that
>>>> not "programming"?
>>>>
>>>> This sounds a bit arrogant.  "If they aren't programming the way I
>>>> program, it isn't programming".
>>>
>>>
>>> I would point out there is a big difference between "programming" and "coding"
>>> and what people call programming today is little more than scripting.
>>>
>>> What tends to happen over time is a large scale de-skilling and job title
>>> and task renaming that seems designed to hide the widespread de-skilling.
>>>
>>> How many companies employ "systems analysts" these day I wonder?
>>> And what do they do in between toilet breaks.
>>
>> At some point are you going to define "programming" in a useful way?
>
> I don't know about useful  but
>
> I hadn't thought of it as an issue but sure- I tend to agree with F.P. Brooks
> and his definition of a "Programming Systems Product"
> That is programming to me. It is rapidly becoming too physically dangerous
> to do it any other way.

But you didn't share that definition.  I'm don't think I'm going to buy 
a book to continue this discussion.  A search mostly gave me links about 
"The Mythical Man-Month".


> Anything less is scripting, or hacking or whatever else you call it.
> (I was trained in systems analysis and organisation and methods
> in the 1970's - perhaps explaining my bias.. things were different.)
>
> There's a big paragraph in his book I'll type out if you need it that
> describes it better.   (Chapter 1 - I just looked it up)
>
> bashing out say a few forth words and sticking a stack effect picture
> on the end doesn't even come close regardless of whether it performs a
> desired function or not.

You are using derogatory labels rather than explaining anything.


> You can go too far of course -  I had to suffer the use of SSADM once.
> By the time I had single handedly deforrested the african continent
> the job was defunct anyway. That's a methodology I'll never use again.
> It doesn't even perform its intended function most of the time.
>
> I notice some people are using footers - If no one objects I'd like
> to start adding my forum and johns site on something like this
> perhaps with an info line (dont know what yet).

You could shorten the white space at the end which I just have to delete 
in order to reply.  You also should use the standard marker for a footer 
which would allow a newsreader to trim it automatically.

-- 

Rick C

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

#52583

> n article <o08phk$dqj$1@dont-email.me>, gnuarm@gmail.com says...
> 
> But you didn't share that definition.  I'm don't think I'm going to buy 
> a book to continue this discussion.  A search mostly gave me links about 
> "The Mythical Man-Month".

As a matter of fact I did offer tp type out the whole definition for you just
5 lines below.

On the other hand if you're too idle to type a phrase into wikipedia
or yahoo then why would i bother? 
I did assume a certain knowledge of programming technologies
when I responded. My mistake sorry.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programming_in_the_large_and_programming_in_the_small

> 
> 
> > Anything less is scripting, or hacking or whatever else you call it.
> > (I was trained in systems analysis and organisation and methods
> > in the 1970's - perhaps explaining my bias.. things were different.)
> >
> > There's a big paragraph in his book I'll type out if you need it that
> > describes it better.   (Chapter 1 - I just looked it up)
> >
> > bashing out say a few forth words and sticking a stack effect picture
> > on the end doesn't even come close regardless of whether it performs a
> > desired function or not.
> 
> You are using derogatory labels rather than explaining anything.
> 
If you think there is something derogatory there I can only suggest you 
grow a thicker skin.

I will take your comments about footers under advisement.
(Is thunderbird a newsreader? I thought it was one of those swiss army knife
thingies that tried to be all things to all people?)
Is this design any easier for you? I can adjust it more if it helps.

jim

=========================
http://johntech.co.uk

"Bleeding Edge Forum"
http://johntech.co.uk/forum/ 

=========================

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

#52586

jim <anon@example.com> writes:
> I will take your comments about footers under advisement....
> Is this design any easier for you? I can adjust it more if it helps.

Traditionally (i.e. I don't know if anyone remembers any more),
netiquette called for keeping it to 4 lines or less.

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

#52588

In article <8760nrfc3j.fsf@nightsong.com>, no.email@nospam.invalid says...
> 
> jim <anon@example.com> writes:
> > I will take your comments about footers under advisement....
> > Is this design any easier for you? I can adjust it more if it helps.
> 
> Traditionally (i.e. I don't know if anyone remembers any more),
> netiquette called for keeping it to 4 lines or less.

Which was what I did initially and got the complaint.
... some of the people some of the time.

-- 
jim

=========================
http://johntech.co.uk

"Bleeding Edge Forum"
http://johntech.co.uk/forum/ 

=========================

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

#52603

On 11/13/2016 7:28 AM, jim wrote:
>> n article <o08phk$dqj$1@dont-email.me>, gnuarm@gmail.com says...
>>
>> But you didn't share that definition.  I'm don't think I'm going to buy
>> a book to continue this discussion.  A search mostly gave me links about
>> "The Mythical Man-Month".
>
> As a matter of fact I did offer tp type out the whole definition for you just
> 5 lines below.

And I have done nothing to stop you.


> On the other hand if you're too idle to type a phrase into wikipedia
> or yahoo then why would i bother?
> I did assume a certain knowledge of programming technologies
> when I responded. My mistake sorry.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programming_in_the_large_and_programming_in_the_small

I did do a search and I shared the results with you.

Your article says, "Fred Brooks identifies that the way an individual 
program is created is different from how a programming systems product 
is created."  I asked what you define as "programming" and you refer me 
to a book talking about programs vs. a "programming systems product". 
I'm not getting it.

Why don't you just tell me what *you* mean by "programming"?


>>> Anything less is scripting, or hacking or whatever else you call it.
>>> (I was trained in systems analysis and organisation and methods
>>> in the 1970's - perhaps explaining my bias.. things were different.)
>>>
>>> There's a big paragraph in his book I'll type out if you need it that
>>> describes it better.   (Chapter 1 - I just looked it up)
>>>
>>> bashing out say a few forth words and sticking a stack effect picture
>>> on the end doesn't even come close regardless of whether it performs a
>>> desired function or not.
>>
>> You are using derogatory labels rather than explaining anything.
>>
> If you think there is something derogatory there I can only suggest you
> grow a thicker skin.
>
> I will take your comments about footers under advisement.
> (Is thunderbird a newsreader? I thought it was one of those swiss army knife
> thingies that tried to be all things to all people?)
> Is this design any easier for you? I can adjust it more if it helps.

I have no interest in playing word games with you.  If you want to 
discuss something then let's do so.  If you just want to spar, I'll let 
you go on without me.

As to your signature, how about *you* do a little web searching an learn 
about it?

-- 

Rick C

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

#52610

In article <o0bdgj$ge7$1@dont-email.me>, gnuarm@gmail.com says...
> 
> I have no interest in playing word games with you.  If you want to 
> discuss something then let's do so.  If you just want to spar, I'll let 
> you go on without me.
>

You're the one with the problem not me. 
 
> As to your signature, how about *you* do a little web searching an learn 
> about it?
> 

I don't need to - I was here when it started. (before in fact)


> 
> Rick C
> 


-- 
jim

=========================
http://johntech.co.uk

"Bleeding Edge Forum"
http://johntech.co.uk/forum/ 

=========================

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

#52744

On 11/12/2016, jim wrote:

> I would point out there is a big difference between "programming" and "coding"
> and what people call programming today is little more than scripting.
> 
> What tends to happen over time is a large scale de-skilling and job title
> and task renaming that seems designed to hide the widespread de-skilling.
> 
> How many companies employ "systems analysts" these day I wonder?
> And what do they do in between toilet breaks.


Ruby:

%{I would point out there is a big difference between "programming" and "coding"
and what people call programming today is little more than scripting.
What tends to happen over time is a large scale de-skilling and job title
and task renaming that seems designed to hide the widespread de-skilling.
How many companies employ "systems analysts" these day I wonder?
And what do they do in between toilet breaks.}.downcase.scan(/[\w-]+/).
group_by{|s| s}.map{|word,array| [array.size,word]}.sort_by{|c,w| [-c,w]}.
tap{|ary| width = ary.map{|c,w| w.size}.max
  ary.each{|count,word| puts "#{word.ljust width} #{'*' * count}"}}

and         *****
is          ***
what        ***
a           **
between     **
de-skilling **
do          **
i           **
programming **
to          **
analysts    *
big         *
breaks      *
call        *
coding      *
companies   *
day         *
designed    *
difference  *
employ      *
happen      *
hide        *
how         *
in          *
job         *
large       *
little      *
many        *
more        *
out         *
over        *
people      *
point       *
renaming    *
scale       *
scripting   *
seems       *
systems     *
task        *
tends       *
than        *
that        *
the         *
there       *
these       *
they        *
time        *
title       *
today       *
toilet      *
widespread  *
wonder      *
would       *

Nobody knows what jim is talking about because nobody
knows what he means by "programming", "coding", or "scripting".

Let's see if he can perform this task in Forth by
"programming", "coding", or "scripting".

Don't hold your breath.

-- 
When the Israeli bombers and torpedo-planes were sent to attack and destroy the
ship, the Jewish commander, seeing that it was an American vessel, had
misgivings and reported to the High Command, which simply repeated the orders
to attack and sink the Liberty. www.revilo-oliver.com/rpo/Bit_of_Good_News.html

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

#52562

On Saturday, 12 November 2016 02:02:40 UTC+1, rickman  wrote:
> On 11/11/2016 8:29 AM, Howerd wrote:
> > On Friday, 11 November 2016 12:47:20 UTC+1, Mark Wills  wrote:
> >> Forth: You're in control. Everything is global. The system assumes
> >> you're not an idiot. And I love it.
> >>
> >> Python: You're in control. Everything is global. The system assumes
> >> you're not an idiot. I hate it.
> >>
> >> And I don't know why!
> >>
> >> Aggggh! :-/
> >
> > Hi Mark,
> >
> > With Python the system assumes that you are not an idiot, but that you are very busy, so you will use libraries written by someone else. If you want to see what is in the libraries the source is there, but do you really have the time?
> > Your job is to find and use exactly the right library - nothing to do with programming.
> > When you have found your perfect library your job is to write wrapper code to call it from your program - also not really programming.
> > Then you run your program. Job done.
> 
> I find it amusing what programmers think programming is, or is not. 
> What is wrong with using libraries for the grunt work and writing the 
> "real" code that makes the application do what is needed?  Why is that 
> not "programming"?
> 
> This sounds a bit arrogant.  "If they aren't programming the way I 
> program, it isn't programming".
> 
> -- 
> 
> Rick C

Hi Rick,

When I wrote "also not really programming" I was thinking only of what I have done when I use Python to get a specific job done compared to what I do when I program in Forth - I was not comparing what I do to what others may or may not do - sorry if I didn't make that clear.
For me they are two completely different mindsets.

Best regards,
Howerd

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

#52564

On 11/12/2016 1:32 PM, Howerd wrote:
> On Saturday, 12 November 2016 02:02:40 UTC+1, rickman  wrote:
>> On 11/11/2016 8:29 AM, Howerd wrote:
>>> On Friday, 11 November 2016 12:47:20 UTC+1, Mark Wills  wrote:
>>>> Forth: You're in control. Everything is global. The system assumes
>>>> you're not an idiot. And I love it.
>>>>
>>>> Python: You're in control. Everything is global. The system assumes
>>>> you're not an idiot. I hate it.
>>>>
>>>> And I don't know why!
>>>>
>>>> Aggggh! :-/
>>>
>>> Hi Mark,
>>>
>>> With Python the system assumes that you are not an idiot, but that you are very busy, so you will use libraries written by someone else. If you want to see what is in the libraries the source is there, but do you really have the time?
>>> Your job is to find and use exactly the right library - nothing to do with programming.
>>> When you have found your perfect library your job is to write wrapper code to call it from your program - also not really programming.
>>> Then you run your program. Job done.
>>
>> I find it amusing what programmers think programming is, or is not.
>> What is wrong with using libraries for the grunt work and writing the
>> "real" code that makes the application do what is needed?  Why is that
>> not "programming"?
>>
>> This sounds a bit arrogant.  "If they aren't programming the way I
>> program, it isn't programming".
>>
>> --
>>
>> Rick C
>
> Hi Rick,
>
> When I wrote "also not really programming" I was thinking only of what I have done when I use Python to get a specific job done compared to what I do when I program in Forth - I was not comparing what I do to what others may or may not do - sorry if I didn't make that clear.
> For me they are two completely different mindsets.

I can't say I understand your definition of "programming".  Why is 
writing code using a library or libraries not programming?

-- 

Rick C

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

#52567

On Saturday, 12 November 2016 19:52:35 UTC+1, rickman  wrote:
> On 11/12/2016 1:32 PM, Howerd wrote:
> > On Saturday, 12 November 2016 02:02:40 UTC+1, rickman  wrote:
> >> On 11/11/2016 8:29 AM, Howerd wrote:
> >>> On Friday, 11 November 2016 12:47:20 UTC+1, Mark Wills  wrote:
> >>>> Forth: You're in control. Everything is global. The system assumes
> >>>> you're not an idiot. And I love it.
> >>>>
> >>>> Python: You're in control. Everything is global. The system assumes
> >>>> you're not an idiot. I hate it.
> >>>>
> >>>> And I don't know why!
> >>>>
> >>>> Aggggh! :-/
> >>>
> >>> Hi Mark,
> >>>
> >>> With Python the system assumes that you are not an idiot, but that you are very busy, so you will use libraries written by someone else. If you want to see what is in the libraries the source is there, but do you really have the time?
> >>> Your job is to find and use exactly the right library - nothing to do with programming.
> >>> When you have found your perfect library your job is to write wrapper code to call it from your program - also not really programming.
> >>> Then you run your program. Job done.
> >>
> >> I find it amusing what programmers think programming is, or is not.
> >> What is wrong with using libraries for the grunt work and writing the
> >> "real" code that makes the application do what is needed?  Why is that
> >> not "programming"?
> >>
> >> This sounds a bit arrogant.  "If they aren't programming the way I
> >> program, it isn't programming".
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> Rick C
> >
> > Hi Rick,
> >
> > When I wrote "also not really programming" I was thinking only of what I have done when I use Python to get a specific job done compared to what I do when I program in Forth - I was not comparing what I do to what others may or may not do - sorry if I didn't make that clear.
> > For me they are two completely different mindsets.
> 
> I can't say I understand your definition of "programming".  Why is 
> writing code using a library or libraries not programming?
> 
> -- 
> 
> Rick C

Hi Rick,

OK, it is programming, just a different type of programming :-)

Best regards,
Howerd

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

#52577

On 11/12/2016 2:55 PM, Howerd wrote:
> On Saturday, 12 November 2016 19:52:35 UTC+1, rickman  wrote:
>> On 11/12/2016 1:32 PM, Howerd wrote:
>>> On Saturday, 12 November 2016 02:02:40 UTC+1, rickman  wrote:
>>>> On 11/11/2016 8:29 AM, Howerd wrote:
>>>>> On Friday, 11 November 2016 12:47:20 UTC+1, Mark Wills  wrote:
>>>>>> Forth: You're in control. Everything is global. The system assumes
>>>>>> you're not an idiot. And I love it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Python: You're in control. Everything is global. The system assumes
>>>>>> you're not an idiot. I hate it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And I don't know why!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Aggggh! :-/
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Mark,
>>>>>
>>>>> With Python the system assumes that you are not an idiot, but that you are very busy, so you will use libraries written by someone else. If you want to see what is in the libraries the source is there, but do you really have the time?
>>>>> Your job is to find and use exactly the right library - nothing to do with programming.
>>>>> When you have found your perfect library your job is to write wrapper code to call it from your program - also not really programming.
>>>>> Then you run your program. Job done.
>>>>
>>>> I find it amusing what programmers think programming is, or is not.
>>>> What is wrong with using libraries for the grunt work and writing the
>>>> "real" code that makes the application do what is needed?  Why is that
>>>> not "programming"?
>>>>
>>>> This sounds a bit arrogant.  "If they aren't programming the way I
>>>> program, it isn't programming".
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Rick C
>>>
>>> Hi Rick,
>>>
>>> When I wrote "also not really programming" I was thinking only of what I have done when I use Python to get a specific job done compared to what I do when I program in Forth - I was not comparing what I do to what others may or may not do - sorry if I didn't make that clear.
>>> For me they are two completely different mindsets.
>>
>> I can't say I understand your definition of "programming".  Why is
>> writing code using a library or libraries not programming?
>>
>> --
>>
>> Rick C
>
> Hi Rick,
>
> OK, it is programming, just a different type of programming :-)

I still have no idea what you mean.  I use libraries all the time when I 
program... or whatever it is that I do.  If you don't wish to explain 
it, fine.  But I don't really know what you are trying to say.

-- 

Rick C

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

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

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

csiph-web