Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder2.ecngs.de!ecngs!feeder.ecngs.de!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.ams.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.ams.giganews.com!nntp.bt.com!news.bt.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2013 05:54:15 -0600
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2013 11:54:10 +0000
From: lipska the kat <"lipskathekat at yahoo dot co dot uk">
Organization: Trollbusters 3
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130308 Thunderbird/17.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject: Re: Java 8 closures vs. anonymous inner classes
References: <l7nuiv$ajm$1@news.albasani.net> <5yTqu.2639$oo4.861@fx02.iad> <52acd504$0$302$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <g4nru.546685$nC5.145367@fx06.iad> <MPG.2d1abfbf395d3ee22@202.177.16.121> <C17tu.56714$T27.44999@fx01.iad>
In-Reply-To: <C17tu.56714$T27.44999@fx01.iad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <1Ymdndba6bj6HCjPnZ2dnUVZ8sKdnZ2d@bt.com>
Lines: 50
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-AuthenticatedUsername: NoAuthUser
X-Trace: sv3-B3BmM5K1T5G24rxKZX0ffRRHVwtk0UxbggtwHbAwzZHGad/G0iX6SDpT52XJMvCx1KcSG0Xvb4nGDqO!1lq/a037z0GovwzqARF4u3lWoOOL89MMJFmuN6VEXJ62p/Fxtih3IzXYCozqgS73x8u1Ps/MX6+I
X-Complaints-To: abuse@btinternet.com
X-DMCA-Complaints-To: abuse@btinternet.com
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 3529
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:27010

On 21/12/13 02:28, Arved Sandstrom wrote:
> On 12/17/2013 03:09 PM, Wanja Gayk wrote:
>> In article <g4nru.546685$nC5.145367@fx06.iad>, Arved Sandstrom
>> (asandstrom2@eastlink.ca) says...
>>
>>> No aspersion on the M-F 9-5 programmers, Arne. But by definition M-F 9-5
>>> programmers have made a decision - not something I will heavily
>>> criticize - to confine their work to work hours, and keep their free
>>> time for family and leisure. As such they don't spend nearly as much
>>> time on off-hours professional education (if any), and we all know that
>>> work hours don't lend themselves to professional education either.
>>
>> To put it bluntly, this is nonsense. You can't generalize like that.
>
> Sure I can generalize like that. When I refer to a programmer as a M-F
> 9-5 programmer, it's not a slur, it's a straightforward definition of a
> programmer who only practices his trade M-F 9-5.

<snip>

Who works 9-5?

I never had a job where I worked 9-5

8-6 minimum plus any unpaid overtime required to get the job done by 
release date. Then there are the nights (or small part thereof) spent in 
the company flat sleeping on the floor because some suit said we could 
do so and so by such and such and now we are working until we drop while 
he sleeps at home with his wife, or mistress.

Then there's the time spent crammed up against some herbert who could do 
with a bath, on an overcrowded train, waiting for the upline to become 
available and swotting up for the latest Java certification.

Or spending your weekends getting your head around some shitty new 
framework that some twat decided was the latest greatest waste of time 
that would look good on his CV, whilst your kids are growing up and you 
are missing the best time of their lives.

Or trying to learn some pointlessly complicated XML at 11.00pm on a 
weeknight, or ... or ... or ...

9-5 developers?
No such thing.


-- 
Lipska the KatŠ: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer,
treacherous feline and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun
GNU/Linux user #560883 - http://www.linuxcounter.net