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


Groups > comp.programming > #9301

Re: .paid field vs .payment field

Newsgroups comp.programming
Date 2018-09-25 09:43 -0700
References <po0slo$eqg$1@gioia.aioe.org> <03ff8449-f4f8-4c03-84d0-ab5efd539efa@googlegroups.com> <pobjcp$1dhl$1@gioia.aioe.org> <a1a3fe24-76dc-4d8a-8295-685f44f03de4@googlegroups.com> <podm0b$puj$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Message-ID <05d5ce44-c2a2-4fd4-bfc6-9b2ee6272cd2@googlegroups.com> (permalink)
Subject Re: .paid field vs .payment field
From Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name>

Show all headers | View raw


On Tuesday, 25 September 2018 17:59:14 UTC+2, Victor Porton  wrote:

> No, there are links in BOTH directions:

Where you completely miss what is what and the very distinction between a
conceptual model and an implementation model.  And that the conceptual part
rather *drives*, not the other way round: e.g. "links" implement _relations_,
and it's the relations that you should find and model to begin with.  Just to
mention the tip of an iceberg.

But I know you have a background in mathematics, that's why I rather expected
you to be able to at least parse precise statements and definitions, or know
what a _relation_ is, etc., even if you have no clue about implementation.

> You can read my abstract Nobel-level (yes, I know no Nobel in math) math
> research at: http://www.mathematics21.org/algebraic-general-topology.html

Sure, I have seen it in sci.math, crank!  Not that sci.math is anymore that
relevant, of course, but you are being utterly ridiculous...

And now you get a job in software, as many, and as many with some mathematical
background (and this includes 99% of the computer scientists), you think you
are a genius of software...  Well, sorry to break it on you, but software
*engineering* is *the most complex engineering that there is*, and yours is
just yet another instance of the Dunning-Kruger effect: to put it charitably.

Indeed, it's pretty normal to be totally confused when first approaching real
programming and real software (already the discipline of naming things is a
total nightmare to the beginner): and not just because of the *tons* of *crap*
that one usually finds online (Wikipedia on anything software *not* being any
exception), but more fundamentally, I'll say it again,  *software is the
most complex engineering that there is*.  So, I really do not have it with
your cluelessness, I have it with your unmitigated arrogance and the frauds
that necessarily come with it...

Bottom line, learn to use question marks, that might help.

Have a nice day,

Julio

Back to comp.programming | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

.paid field vs .payment field Victor Porton <porton@narod.ru> - 2018-09-20 22:33 +0300
  Re: .paid field vs .payment field Victor Porton <porton@narod.ru> - 2018-09-22 16:40 +0300
  Re: .paid field vs .payment field Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2018-09-22 07:11 -0700
    Re: .paid field vs .payment field Victor Porton <porton@narod.ru> - 2018-09-22 17:17 +0300
      Re: .paid field vs .payment field Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2018-09-25 01:21 -0700
        Re: .paid field vs .payment field Victor Porton <porton@narod.ru> - 2018-09-25 18:59 +0300
          Re: .paid field vs .payment field Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2018-09-25 09:43 -0700
  Re: .paid field vs .payment field Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2018-09-22 08:53 -0700

csiph-web