nuclear_eclipse
@nuclear_eclipse
Best posts made by nuclear_eclipse
Latest posts made by nuclear_eclipse
-
RE: Randal Munroe of xkcd.com must be familiar with TheDailyWTF.com
@bouk said:
On a zen note, humans error is human error, although human error is not human error.
My brain just broke...
-
RE: The joys of PHP
@Cap'n Steve said:
How do you explain the blank string then? I also think null would make more sense than false in this case. I thought I remembered some case where it will return a negative number, but I can't find an example right now.
It's simply saying that objects such as 0 or "" evaluate as false in a normal conditional, but only the identity operator (===) will determine if it's really the FALSE value, and not just evaluated as false. It's actually quite useful once you get used to how it all works. It's much better, and much more elegant than having functions return a special value like -1, which can get in the way when you want a return value that's outside all other possible values, like for a math function, where -1 could be a perfectly reasonable answer...
-
RE: Co-worker's third attempt at formatting a date...
That looks almost exactly like the way my co-workers like to use Perl to extract date/timestamps into arrays and then use sprintf to put them back together....
-
RE: Windows Vista Ultimate Edition Pricing WTF
@TheJasper said:
Fair? I tried to read it. I tried to keep an open mind. He begins by saying he is going to concentrate on comparison with vista's main competitor, namely XP. Fair enough, probably true. But the fact of the matter is that the further I read, the clearer it became that the guy was 110% pro Windows. He wouldn't have made a bad review if Vista came packaged on punch cards. You can't convince me that any (non trivial) software product that comes out is perfect. Maybe he gets to the downsides further on in the article, but I as far as I read it was all pro-windows and pro-vista.
I am not inherently anti-windows (I am anti-microsoft, but mainly because of their business practices). I figure, maybe windows fails on certain technical grounds, but it succeeds in making the machine accessible for my 77 year old aunt, who once swore she wouldn't ever have a computer in the house...and I haven't touched her machine for any maintenance ever, it was set up by my non-tech relations. But when I read a review which is only positive...well I hope he got paid for it, otherwise he is just delusional.Maybe somebody who actually read the whole review could give a...review. However, I think this 'fair review' reads like either a commercial or fan-fiction.
Perhaps you are correct. Thurrott is historically biased towards Windows, but if you take the time to read the last few sections of the article, especially the piece on the downsides of Vista, you do see that he is not just spouting the company line for Vista. He's simply making the argument that all of the problems that everyone is blaming Vista with, are mostly blown out of proportion. I have tried to find as many reviews of Vista as I could, and Thurrott's is really the one that seems most in touch with reality, and I'm no Windows fan - I have six computers, 4 with Linux, 1 with FreeBSD, and only 1 with Windows XP. But the majority of Vista reviews that I have found are of only two types: either written by a paid writer for a magazine who tailors the review to be favorable to the audience (100% pro-windows or 100% anti-windows), or written by a writer who for open source software, and the review of Vista is even more biased, or correspondingly slammed either over the price, the number of different versions, the "DRM-ed to hell" OS, or the new security dialogs.
But I digress. If you truly want unbiased information on Vista, you must read articles from every viewpoint, both good and bad, and then draw your own conclusions from what you've read. I personally found Thurrott to be quite open and he refreshingly wrote about Vista in such depth that it required about twenty separate articles to cover everything. I would be hard pressed to find such a detailed review of Vista anywhere else on the net.
-
RE: Windows Vista Ultimate Edition Pricing WTF
@Tweenk said:
Vista in itself is a WTF. Looks to me like the most awaited uber-bloat of all time. May anyone convince me I am wrong?
This is one of the most fair reviews I've seen dealing with Vista, especially is such detail that he goes into:
Paul Thurrott: http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/winvista.asp
-
RE: Ajax4Jsf White Paper
@asuffield said:
[quote user="nuclear_eclipse"][quote user="asuffield"]
Assembler is a highly simple, powerful beast of a language. That's kinda the point.
When you start to get into doing drivers, interrupts, functions/procedures, stacks, and memory allocations, I don't exactly see assembler as being simple.[/quote]
Missed the point. Assembler is simple. Programs that need to be written in assembler frequently are not. And writing programs in assembler is certainly not simple. But by analogy - just because it's difficult to take over the world by hitting people with a rock, doesn't mean that it's difficult to hit somebody with a rock. Overly simple tools are not normally the best choice for excessively complicated tasks.
[/quote]I'll accept that; good analogy. Much better than HTML -> JSP -> JSF =\
-
RE: Ajax4Jsf White Paper
@asuffield said:
[quote user="nuclear_eclipse"]while assembler is a highly complex, powerful, and wild beast of a language.
Assembler is a highly simple, powerful beast of a language. That's kinda the point.
[/quote]
When you start to get into doing drivers, interrupts, functions/procedures, stacks, and memory allocations, I don't exactly see assembler as being simple. It's a very complex process of managing and planning your code to take all those points into account. If assembler was simple, we'd all just be coding in machine languages...
-
RE: Ajax4Jsf White Paper
I think the WTF here is their equating of HTML to assembler, considering HTML is a very easy, static, and un-assembler-like "language", while assembler is a highly complex, powerful, and wild beast of a language.
-
RE: IE could not open site
@db2 said:
@nuclear_eclipse said:
I believe it's a sarcastic use of JavaScript to pop up an alert dialog for IE users,
Eg. <script> alert('Internet Explorer cannot blah blah ....'); <script>
As far as I know, you can't throw up a Red X Of Doom message box via Javascript. Unless there's some clever way of exploiting exceptions or something.
I somehow missed the red X, I guess it was my eyes glazing over already from the code I have to work on....