[linux-elitists] Opera beta for linux available
Fri Oct 6 16:17:06 PDT 2000
On Fri, 6 Oct 2000, Eugene Leitl wrote:
> That was a cheap shot (owch). And you forgot lots of silly
> parenthesis. And 8 MBytes continuously swapping (256 MBytes
> continuously swapping, in my case. When Netscape and XEmacs are
> fighting for the core sometimes even the GUI loses; my window dock has
> crashed a week ago. Now here's a feature of KDE I'm not missing one
Interesting. I've never had that happen with my editor of choice (Nedit),
which is not exactly lightweight.
> Well, you don't say which IDE you're using. (Unless ::snort:: is
> something like SNiFF). Anyways, it's hard to argue about a reality
> branch that didn't happen. The stuff I see in my head is pretty nice,
> but I can't beam that imagery at you.
The reference IDE is the NeXT one, though I've only really used it in its
MacOS X Server incarnation. I've never seen *any* that was as cool, even
though I'm not much of a fan of Objective-C.
My second favorite IDE is CodeWarrior, whether on Linux, MacOS, or BeOS.
> You pegged me wrong, mine was a meta level comment. Instead of running
> like herdless sheep from one knoll of grass to the other, we should
> have flocked to the first decent knoll, and stayed there. There is
> synergy in numbers. Larger communities are overproportionally
> productive, the more so the longer they persist. Which particular
> language to use doesn't matter, as long as it's safe and powerful.
OK. I just hear a lot of bitching and moaning from Lisp fans around the
python community and I'm tired of it. I didn't mean so much to take it out
on you personally.
However, I disagree. As a writer, dialogue is not my only tool. As a
woodworker, I don't just use a table saw. Each tool has a set of best
uses, a set of good uses and a set of inappropriate uses. I see computer
languages a lot like that. I will never use just one. Heck, I've used four
> The question is not whether the stuff is more fun or elegant, it's
> whether it allows you to write stable industry-strength code. Lisp was
> the first decent language to come along, so the community should have
> stayed there. I wish *nix/C didn't happen. Forth at the low end
> (dirty, mean and lean, no bloat), Lisp at the high end (safe and
> elegant, but a bit on the fat side), this would have been cool.
Well, Forth code can be well-written and high-end. But, as a friend said,
"the problem with most Forth programmers is that they think of the reset
switch as a programming tool." I wrote a LOT of Forth in my day. I learned
LISP and Forth at the same time (along with Smalltalk). Of the three,
Forth is the one I liked best and used most. I have worked on
commercial-scale Forth projects; one was a hypertext medical system before
hypertext became so common.
But I'd say that C is a *fuck* of a lot better language for almost
everything than Lisp. Try debugging a large Lisp project. When you've done
one on the scale of the average commercial software project, then I think
you'll have earned the right to tell programmers what tools they maybe
should or shouldn't use. We still won't listen, mind you.
> Emacs is broken since it doesn't do threading. Nor incremental
> nonintrusive gc. No patches will do, it needs badly to be rewritten
> from scratch, because it sucks so badly.
If it were written in C, it wouldn't need to be rewritten from scratch.
That's the point you don't get.
> And I'm not a coder, so I'm forced to stick to a large enough
> community (damn these brownian sheep). Python/C seems to offer the
> righ mix of nice features, productivity (especially for a noncoder),
> performance and support. Perl/C has too many warts, albeit a larger
I prefer PHP for doing web stuff, but for everything else I pretty much
> I wish programmers had less maestro/diva streaks, and wouldn't keep on
> fragmenting into balkanized communities, producing little isolated
> noninteroperable code sniglets, and most of them of lousy quality
> while bleating out that their spot is sweeeetest.
Maybe you really need to learn what it's like to be a programmer. I've
done it for a living for a quarter century now. The primary languages I've
used, in order: Basic, Pascal, Forth, C, C++, Python, PHP.
Why the evolution? Because, among other things, the toolsets changed.
> > I'd be hard-pressed to name a language I like less than Lisp.
> > I think I even prefer Visual Basic, and that's saying something.
> I honestly don't understand that. Is it the verbosity or parenthesis
> which irk you, or something deeper? Snootiness? Stench of the rotting
> AI carcass?
It's the AI aspect, in part.
I don't like the verbosity, obscurity or parentheses either, but I can
forgive any one of those.
I just don't care for functional languages. Of the classes I took in CS,
AI was my second-least favorite (the lower layers of the OSI model were
the only thing that won out but there was pretty stiff competition).
_Deirdre * http://www.sfknit.org * http://www.deirdre.net
"More damage has been caused by innocent program crashes than by
malicious viruses, but they don't make great stories."
-- Jean-Louis Gassee, Be Newsletter, Issue 69
More information about the linux-elitists