>>18
I have. It starts off nicely with "SI", but then the "C" makes it sound like "sick", and the "P" sounds like "pee". So the first half was nice, but the rest really lets it down. All that buildup and excitement from the "S" and "I", only to be crushed by the "C" and "P". Overall they are a nice group of letters, and deserved to be read at least once, but they don't
warrant so much hype.
Only timewasters like C. They waste so much time implementing everything rather than delivering completed solutions.
Name:
Anonymous2007-12-19 17:59
>>32
What program languages do you develop solutions in? If you say Python, Perl or any other toy scripting language, your opinion is NUL.
Name:
Anonymous2007-12-19 18:05
>>33
Right, because productivity is never a valid measure for a language's usefulness.
Name:
Anonymous2007-12-19 18:13
>>33 What program languages do you develop solutions in? EXPERT PROGRAMMERS don't develop solutions, they only develop problems.
Name:
Anonymous2007-12-19 22:07
>>32
This is why EXPERT PROGRAMMERS write libraries and copypasta code, so that they don't have to write it again.
Also, OMG OPTIMIZED
Name:
Anonymous2007-12-20 0:43
>>36
Yes, that is good because every single programmer should have reinvented his own fucking wheels from raw C stdlib and use only that, right?
Name:
Anonymous2007-12-20 2:41
>>37
By solutions, I mean actual real-world applications which have been deployed. Nobody cares about your toy irc bot script, or your toy jpg renamer.
Name:
Anonymous2007-12-20 5:15
>>38 By solutions, I mean actual real-world applications which have been deployed.
Since those typically never use toy languages and most of the software on your PC right now was probably written in C or a language that works on a similar level, I'm not sure what side you're arguing for.