IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New 1994, actually.
Original point still stands. You can't stereotype maturity based on age.

I'd hardly call STL necessary for components, anyway. You can do components without generic programming. The utility may be lessened, but it's still possible.
Regards,

-scott anderson

"Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
New That's a side issue
Point remains that we never bother to make stuff mature - we just abandon it for the next shiny thing every few years.

So no wonder its hard to get to components based software construction.




[link|http://www.blackbagops.net|Black Bag Operations Log]

[link|http://www.objectiveclips.com|Artificial Intelligence]

[link|http://www.badpage.info/seaside/html|Scrutinizer]
Expand Edited by tuberculosis Aug. 21, 2007, 06:02:49 AM EDT
New Define "a few years"
First you said 10. As I pointed out, by that definition every one you listed was "mature". C++ has been around nearly as long as Smalltalk-80. Length of time has nothing to do with components.
Regards,

-scott anderson

"Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
New No
I haven't bothered to chart it out - I pulled "10" from my ass. Deal with it.

But the point (which you are working really hard to miss) is that software is inherently fashion oriented. we don't stick with stuff to perfect it, we abandon it after awhile.

C++ golden age was 1992-6. Java was 1997-2004. I see Java dying already (and I abandoned it a long time ago). XML was a little craze in there somewhere. etc.



[link|http://www.blackbagops.net|Black Bag Operations Log]

[link|http://www.objectiveclips.com|Artificial Intelligence]

[link|http://www.badpage.info/seaside/html|Scrutinizer]
Expand Edited by tuberculosis Aug. 21, 2007, 06:04:25 AM EDT
New Hey, YOU'RE the one who made the stupid assertion.
Deal with it.
Regards,

-scott anderson

"Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
New I guess...
...the FORTRAN-77 that we maintain that was written on PDP-11s running RSX/11 just ain't hip enough for you.

People can and do (and, indeed, mostly do) write software that keeps the world turning in things other than SmallTALK.

I'd bet a pint that more C++ and Java is written every month than all the SMalLTaLK code in all the world.

But hey, they're dying.

You're a very clever man who says very silly things sometimes, Todd.


Peter
[link|http://www.no2id.net/|Don't Let The Terrorists Win]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Home]
Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
[link|http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?pwhysall|A better terminal emulator]
New wrongly
I used to work in F/77. For certain domains it is the right tool for the job. There are some wonderfully mature math libs written in it. Great stuff. Libraries - you know - components - tested, mature, solid, verified.

And yet - some years ago - Raytheon's Satellite management division ported all of their nice stable bullet proof tested F/77 libs to C++. Because that's the new thing don'tcha know. Never mind that you can just LINK to and CALL F/77 from C/C++. A useful property we used to have pre-C++ was library interoperability. Of course, that went the way of dodo with name mangling. The C++ versions run more slowly too.

Which really goes to prove my point on the fashion thing. When asked to select the right tool for a given job, 99.9999% of programmers will answer Mooooooo as their herd instinct kicks in.

I figured I'd point out the point given that point spotting has achieved Mr Magoo levels on this board. Thanks for the absolutely uninspiring exchanges all, I won't trouble you again.



[link|http://www.blackbagops.net|Black Bag Operations Log]

[link|http://www.objectiveclips.com|Artificial Intelligence]

[link|http://www.badpage.info/seaside/html|Scrutinizer]
Expand Edited by tuberculosis Aug. 21, 2007, 06:05:49 AM EDT
New Don't leave.
Even when I don't agree with you, I usually enjoy your contributions.

Don't let the barbs get to you. This place would be very much less interesting if it was a mutual admiration society. Feel free to give as good as you get. :-)

Come back when you can.

Cheers,
Scott.
New Oh stop.
I dont have a clue what you guys are talking about with all this programming gibberish (it all sounds like blah blah blah to me) but I do know you're brillant, have strong opinions, and are very passionate and very good at what you do. Pull your nose back in joint. This place needs you around. And when I say this place, I of course, mean me. Dont bail, Todd.
Follow your MOUSE
New Wind your neck in.
You're being an oversensitive prima donna and all because some people dare to disagree with you.


Peter
[link|http://www.no2id.net/|Don't Let The Terrorists Win]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Home]
Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
[link|http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?pwhysall|A better terminal emulator]
     Interesting Article on Software Engineering - (tuberculosis) - (48)
         off the cuff without reading the article - (boxley) - (17)
             Same as it ever was - (drewk) - (16)
                 He doesn't mention language at all - (tuberculosis) - (15)
                     Everything always looks better from the outside - (tonytib) - (1)
                         Hardware design is getting to look a lot like... - (ChrisR)
                     I was replying to Bill's comment, not really to the article - (drewk) - (12)
                         I know where he is going with that - (boxley) - (4)
                             I know the authors of dabbledb - (tuberculosis) - (3)
                                 Note that the h/w folks Savain loves don't love schematics - (tonytib) - (2)
                                     Does noone use circuit simulators? -NT - (tuberculosis) - (1)
                                         Circuit simulators are no silver bullet, esp for Analog -NT - (tonytib)
                         And another thing... - (jb4) - (4)
                             He's talking about the "90%" of programming. - (Another Scott) - (3)
                                 I'm considerably more skeptical about components - (tonytib) - (2)
                                     Well said. - (Another Scott) - (1)
                                         Well, we've already got 10^10 components... - (jb4)
                         The problem with user-built programs - (tablizer) - (1)
                             you expect anything different? - (Steve Lowe)
         The article is BS - (ben_tilly) - (28)
             I don't agree - (tuberculosis) - (26)
                 Er, what? It's 2006, dude. - (admin) - (12)
                     C++ was never about components - (tuberculosis) - (11)
                         ? in 97 useta write module compile in Borland - (boxley)
                         1994, actually. - (admin) - (9)
                             That's a side issue - (tuberculosis) - (8)
                                 Define "a few years" - (admin) - (7)
                                     No - (tuberculosis) - (6)
                                         Hey, YOU'RE the one who made the stupid assertion. - (admin)
                                         I guess... - (pwhysall) - (4)
                                             wrongly - (tuberculosis) - (3)
                                                 Don't leave. - (Another Scott)
                                                 Oh stop. - (bionerd)
                                                 Wind your neck in. - (pwhysall)
                 Just for the record: - (jb4)
                 I wish components worked like that everywhere - (ben_tilly) - (11)
                     What do you mean, traditionally? - (admin) - (10)
                         I mean what they mean in their documentation - (ben_tilly) - (9)
                             That's character set, not numeric. - (admin) - (8)
                                 So we were talking past each other -NT - (ben_tilly) - (7)
                                     The example you gave was of numeric sort not working. - (admin) - (2)
                                         No, it was not of *numeric* sort not working - (ben_tilly) - (1)
                                             Nevermind me, I'm tired tonight. -NT - (admin)
                                     There's a lot of that going on -NT - (tuberculosis) - (3)
                                         No - (admin) - (2)
                                             Whatever - (tuberculosis) - (1)
                                                 Who says irony is dead? -NT - (admin)
             The problem with hardware is deeper - (tonytib)
         Good luck with that - (warmachine)

Ah yes, "Lambicus cetafermentum", otherwise known as the Greater Belgian Whale.
130 ms