Re: Software Needs Philosophers

On 2016-09-12 17:09:03 +, danut...@gmail.com said: Yes, it does: Operating systems do as well . -- Andrea -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

Yes, it does: https://philosoftware.wordpress.com/ -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

He means Lisp macros. Lisp macros are nothing like the crippled C++ macros that people tend to think of. Roedy Green wrote: > On 21 May 2006 02:15:31 -0700, "Xah Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote, > quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said : > > > Java has lots of macro languages, including C++'s

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

The Condition of Industrial Programers Xah Lee, 2006-05 Before i stepped into the computing industry, my first industrial programing experience is at Wolfram Research Inc as a intern in 1995. (Wolfram Research is famously known for their highly successful flagship product Mathematica) I thought,

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

Paul Rubin a écrit : > John D Salt writes: > >>What exciting new ideas exist in software that are both important and >>cannot be traced back to 1986 or earlier? > > > Automated spamming tools? ;-) keyboard ! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

John A. Bailo a écrit : > John D Salt wrote: > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: >> >> [Snips] >> >>> Wrong. We live in a paradise of ideas and possibilities well beyond the >>> wildest dreams of only 20 years ago. >> >> >> >> What exciting new ideas exist in software that ar

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

John D Salt a écrit : > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: > > [Snips] > >>Wrong. We live in a paradise of ideas and possibilities well beyond the >>wildest dreams of only 20 years ago. > > > What exciting new ideas exist in software that are both important and > cannot be tr

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

On 21 May 2006 02:15:31 -0700, "Xah Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said : >FACT: Java has no first-class functions and no macros. This results in >warped code that hacks around the problem, and as the code base grows, >it takes on a definite, ugly shape, on

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

Eli Gottlieb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: [Snips] > I correct: We live in a paradise where we finally have to processing > power to realize all those ideas that were too inefficient 20 years > ago. That sounds more reasonable. In my more jaundiced moments, I think that

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

"John A. Bailo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: [Snips] > What exciting new ideas exist in software that are both important and > cannot be traced back to Doug Engbart's 1968 presentation at Xerox > Parc? The only two I would think worth mentioning are Nygaard et al's idea

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

Le Tue, 23 May 2006 08:58:12 -0500, John D Salt a écrit : > > What exciting new ideas exist in software that are both important and > cannot be traced back to 1986 or earlier? Actually it looks like the latest breakthru was invention of LISP circa 1957. Well, Perhaps OO paradigm and Smalltalk,

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

John D Salt writes: > What exciting new ideas exist in software that are both important and > cannot be traced back to 1986 or earlier? Automated spamming tools? ;-) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

John D Salt writes: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: > > [Snips] >> Wrong. We live in a paradise of ideas and possibilities well beyond the >> wildest dreams of only 20 years ago. > > What exciting new ideas exist in software that are both important and > cannot be traced b

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

Good question on new ideas vs old ideas. Seems to me the computer industry needs some young brains, raised around the internet, to generate some major new theoretical ideas for computers. Seems to me it must already be occuring below the radar. When it happens, it shouldn't be too hard to spot.

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

John D Salt wrote: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: > > [Snips] > >>Wrong. We live in a paradise of ideas and possibilities well beyond the >>wildest dreams of only 20 years ago. > > > What exciting new ideas exist in software that are both important and > cannot be trace

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

On Tue, 23 May 2006 15:58:12 +0200, John D Salt wrote: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: > > [Snips] >> Wrong. We live in a paradise of ideas and possibilities well beyond the >> wildest dreams of only 20 years ago. > > What exciting new ideas exist in software that are bot

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

John D Salt wrote: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: > > [Snips] > >>Wrong. We live in a paradise of ideas and possibilities well beyond the >>wildest dreams of only 20 years ago. > > > What exciting new ideas exist in software that are both important and > cannot be trace

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: [Snips] > Wrong. We live in a paradise of ideas and possibilities well beyond the > wildest dreams of only 20 years ago. What exciting new ideas exist in software that are both important and cannot be traced back to 1986 or earlier? I'd like

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

"nikie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] : Xah Lee wrote: : : : I wonder where you get your historical "facts" form? (Monty Python : movies?) Let's just add a few fun facts: Yes, philosophy did flourish : in ancient greece, but liberty certainly didn't. Yes, Athens was (

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

fupto: poster Dra¾en Gemiæ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Timo Stamm wrote: >> Dra¾en Gemiæ schrieb: >> >>> Xah Lee wrote: >>> Software Needs Philosophers >>> >>> Welcome to my junk filters >> >> >> >> Thanks for informing each and every reader of the newsgroups >> comp.lang.per

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

Timo Stamm wrote: > Dražen Gemić schrieb: > >> Xah Lee wrote: >> >>> Software Needs Philosophers >>> >> >> Welcome to my junk filters > > > > Thanks for informing each and every reader of the newsgroups > comp.lang.perl.misc, comp.lang.python, comp.lang.java.programmer, > comp.lang.lisp,

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

Dražen Gemić schrieb: > Xah Lee wrote: >> Software Needs Philosophers >> > > Welcome to my junk filters Thanks for informing each and every reader of the newsgroups comp.lang.perl.misc, comp.lang.python, comp.lang.java.programmer, comp.lang.lisp, comp.lang.function about your junk filters

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

Xah Lee wrote: > Software Needs Philosophers > > by Steve Yegge, 2006-04-15. > > Software needs philosophers. > > People don't put much stock in philosophers these days. The popular > impression of philosophy is that it's just rhetoric, just frivolous > debating about stuff that can never proper

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

vjg wrote: > nikie wrote: > >> (BTW: Have you ever considered the possibility that philosophers might >> not be interested in tab-versus-spaces-debates in the first place? >> Maybe they have more interesting matters to discuss. Just like the rest >> of us.) >> > > Debate? There's no valid d

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

nikie wrote: > > (BTW: Have you ever considered the possibility that philosophers might > not be interested in tab-versus-spaces-debates in the first place? > Maybe they have more interesting matters to discuss. Just like the rest > of us.) Debate? There's no valid dabate. Tabs bad. Spaces good.

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

"Mumia W." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Xah Lee wrote: >> Software Needs Philosophers >> >> by Steve Yegge, 2006-04-15. >> >> Software needs philosophers. >> >> [...] >> >> This post is archived at: >> http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2006/04/software-needs-ph

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

after all, somebody dumped some backup of his brain to use-net: > Software Needs Philosophers > by Steve Yegge, 2006-04-15. including lots of personal details. So what I basically took from it is written in this paragraph: > I was born and raised a Roman Catholic, and I renounced it when I was

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

Xah Lee wrote: > Software Needs Philosophers > > by Steve Yegge, 2006-04-15. > > Software needs philosophers. > > [...] > > This post is archived at: > http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2006/04/software-needs-philosophers.html > > and > http://xahlee.org/Periodic_dosage_dir/_p/software_phil.

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

As a professionally trained "philosopher" and "programmer", I'm perfectly well aware that the onus is on _me_ to make others respect & appreciate my skills and what they offer. Posting to usenet about how others just don't "get it" is, in fact, not "getting it". Even further, using "religion" as t

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

SamFeltus wrote: > Religious Fanaticism is a very strong in the Computer community. But, > is it really a surprise that when a bunch of hairless apes created a > new mental world, they created it with a complicated Quilt of religions > and nationalities, and many became fanatical? > > I am confi

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

"nikie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Xah Lee wrote: > >> Software Needs Philosophers >> >> by Steve Yegge, 2006-04-15. >> >> Software needs philosophers. >> >> This thought has been nagging at me for a year now, and recently it's >> been growing like a tumor. One

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

M Jared Finder wrote: > SamFeltus wrote: >> [...] >> Software needs philosophers is an interesting point, perhaps the most >> important function of Philosophers is exposing Sacred Cows as just >> Cattle. > > Finally, someone else who sees that Xah's posts consistently expose > valid problems! (T

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

Xah Lee wrote: > Software Needs Philosophers > > by Steve Yegge, 2006-04-15. > > Software needs philosophers. > > This thought has been nagging at me for a year now, and recently it's > been growing like a tumor. One that plenty of folks on the 'net would > love to see kill me. No, we all wish yo

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

Pascal Bourguignon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > "SamFeltus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Software needs philosophers is an interesting point, perhaps the most >> important function of Philosophers is exposing Sacred Cows as just >> Cattle. > > As I see it philosophers have a big problem: nobody

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

Xah Lee wrote: > Software Needs Philosophers > > by Steve Yegge, 2006-04-15. > > Software needs philosophers. > > This thought has been nagging at me for a year now, and recently it's > been growing like a tumor. One that plenty of folks on the 'net would > love to see kill me. > > People don'

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

Xah, I agree with the thrust of your thread here, though I don't think it's anything special: people invest their values in what they invest their time in. To top it off, you're taking an anti-CL viewpoint in a group predominantly focused around CL (despite being named for just lisp). You're fight

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

Mark Shelor wrote: > Xah Lee wrote: > >> Programming languages are religions. For a long while now I've been ... ... > Is there really something new out there? I would argue that software > needs innovation more than it needs philosophers. software needs innovation. innovation needs philosoph

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

"SamFeltus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Software needs philosophers is an interesting point, perhaps the most > important function of Philosophers is exposing Sacred Cows as just > Cattle. As I see it philosophers have a big problem: nobody need them, so they're out of job. That's why we see oc

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

SamFeltus wrote: > Religious Fanaticism is a very strong in the Computer community. But, > is it really a surprise that when a bunch of hairless apes created a > new mental world, they created it with a complicated Quilt of religions > and nationalities, and many became fanatical? > > I am confid

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

Xah Lee wrote: > Software Needs Philosophers > Welcome to my junk filters DG -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

Religious Fanaticism is a very strong in the Computer community. But, is it really a surprise that when a bunch of hairless apes created a new mental world, they created it with a complicated Quilt of religions and nationalities, and many became fanatical? I am confidant the responces Xah will re

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

In comp.lang.perl.misc Xah Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: : the way through the Software Dark Ages we're in today: a time that will Wrong. We live in a paradise of ideas and possibilities well beyond the wildest dreams of only 20 years ago. : But I've failed. This isn't the essay I wanted to wr

Re: Software Needs Philosophers

Xah Lee wrote: > Programming languages are religions. For a long while now I've been > mildly uncomfortable calling it “religion”, but I don't feel bad > about it anymore. They're similar enough. At the top of the language > religion is the language itself; it serves as the deity and the object >