![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
вот какую любопытную книжку я откопал в субботу:
русское издание аж 2003-го года :)
русское издание аж 2003-го года :)
Jul. 2nd, 2007
article, science
Jul. 2nd, 2007 11:05 amvia ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
nature_wonder очень интересная статья от Kevin Kelly: Speculations on the Future of Science
кстати, судя по объёму требуемых tools, разработчики ПО без хлеба не останутся :)
nature_wonder очень интересная статья от Kevin Kelly: Speculations on the Future of Scienceкстати, судя по объёму требуемых tools, разработчики ПО без хлеба не останутся :)
статья Страуструпа о эволюции C++
Jul. 2nd, 2007 11:12 amпро которую я уже писал тут, кроме разнообразных интересных "технических" деталей, застряла в голове одной очень правильной цитатой:
"...
My other priority (together with better support for generic programming) is better support for beginners. There is a remarkable tendency for proposals to favor the expert users who propose and evaluate them. Something simple that helps only novices for a few months until they become experts is often ignored. I think that’s a potentially fatal design bias. Unless novices are sufficiently supported, only few will become experts. Bootstrapping is most important! Further, many — quite reasonably — don’t want to become experts; they are and want to remain “occasional C++ users”. For example, a physicist using C++ for physics calculations or the control of experimental equipment is usually quite happy being a physicist and has only limited time for learning programming techniques. As computer scientists we might wish for people to spend more time on programming techniques, but rather than just hoping, we should work on removing unnecessary barriers to adoption of good techniques.
..."
Пожалуй никогда ещё формулировка "шашечки или ехать" не выглядела так солидно :)
"...
My other priority (together with better support for generic programming) is better support for beginners. There is a remarkable tendency for proposals to favor the expert users who propose and evaluate them. Something simple that helps only novices for a few months until they become experts is often ignored. I think that’s a potentially fatal design bias. Unless novices are sufficiently supported, only few will become experts. Bootstrapping is most important! Further, many — quite reasonably — don’t want to become experts; they are and want to remain “occasional C++ users”. For example, a physicist using C++ for physics calculations or the control of experimental equipment is usually quite happy being a physicist and has only limited time for learning programming techniques. As computer scientists we might wish for people to spend more time on programming techniques, but rather than just hoping, we should work on removing unnecessary barriers to adoption of good techniques.
..."
Пожалуй никогда ещё формулировка "шашечки или ехать" не выглядела так солидно :)