Hobby languages
in [Cobol]
|
From: George Orwell on 27 Jul 2010 09:44 > Then don't hire us. Ever. To do anything. I wouldn't. I write code and get paid handsomely for doing it. I don't need to hire anybody to do what I'm already good at- code that you can't write anyway. I wasn't taking to you, Louis, why are you arguing with me on Howard's behalf? Did I slap your girlfriend? I wouldn't hire you to shine my shoes. You couldn't do that on your best day. > "Middle of the road dopes" doesn't begin to describe what you're facing > here. If you only knew... I do know, and I don't have any patience for mediocrity or people who don't care enough about what they do to become experts and have unpopular opinions based on actually knowing something instead of going with the flow or hiding behind a cadre of other incompetent people parroting the same incorrect opinions. Sorry to break up your love-in, girls! You can write all the Perl in the world and teach women COBOL, that doesn't make you a man ;-) Il mittente di questo messaggio|The sender address of this non corrisponde ad un utente |message is not related to a real reale ma all'indirizzo fittizio|person but to a fake address of an di un sistema anonimizzatore |anonymous system Per maggiori informazioni |For more info https://www.mixmaster.it
From: Howard Brazee on 27 Jul 2010 10:29 On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 02:43:42 +0200 (CEST), starwars <nonscrivetemi(a)tatooine.homelinux.net> wrote: >> Base "good and bad" upon objectives and measurable criteria. Otherwise >> you are talking religion. > >I gave you criteria and a lot of other useful information. I don't recall >any thank yous but I do see a lot of arguments you're making for other >people, I guess you see they can't defend themselves. Thank-you for being part of an interesting conversation? I didn't figure you for a Donald Trump type. I just took time to re-read your messages, and those with measurable objective criteria must not have made it to my computer. Could you please re-post them? Thank-you. >> And the objectives shouldn't be based upon "clean code", but upon "are >> the needs of the customer met". > >That's an interesting and short-sighted comment. If you say part of the >customer's needs are software that's easily and promptly serviced then >clean code does have a direct and measurable influence on whether those >needs are met. I don't disagree with your second sentence. If those are the customer's needs, then why is my comment short-sighted? "Quality" does not mean "doing things my way". Criteria should be determined according to the goals of the job. Part of the process should be making sure the goals are complete and measurable. >I see you guys are basically middle-of-the-road dopes who really don't care >about quality or performance or understanding how anything really works as >long as it eventually works (sort of). I think you should get your vision checked. >Those are fine goals for applicance >users (or car drivers, etc.) but for people who do this as a living which I >thought we all were, those are some pretty sorry values. So you want criteria for programming that doesn't apply to car drivers? Interesting, to me, the cost of bad car driving can be higher than the cost of a quick and dirty program. I also don't see that "doing this as a living" should have higher standards than "I'm retired but doing this to buy a toy", or even "doing this because I love it". But programming standards should be measured against objective criteria. -- "In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found, than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace to the legislature, and not to the executive department." - James Madison
From: Anonymous on 27 Jul 2010 10:36 In article <Q4KdnVVt64DipdPRnZ2dnUVZ_radnZ2d(a)indra.net>, Louis Krupp <lkrupp_nospam(a)indra.com.invalid> wrote: [snip] >And the one who calls himself Doc >... there's a story there, I'm sure of it. zzzZZZZZzzznnuurrrkkk... zzzZZAAWWWWWWWW... huh? whuh? Onwards, onwards for the glory of... oh, sorry, I was... thinking about something, did I miss much? A story behind me? Pfawgh, nothing special... one day I was working on a warehouse loading-dock and thought 'Wouldn't being a COBOL-codin' fool beat this like a bass drum at a school-band practise-session?' And there you have it... ONE and two and THREE and four and 'whoodle tootle clang clash *whump* *whump* *whump*'. DD
From: Howard Brazee on 27 Jul 2010 10:41 On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 10:54:41 +1200, "Pete Dashwood" <dashwood(a)removethis.enternet.co.nz> wrote: >Living in Germany certainly spoiled beer drinking for me. The fine beers >produced according to the Rheinheitsgebot are SO far ahead of the fizzy >chemical concoctions that pass for beer in the rest of the world, that I >find it very hard to drink beer when outside Germany. Here in NZ they are >starting to produce pure beers that have no enzymes, fillers, rice, or >chemical accelerants in them, and one or two of these are not bad, but my >palate still remembers and hankers for "ein grosses Koenigs oder Bitburger >Pils..." I loved watching it being drawn and seeing the white foam slowly >replaced by the pale golden nectar that is good Pils.... ah, happy times! Of course, taste is taste. Personally, I'd much rather drink Belgian ale than German Pilsner. (Not to say that Germans don't make good ale too - but there are microbreweries all over the world with fine brews). It would be convenient if I liked lagers. I do like the whole thing about having so many new microbreweries. -- "In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found, than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace to the legislature, and not to the executive department." - James Madison
From: Pete Dashwood on 27 Jul 2010 19:53
Louis Krupp wrote: > On 7/26/2010 6:43 PM, starwars wrote: > <snip> >> I see you guys are basically middle-of-the-road dopes who really >> don't care about quality or performance or understanding how >> anything really works as long as it eventually works (sort of). >> Those are fine goals for applicance users (or car drivers, etc.) but >> for people who do this as a living which I thought we all were, >> those are some pretty sorry values. > > Then don't hire us. Ever. To do anything. > > Take Perl programming, for example. I said I'd done some, but don't > believe me. I'm useless. As far as I'm concerned, whatever it is, > there isn't even a single way to do it. > > And COBOL. If I mention that I taught COBOL once -- to a Women in > Computer Science program at a university in 1983 -- don't be fooled. > Most of my students, when interviewed a year or two later at their > various homeless shelters, their starving and neglected children > staring wanly at the camera, singled out my class as the experience > that ruined their lives. > > And then there's Unisys. I worked for what was then Unisys CAD/CAM > from 1987 to 1992. Know what's happened to Unisys lately? Reverse > stock split, that's what, and it's all my fault. Sure, they try to > bury it in the annual report, since they're tired of having to > explain how I set the industry back six years while only working > there for five, but it's there if you look. They used to promise > they'd recover from whatever it was I did in ten years, or fifteen, > and now they're shooting for twenty. > So don't hire me. Or any of us. Pete sounds like an intelligent guy, > but what is he hiding from down there in New Zealand? What is Howard > really going to do when he retires? And the one who calls himself Doc > ... there's a story there, I'm sure of it. > > "Middle of the road dopes" doesn't begin to describe what you're > facing here. If you only knew... > > Louis An amusing and well written response, Louis. :-) I'm of the opinion that Starwars, George Orwell, Non-Scrivetemi, and Nomen Nescio all live under the same bridge and may well be the same Troll. :-) But, like you, I'm just a "middle of the road dope" so I'm probably wrong... Pete. Pete. -- "I used to write COBOL...now I can do anything." |