Vector themed issue: How to wear sheepskin

This is a discussion on Vector themed issue: How to wear sheepskin within the APL forums in Programming Languages category; On Aug 14, 7:17*pm, AAsk <AA2e...@lycos.co.uk> wrote: > When it comes to claims about speed, it is worth remembering that 9 > members of the male species and one member of the female species would > still take 9 months to produce an offspring. Certainly the speed to > production matters but what matters even more is the embedded value of > the software and the confidence with which it can be deployed. If you do it the other way round with 9 members of the female species and one member of the male species would take 9 months to ...

Go Back   Application Development Forum > Programming Languages > APL

Object Mix

Register FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
  #41  
Old 08-21-2008, 11:49 PM
Gosi
Guest
 
Default Re: Vector themed issue: How to wear sheepskin

On Aug 14, 7:17*pm, AAsk <AA2e...@lycos.co.uk> wrote:

> When it comes to claims about speed, it is worth remembering that 9
> members of the male species and one member of the female species would
> still take 9 months to produce an offspring. Certainly the speed to
> production matters but what matters even more is the embedded value of
> the software and the confidence with which it can be deployed.


If you do it the other way round with 9 members of the female species
and one member of the male species would take 9 months to produce 9
offsprings, and if all are twins it could be 18 and .....

So it looks like it matters what kind of programming staff you keep.
What kind of managers etc

In a rowing boat it matters to have one manager and 7 persons rowing
or if you have 7 managers and one person rowing.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 08-25-2008, 01:20 AM
Jack
Guest
 
Default Re: Vector themed issue: How to wear sheepskin

On Aug 18, 2:05*am, Gosi <gos...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Aug 18, 2:29 am, Jack <jgr...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Aug 16, 3:57 am, Gosi <gos...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> > > On Aug 12, 4:30 am, Jack <jgr...@comcast.net> wrote:

>
> > > > In my environment, it has always been risky to have our real-time
> > > > systems have anything to do with APL, since some people would always
> > > > be ready to blame APL whenever anything failed.

>
> > > How and why would they blame APL?

>
> > > I guess that was the attitude some decades ago but it is hardly
> > > relevant today.

>
> > > > I avoid this by doing
> > > > my development and offline testing in APL; when we decide that a given
> > > > algorithm should be put into our real-time system, we translate it to
> > > > C and integrate it. *So our missile defense customer sees nothingbut
> > > > C and C++.

>
> > > So you are not giving them any chance of judging any APL and as far as
> > > your message goes you do use APl but you will not let anyone know how
> > > you came up with your solution.

>
> > > I think it is time to drop the old idea that APL is just for certain
> > > people and some people are dead against it.

>
> > > I think this thread is basically based on the old idea that APL code
> > > can blow up with APL errors displayed on the screen.

>
> > > There are error handlings in all new modern APLs and no need for the
> > > user to know other than the solution was done in APL and it works.

>
> > > The reason for the solution was done in APL was because it was easier
> > > and faster.

>
> > > ----------------
> > > Björn Helgasonhttp://groups.google.com/group/J-Programming

>
> > There are several reasons that real-time missile defense applications
> > should not be implemented in APL. *One of them is that you don't want
> > to lose cycles to garbage collection in the midst of trying to shoot
> > down a missile.

>
> There are surely 1000 reasons why real-time missile defense
> application should not be implemented in any language.
>
> If you look at all the possible problems with any language i am sure
> you can find something wrong.
>
> People have been making mistakes in various programs and the more
> lines you write the more likely it is to make mistakes.
>
> It is more a question of attitude if you look for positive or
> negative.
>
> If you look for positive you will find it.
> If you look for negative you will find it.
>
> Will you look for positive and add on it and eliminate any problems
> encountered or will you look for negative and not give it a try?
>
> It looks like many concentrate on the negative in APL and do not even
> try to fix it.
>
> Many who say this and that is not good enough in APL think the same is
> ok in other languages.
>
> I have recently looked closely at Rexx again.
>
> Rexx seems to be positively accepted for many of the things people
> have complained about in APL- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -


Wow. I never dreamed there would ever be someone to suggest that I'm
insufficiently enthusiastic about using APL. :-)


Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.2.0
vB Ad Management by =RedTyger=

In an effort to better serve ads to our visitors, cookies are used on objectmix.com. For more information, check out our Privacy Policy.