Re: is it possible to install a desktop-manager without python and perl?

2009/6/24 Hal Vaughan :
>
> On Jun 23, 2009, at 10:02 PM, =A9=FA=C4=B1 wrote:
>
>> 2009/6/23 Jeff Soules :
>>>>
>>>> I open this thread as a programmer, you can ignore my questions about
>>>> programming in the future, but you should not ignore my questions as a
>>>> debian user.
>>>
>>> Right now you are showing that you're a person who asks for advice,
>>> but does not listen to the response. People value their time and will
>>> not take the time to respond to someone like this, whether you're
>>> speaking as a programmer, a Debian user, an artist, or a fisherman.
>>> Don't waste people's time. Ever.
>>
>> yes i'm asking for advice, and I'm very happy to get so many good
>> advices, and I'm trying to form a solution to include all the good
>> advices, I'm not wasting other's time, we are just discussing and
>> trying to figure out the best way.
>
> No, we're not figuring out the best way. All of US are telling you that
> you're off your rocker and on a fool's quest. You're saying, "But you're
> wrong and I'm right."
I give you much respect, but you give me laughing, I will not respect
you anymore, no thanks, good bye!
>
>>>
>>> You talk about how different languages are just "different ways to do
>>> the same thing." Well... okay... but you're writing to this list in
>>> English. From your sig and your name you're obviously a native
>>> Chinese speaker. Aren't English and Chinese just "different ways to
>>> say the same thing?" If you don't understand them both well, you
>>> might think so. But some things are much easier to do in one language
>>> versus the other. "=C4=C6=C4=C6=A6=F3=A9=D2=A6=FC=A1A =A4=D1=A6a=A4@=
=A8F=C5=C3" -- in English, is it 'just the same
>>> thing?' It's not that Chinese is just "better," there are plenty of
>>> things that are more natural in English than in Chinese. Just the
>>> same, if all you see in Perl is wrappers around C functions--if you
>>> think "none of them bring new concepts [or clarity or simplicity] to
>>> C/C++" -- then you don't understand Perl. And you need to. Without
>>> lots of different ways of thinking about problems, you're like a frog
>>> in a well, saying "look how small the sky is!"
>>
>> A very good comparison -- human languages and programming languages.
>> Then why we must have an official world language - English? What's the
>> official language in the programming world? If you say you do not need
>> an official programming language, then you are saying "we do not need
>> English to be the world official language", I believe no one will
>> agree with you; if you say every programmer should learn many
>> languages, then you are saying "everyone should learn English,
>> Chinese, French....", oh, I believe everyone will hate you so much, I
>> guess you are also a chinese, you should know how suffering we chinese
>> have to learn English.
>
> Comparisons hold true on some levels, but few hold true on every level. =
In
> this case, you're taking one argument and stretching it beyond any bounda=
ry
> of logic or common sense. Yeah, I could go into it more, but why? You'l=
l
> just say, "But I'm right and you're not."
>
>> I value every good concept in every language,
>
> No you don't. If you did, you'd understand the main message you've been
> told dozens of times.
>
>> but please add that good
>> concept to my familiar language, not force me to learn a new one;
>
> Nobody's forcing you to learn a darn thing. You don't have to do nothing=
--
> except pay taxes and die (and I honestly don't know how taxes work in you=
r
> country). You make it sound like a chore to learn a new language. For a
> true programmer it isn't. Learning a new language, for a real and true
> programmer, is and adventure. It's a chance to approach all problems fro=
m
> yet another perspective. I learned most languages in a few hours or days=
.
> When I first started looking at OOP, it took me a while, but once I got =
it,
> working with other OOP based languages was a snap. If you feel like you'=
re
> being forced to learn languages, then you're in the wrong field.
>
> But after reading that line, I wonder....
>
> Is all this because you have trouble with some languages -- it looks like
> you're essentially trying to go through all this so you don't have to lea=
rn
> languages you don't want to learn.
>
> I've never seen someone work so hard due to fear and sloth.
>
>> or,
>> I can reference another language so that I can improve my language,
>> but please do not force me to use a new one.
>
> Nobody is forcing you to learn anything. You don't want to learn one, do=
n't
> learn it. Quit the job -- but then when you want a new job, don't be
> surprised if they ask you why you quit that last one! Honestly, that you
> can even talk about being forced to learn a language, that you even have
> that as a concept in your brain, says even more about you. It tells us y=
ou
> don't want to learn something new. It tells us you don't want to explore=
.
> It tells us you see programming more as a chore than an art or challenge=
.
> It also says that we should have sympathy for whoever hires you as a
> programmer.
>
>> The way computers working
>> is simple, so there isn't any difficulties to implement a good concept
>> in one language to another.
>
> Do you have any clue, when you make a statement like that, just how much =
it
> shows everyone that you know almost nothing about programming? Seriously=
,
> and not as a slam against you, you keep making statements like that and e=
ach
> one just tells us even more about how little you know and how little you'=
re
> willing to learn. You're not just ignorant, you simply refuse to learn.
>
>> The problem is, if everyone of us use a different language, we cannot
>> cooperate, so we must have an official language, and everyone learn
>> and use it from the start to end.
>
> That is one of the stupidest comments I've heard anyone say or write in a=
t
> least a year -- and I know stupid. I lived through the 2009 U.S.
> Presidential elections (which are included in that one year). Seriously,
> it's just plain ignorant and stupid.
>
> I've written bash scripts to work with programs in other languages. Look=
at
> how Perl uses C and C++ libraries and they work together. I've written
> programs in Perl that communicate with programs in Java with no trouble.
>
> You make it sound like it's such a barrier to have different languages, b=
ut
> it's not.
>
> This statement is as stupid as saying, "We should all learn to play the s=
ame
> musical instrument so we can all read notes on the same staff and in the
> same notation and play in the same range." Honestly, I don't know whethe=
r
> you're now spinning your wheels and making up things to try to justify yo=
ur
> position or not, but you've crossed a line somewhere today and gone from
> making statements that let you sound somewhat intelligent but inexperienc=
ed
> to making statements that make you sound like you have just enough
> intelligence to learn simple programming tasks, but not enough to see how
> much you don't know.
>
>>> I'm perhaps a "junior programmer" myself. I can and have used C and
>>> Pascal. I've taught Java. I'm working on projects with JavaScript
>>> and I use Perl and SQL regularly in my career. I don't know ENOUGH
>>> different ways to do the same thing! I say this because I've realized
>>> that different languages do different things much more easily than
>>> others, and ultimately it's about getting the job done.
>>
>> but in my career life, I saw so much overlapping work done because
>> different languages, I used to be a web programmer, javascript, xslt,
>> C#, we programmed so many same functions with different languages.
>> It's painful, cann't you see it? It's beause we are on the wrong way!
>
> Odd. It's painful for you, other programmers don't have an issue with it=
.
> Is it possible programming is not a wise career path for you? Maybe you
> should try something different.
>
>>> Quick storytime: Several years back, I was writing some XML format
>>> converters in Perl. There are wonderful pre-written Perl modules to
>>> parse and output XML. But I wanted to "learn more," so I insisted on
>>> doing it all myself. (Management wasn't watching me too closely.) It
>>> took me three times as long to write and the code wasn't flexible or
>>> maintainable... and honestly, I didn't learn anything worthwhile, but
>>> I wanted to "learn." Now, whenever I find myself doing this, I look
>>> back at that: do I *really* want to spend my time inventing inferior
>>> ways to parse XML? Is it so interesting to write string parsers?
>>> What am I learning? How much better it is just to learn the common
>>> tools! If I want to learn, I'm better off reading someone else's
>>> great code than writing my own bad code. It's not the "waste of time
>>> those scripts languages bring to us programmers" -- they exist to SAVE
>>> time. If you doubt it, challenge a perl programmer to a race
>>> sometime. There are problems for which it would be faster to *learn
>>> perl well enough to write a perl solution* than to write the solution
>>> in C.
>>
>> I want to integrate perl into C/C++.
>
> Remember what I said above? This gets even more outlandish than your oth=
er
> statements -- and see what I said about how they make you look as you mak=
e
> each new one.
>
>>> You keep coming back to this argument that "I hope one day I will be
>>> able to take full control of my system, and modify [it] as i like."
>>> An admirable goal -- but what does it actually *mean*? What are you
>>> going to do with this system? You're going to give up most of the
>>> functionality of a good Linux distro so you can... mess around with
>>> the way your personal hardware handles filesystem journaling, or
>>> memory allocation, or something? That's really the most interesting
>>> problem you can think of solving with computers?
>>
>> Yes, I myself won't be able to do all the work, but if there are many
>> people agree with me, and we work together to realize an only one
>> programming language system, that will be a bright future of our free
>> software world.
>
> Nobody agrees with you. At least nobody with any programming talent and
> experience.
>
>>>
>>> You really need to rethink your priorities. A mature person would
>>> accept that when a solution has been endorsed by thousands of people
>>> over decades, there might be something worthwhile to it, even if it is
>>> unfamiliar at first. The majority isn't always right, but their ideas
>>> are at least worth considering.
>>
>> no, I don't consider the number of people and the length of time a
>> situation exists, I just consider whether it's the right way to do
>> things.
>
> And it's not, but your ego is so strong and your need to appear and feel
> right is so strong that you are incapable of backing down and realizing w=
hen
> you've goofed or when you don't understand something.
>
>> thank you for the advice!
>
> Why? You don't want it, you won't listen. You just tell all of us we're
> wrong and you're right, yet you're the one without a job, you're the one
> willing to piss off your bosses in programming jobs.
>
>
> Hal
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.orgwith a subje=
ct
> of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
>
--=20
Gnu.Linux.(Debian|gNewSense).Gnome.(Mozilla|Gmail|Evolution|Scim|Flashplaye=
r|Codeblocks)
Microsoft.Windows.(Vista|XP).(QQ|Game|Notepad++) Gcc.Gtkmm.Opengl
=AA=EC=C1I=A8=A5=BBy=B1I=B7=C0=A1A=A4G=C1I=C4=B1=C6[=B1I=B7=C0=A1A=A4T=C1I=
=B3=DF=A4=DF=B1I=B7=C0=A1A=A5|=C1I=A5X=A4J=AE=A7=B1I=B7=C0....=A4_=B3g=B1=
=FD=A4=DF=A1B=DC=D2=D1}=A4=DF=A1B=B7M=B7=F6=A4=DF=A4=A3=BC=D6=A1B=B8=D1=B2=
=E6=A1A=ACO=AC=B0=B5L=A4W=C1I=A1C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org