A Quote by Erik Naggum
Getting C programmers to understand that they cause the computer to do less than minimum is intractable. … Ask him why he thinks he should be able to get away with unsafe code, core dumps, viruses, buffer overruns, undetected errors, etc., just because he wants speed.
Related Quotes
There are a couple of people in the world who can really program in C or FØRTRAN. They write more code in less time than it takes for other programmers. Most programmers aren't that good. The problem is that those few programmers who crank out code aren't interested in maintaining it.
Any fool can write code that a computer can understand. Good programmers write code that humans can understand.
There's a subtle reason that programmers always want to throw away the code and start over. The reason is that they think the old code is a mess. [...] The reason that they think the old code is a mess is because of a cardinal, fundamental law of programming: It's harder to read code than to write it.
What ends up getting this Stephen Lerner guy in the mind-set that he's in is his sense of entitlement. So he wants a college education. He wants it, he should have it. It shouldn't cost him anything. And the people who provide it certainly shouldn't be getting rich because a college education he thinks is an entitlement.
The editorial strategy of the 'World' is seemingly rested upon the theory that in a desperate cause, it is well to ask a little less than you hope to get. I think you should ask more.
When the words are fuzzy, the programmers reflexively retreat to the most precise method of articulation available: source code. Although there is nothing more precise than code, there is also nothing more permanent or resistant to change. So the situation frequently crops up where nomenclature confusion drives programmers to begin coding prematurely, and that code becomes the de facto design, regardless of its appropriateness or correctness.
Trying to read our DNA is like trying to understand software code - with only 90% of the code riddled with errors. It's very difficult in that case to understand and predict what that software code is going to do.
Our information network is much better protected than our railroad network, and someone who cracks a system is able to cause far less human damage than someone who derails a train. Why, then, has 'computer crime' caused so much hysteria? Perhaps because the public is so willing - eager, even - to be scared by bogeymen.
Over millions of years the viruses in our genome mutate more and more so the look less and less and less recognizable as viruses and so if there was a virus that infected our pre mammal ancestors like 250 million years ago, which it probably did, we can't see it because it just looks totally random.
Real programmers don't comment their code. If it was hard to write, it should be hard to understand.
It is uncomfortable to ask condemned people about their sentences just as it is awkward to ask wealthy people why they need so much money, why they use their wealth so poorly, and why they don't just get rid of it when they recognize that it is the cause of their unhappiness.
Instruments are a phenomenal investment, especially violins and violas and celli, because the value really doesn't go down, and it just rises up at incredible speed and has done, and I believe will continue to do so, because these rare instruments are not getting more. They are getting less and less through the years.
Now, do I think the tax code should be simplified? Absolutely. Will Donald Trump do away with things like this? He probably is better positioned than anyone to figure out how to do away with it, because he understands the tax code better than anyone else.
I love computer programmers. They have a very beautiful definition of complexity as 'the capacity to transmit the maximum information with the minimum data'.
Most programs are not write-once. They are reworked and rewritten again and again in their lived. Bugs must be debugged. Changing requirements and the need for increased functionality mean the program itself may be modified on an ongoing basis. During this process, human beings must be able to read and understand the original code. It is therefore more important by far for humans to be able to understand the program than it is for the computer.
Didn't Lionel Richie just make a country album? No one is giving him a hard time... and God bless him - I love Lionel and should be able to do what he wants to do, like Madonna should, too. Both are having success and I applaud them. If you don't like it, don't buy it. The ageism criticism is getting old.
Related Authors
Andrew Stone Quotes
American
Programmer
Bruce Perens Quotes
American
Programmer
David Heinemeier Hansson Quotes
Danish
Programmer
Douglas Crockford Quotes
American
Programmer
Justin Frankel Quotes
American
Programmer
Michael Birch Quotes
British
Programmer
Neil Druckmann Quotes
American
Programmer
Timothee Besset Quotes
French
Programmer
Ward Cunningham Quotes
American
Programmer