home .. forth .. colorforth mail list archive ..

Re: [colorforth] Ideas

On Sunday 29 February 2004 06:33 pm, Oninoshiko wrote:
> i value education, but i dont place a high price on a peace of paper
> that says someone passed a few classes. i have talked to a great meny
> people who were highly educated who didnt have one, and a great meny
> people who had one but were not well educated

Now wait just a second, here.  I never said anything about going to 
college, or getting a degree.  I just said that one should always be 
interested in education and educating themselves.  How you do it is up 
to you.  :)

> sometimes people get so wraped up in doing what they ahave learned
> they refuse to think outside of those limitations. this is the danger
> of you argument (although slightly off the point you where trying to
> make)

Yes, I fully agree.  But what is so great about education is that those 
who are truely educated know *when* to let go of all they have learned 
(Yoda's advice holds true, and has basis in reality).  This is one of 
the principles of every "mastership" I can think of, especially martial 
arts.  In fact, it's a mantra in Aikido: Beginner's Mind.  As soon as 
you think you *know* anything *at all* about Aikido, you cease to become 
a teacher.  (Yes, the word "teacher" is correct.  It is not a typo, and 
in Aikido at least, even the lowliest of white belts are considered 
teachers, for they have something other students lack: *true* naivity 
and inexperience in the art.)

> Dr. Moore also admits to not being able to read C (indeed, why would

Since he took his computer's chipset's driver information largely from 
the Linux sources, I suspect Chuck has a different interpretation of 
'being able to read C' than what you claim he does in your response to 
me.

I posit that Chuck *can* read and understand C code.  What he can't come 
to grips with, and thus is the cause of raising his point, is:

1) The unnecessary syntax gets in the way of the program's *semantic* 
meaning (case in point: download and review the F6FBB ham radio BBS 
software -- some function and some variable names are in French while 
others are in English, and a whole mess of variables are wholesale 
inappropriately named using indecipherable abbreviations that probably 
don't make a lick of sense in ANY of the two languages.  Now, combine 
that with ->s, &s, .s, and tons and tons of nested parenthetical 
expressions, and you can see where this can lead to the "inability to 
read C."  Indeed, by this definition, and after reviewing the F6FBB 
sources tonight, I have to say, after 18 years of C programming, I can't 
read C either)

and/or,

2) The fact that important parts of a program are scattered throughout a 
number of files (here, not being able to read C implies an impatience 
with having to keep the distinction of header and implementation files 
in your head all the time, etc.; this is why I love Oberon).

I do have to admit.  I've seen some really, really badly written Forth 
code.  And I've seen some really, really badly written C code.  
Invariably, the Forth code is easier to come to grips with than the C 
code.

> "Give me a problem with 1,000,000 lines of C. But don't expect me to
> read the C, I couldn't. And don't think I'll have to write 10,000
> lines of Forth. Just give me the specs of the problem, and
> documentation of the interface."
> (http://www.colorforth.com/1percent.html)

Yup, and I fully understand (and agree with) this.  But this raises an 
important distinction: his *technical* inability to read C versus his 
lack of *desire* to read it.

> just because meny of us choose to not respond to threads such as this,
> do not assume we side with your opposition. when i refute a few of
> your points, do not assume that i disagree with your conclusion.

I make no such assumptions.  I don't need to make such assumptions; 
confirmation or denial of my views will manifest themselves in 
subsequent messages, possibly on different topics.

> learning is important, but remember that there are many paths to
> learning, and that no school of thought has a monopoly on "rightness"

Non sequitor.  Adam clearly stated his lack of desire to learn, to which 
I became vocal about more out of concern for his welfare than blind 
opposition.

I've known Adam on IRC for quite a while now, and while we've had our 
disagreements there, I still consider him a friend worth knowing.  
Though we've never met, I don't want to see the development of attitudes 
or habits that I feel will hurt him later in life.

> when your reaction to a differing (even polar opposite) view is to
> leave you harm your own undersating even if only because there logic
> "shows by example what *not* to do" (to quote you)

I'm sorry, but I can't even parse this sentence.

> also, it seems, you are taking the ideas of one or two people and
> applying them to everyone here, not only is that uneducated, but it is
> outright wrong.

No, this is not what I'm doing.  Not intentionally, at least.  I did make 
a generalization about the people who I regularly converse with in my 
daily affairs though.  All too few ever think; they clearly don't think 
about their actions or the repurcussions they have in the future, as 
I've been adversely affected by their decisions (unintentionally more 
often than not) on numerous occasions, when a simple 10 minutes of 
thought would have made their lives a lot easier, and not had such 
negative impacts on their surrounding environment.  No, all they want is 
to consume -- instant gratification.  Two of my roommates are counter 
examples, but the other two are quintessential "Consumers" in every 
meaning of the advertising word.  They demonstrate a lack of 
consideration for anyone around them; all they care about is that they 
get that candy bar *NOW* when they push that vending machine button, or 
that their cell phone service is turned on instantly, as soon as they 
flip that phone open (even if this happens to be at 2AM in the morning, 
when I'm trying to get some much needed sleep!!).

I did also ask, as a rhetorical question, whether this place was falling 
into that "all brawn, no brains" kind of trap.  Adam clearly stated, and 
a few agreed, that he doesn't want to think anymore, he wants to just 
do.  Doing without considering the repurcussions of your actions is 
dangerous thought; indeed, in the extreme, wars have started because of 
such hastiness.

Anyway, this is getting wildly off topic.  You folks all now know my 
position on this matter, and the rationale behind it.  I'll cease to 
continue this publicly further here.

I do thank you for the insightful reply.  It was a joy to answer.

--
Samuel A. Falvo II


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: colorforth-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: colorforth-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Main web page - http://www.colorforth.com