[opensource] Printing files from the command line

Paul Betts paul at paulbetts.org
Sat Feb 7 18:25:30 EST 2009

Why am I only on my phone when good mails like this show up?

Anyway, short summary is, Resolve is great ideas hampered by a crap  
language (C++) that really clouds the solid underlying concepts.

Paul Betts

On Feb 7, 2009, at 14:46, Shaun Rowland <rowland at cse.ohio-state.edu>  

> On Feb 7, 2009, at 2:25 PM, Aaron Joseph wrote:
>> Also, I never asked anyone to send me the key, I just wondered if  
>> someone has successfully gotten it from soc lab or oit or some  
>> other legal source. And it seems like the answer is that no-one  
>> like soc lab or oit has it for free.
> That is a little much to infer from what was stated. I am not going
> to dwell on this. I gave my nudge about the subject.
>> Shaun, no-one is going to think you're "the man" for trying to do  
>> what's right. However you could have helped me out a little when I  
>> was trying to argue why RESOLVE sucks at that UG forum!
> :-)
> Heh. I really don't want to start a big discussion about Resolve.
> But I can't resist giving my current impression - at least a little.
> It is impossible to broach the subject without writing a book.
> I have seen this argument come up so many times over the years.
> I knew C++ pretty well when I came into Resolve. I also used to
> wonder if it might be better to use another language which would
> have given me more practical experience. I can't remember how many
> of the things we learned there I had picked up reading on my own
> (that's pretty much how I learn for the most part), but I've
> always wondered if knowing a certain amount enabled me to fly
> through those courses while not having all the material sink
> in as much as it could have. I am not really worried about that
> now. I have a lot more experience than back then. Learning to use
> a new programming language is not a big deal IMO. That's more
> of a practical concern which I prefer to do on my own anyway.
> The "practical" side of the argument is greatly outweighed by
> the "learning the concepts" side - especially now that I am
> older.
> One of my problems when I was taking undergrad courses was
> that I was more interested in doing things on my own instead
> of doing homework... but that's another story. I am sure I'd
> still have that problem, but I hope I am more disciplined now,
> however it just might be hopeless :-)
> Anyway, Bruce is co-director of the CSE department's Reusable
> Software Research Group. He's a really smart guy. I'm sure that's
> an understatement. Even if I wanted to argue about Resolve, I'd
> put a _lot_ of thought into it first, probably come to the
> conclusion that I'm possibly missing something that someone
> who is an expert in the field knows, and then spend a lot
> more time investigating it. Maybe if I wanted to argue about
> it I'd end up learning even more reasons why the course sequence
> is a good idea as is. Actually, I already feel that's the
> case. The arguments for it being the way it is seem sound to
> me. Bruce cares a lot about teaching. I am sure he's thought
> about this much more than anyone else here, and he knows what
> he's doing. I'm not saying that because he's a faculty member
> of the department in which I work either.
> If one is worried about this being a main item on their resume
> and people wondering what it is, I don't see that as an argument.
> It is good to not discuss the fact it was Resolve, but what you
> have learned in the sequence. Besides, you'll probably have
> time to learn "resume enhancing" languages before you're resume
> would depend on such factors anyway. Once you know the art of
> programming, picking up a "practical" language is not a big
> deal I think. I've seen the Resolve argument come up over
> the years, and the "practical language" argument means nothing
> to me at this point.
> So, my short answer is that I think the Resolve sequence is
> fine - so if I spoke up, I'd end up being on the wrong side
> of your battle :-)
> I'll give you one seemingly supportive argument about how
> I was annoyed in a group project once when two of us
> wanted to use C++ and the other two said they knew real
> C++ and not just Resolve... and they didn't, so it was
> annoying. There are reasons why this experience was silly
> however: a) Why would I ever have wanted to use C++?
> b) Either language would not have made a big difference.
> c) These group projects annoy me because I am a pain
> to program with, caring about using white space correctly,
> caring about things like using private data instead of
> just making everything public (some people miss the point),
> and planning out design first... using revision control.
> d) It really had absolutely nothing to do with Resolve
> itself. See, on the surface it seems supportive, but it
> isn't :-)
> I know this is all extremely way off topic. I'm bored right
> now.
> -- 
> Shaun Rowland
> rowland at cse.ohio-state.edu
> _______________________________________________
> Opensource mailing list
> Opensource at cse.ohio-state.edu
> http://mail.cse.ohio-state.edu/mailman/listinfo/opensource

More information about the Opensource mailing list