Mon, 02 Aug 2010 23:47:49 -0700, Jim Balter wrote: > "Andrei Alexandrescu" <seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org> wrote in message > news:i34op7$2hb...@digitalmars.com... >> On 08/01/2010 05:44 AM, retard wrote: >>> Sat, 31 Jul 2010 23:38:17 +0000, BCS wrote: >>> >>>> Hello retard, >>>>> Has anyone except the almighty >>>>> Andrei ever even downloaded a theorem prover? >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Yes, ACL2. >>>> >>>> http://www.dsource.org/projects/scrapple/browser/trunk/backmath >>>> >>>> Now I know why that sort of thing isn't done more often. >>> >>> Learning how to document your code might also help. It looks like a >>> mess. >> >> I think it takes some good amount of courage and confidence to put >> one's identity and code out there for everyone to criticize. >> Conversely, criticizing from the comfort of anonymity and without >> producing "do as I do, not only as I say" examples doesn't sit well. >> >> Andrei > > Ad hominem argument. If you disagree that it looks like a mess, you > should argue that. If you concur, then it doesn't matter who pointed it > out. And anonymity on the internet has been held up as a fundamental > right for decades.
To be honest, I also questioned the expertise of some members of the community. The reason is, comparing complex software technologies is hard. Some examples: XML parsing with SAX vs DOM, Qt vs GTK+, F#'s type system vs Haskell's type system, vi(m) vs emacs. One really needs to have a thorough knowledge of all technologies involved before making relevant conclusions. The conclusion also reflects one's personal values. I don't know many people who can give an authoritative and exhaustive summary of these things. A professor might understand the "ivory tower" side of the issue, senior developers' vision is the "pragmatic" one, but even those together don't form the full truth. A project manager or a novice coder might value some other aspects. My recommendation was just to study at least one other languge or theorem prover before wasting time on useless flame wars.
