Em Qui, 2013-10-31 às 08:51 +0900, Carsten Haitzler escreveu:
> i know. i spent some of my early life on unix/linux paying large sums
> for
> o'reilly books. and reading them cover to cover. they had diagrams. i
> frankly
> far prefer raw simple code over those books. the code is digestible in
> a
> fraction of the time. :) if i have an actual working bit of code i can
> compile
> it, run it and then modify it to see how it wobbles when poked. poke a
> bit more
> and see some more wobbling. these wobbles tell me the story of how
> CHANGES to
> the example affect the behaviour. start small with small changes and
> see. :) a
> book doesn't give me that. english words don't give me that. code
> does. :) but
> that is my style - i know that within all fields of education
> including foreign
> languages, math, science, etc. etc. i always gravitated to "learn by
> example".
> i naturally break up the examples into their constituent parts and
> know how to
> manipulate them - the pattern builds over time naturally.
Code is interactive. School and all non-interactive shit is difficult
and pain to learn (at least for me and for you).
But... I wonder how you avoid undefined behaviour code that can break in
the next release of the lib/compiler or in the second compiler/platform.
--
Vinícius dos Santos Oliveira
https://about.me/vinipsmaker
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Android is increasing in popularity, but the open development platform that
developers love is also attractive to malware creators. Download this white
paper to learn more about secure code signing practices that can help keep
Android apps secure.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=65839951&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
enlightenment-users mailing list
enlightenment-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-users
