[sac-forum] Re: Paul's Programming

 
Stan et al, flattery and blovating won't get you anywhere this time!  The
thread is about attempting to discuss a topic that is far to far off the
astronomy topic.  Perhaps a mention of the language may seem innocuous, but
there are far to many folks that don't know enough, or even care, to know
about details of computer programming languages.  Not to mention a
discussionabout how to write programs.

Re:  about my being extreme.  Again perhaps so, but one of the concepts that
really irritate me are people who don't listen and I felt the message wasn't
being adhered to.  This topic is off base far to off base.

I note that the discussion has died down and hope it stays that-a-way.  I
guess we shall see if cooler heads prevail.

On an observing note.  I see some EVACer are trying to make an observing run
tonight.  Anyone from SAC considering such?  Not me.

aj

Stanley A. Gorodenski wrote:
AJ, You are really a nice guy, but in this I respectfully have to say I
thinkyou are a little too extreme in your response below (and I know I
myselfhave been extreme in the past which I regret). There is more to
astronomy than visual observing, your expertise, and the club should embrace
more than just visual observing. As I said in a previous message there are
programming applications in astronomy and so there is some relevance of this
topic to this forum. You know the subject of the message, i.e., Paul's
Programming, and knowing the topic all you have to do is not open any
messagewith that subject in the title. Also, the issue of not being on topic
had been discussed before (was it in Az-Observing?) and it was concluded
there is no harm if something is a little off topic once in awhile. Besides,
I personally find these discussions interesting and relevant because some
dayI may be writing a program to control a telescope, or a part of a
telescope or instrument, and learning from other astronomers the existence
and capabilities of programming languages is helpful. Respectfully, my
opinion for the good of the club. Stan AJ Crayon wrote: Paul, THAT'S ENOUGH
OF THIS PROGRAMMING DISCUSSION. IN CASE YOU HAVE FORGOTTEN THIS IS AN
ASTRONOMY LIST NOT A DISCUSSION ABOUT PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES!!! I DON'T WANT
THIS ON THIS LIST, GAVEL THIS TO A CLOSE. DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT GAVEL TO A
CLOSE MEANS!! aj Paul Dickson wrote: On Sat, 26 Jun 2004 09:48:13 -0800,
Stanley A. Gorodenski wrote: What is youropinion of C? It has a reputation
ofbeing very fast and easy to learn, and I know of one case where it is
beingused in academic research to write programs for phyogenetic studies
because it is so fast. Short answer: High-level assembly language. Longer:
You end up spending far more time coding the details of how to load and
storedata than you do solving the problem. This detail is important for
operating systems and other embedded applications, but most applications
don't need this level of detail. C is notan easy language to learn how to
usecorrectly. It's pretty trivial if youdon't use pointers. But since C
passes data to functions using pass-by-value, you can't do much without
pointers. Especially if you don't know in advance how much data you'll be
working with. At that point you startallocating memory for buffers and
lists.You have a headache just waiting to happen. -Paul

Other related posts: