Re: one interview question, 17 lines in java, 3 lines in ruby.
WuyaSea Operator <wuyasea@gmail.com> writes:
Do not call me troll, you cheater.
Lasse Reichstein Nielsen wrote:
Either a troll or a spammer. That depends on whether you want people
to get insulted, or you are merely disingenious enough not to expect
it.
One of the marks of a troll is that they respond to perceived /ad hominem/
attacks, but ignore the measured responses to the technical points.
Does that apply here?
Let's see, Joshua said,
"Can be" != "should be".
Even my ugly compact Java file is more readable than your three lines of Ruby.
Not answered.
Besides, so your Ruby program can print out a contrived example more succinctly than Java.
What's the functional difference in the program if the code to be written was
to write a fully-functional CSS parser?
Not answered.
Don't you want the Ruby newsgroup,
Not answered.
you spamming troll?
Answered.
A full participant wouldn't have reacted negatively, but understood that
posting their website URL and offering to answer people's questions makes
their post seem an awful lot like spam, especially given the supercilious tone
of the posts, and worked to overcome that negative impression instead of
reacting with defensive hostility.
Speaking of which, "cheater"? That's a witty thing to call Joshua. How does
"cheater" apply in any plausible way to Joshua? At what could he have been
cheating? How is that even a response worthy of pressing "Send"?
I actually am very strongly interested in Ruby, and shall be learning it
post-haste. It's totally the next wave - but comparing Java to Ruby is like
comparing jet liners to hang gliders => "You see? My hang glider doesn't
require all those radios and fuel lines and control panels!"
For sure I will not use the OP or their web site for any guidance now that
they have completely burned their credibility with me. Oh, I suppose if they
respond to this post in a reasonable manner I'll reconsider that decision.
Perhaps.
--
Lew