"#LINQ in C# is cool
#Python doesn't quite need it as it has generatior expressions, sum(), len(), sorted() and itertools.groupby() #so let's just wrap a nice SQL-like interface over them in order to make them more familiar." ?
It's getting the above-mentioned features as easy to use for the SQL-familiar programmer as possible.
"#LINQ in C# is cool
#Python doesn't quite need it as it has generatior expressions, sum(), len(), sorted() and itertools.groupby()
#so let's just wrap a nice SQL-like interface over them in order to make them more familiar"
you have trouble understanding?
I'm trying to wrap a unified and familiar SQL-like, LINQ-like interface over gen. expressions, sorted(), len() and suchlike and you remark that gen. expressions, sorted() and suchlike exist. Wow!
The Say method takes 2 parameters, what is said in a string, and a reference to the listening method of the partner.
The Say method will first write into the it's private log "I'll remember for a while, I said to {listenmethod.im_self}: something" and do perhaps do some other stuff, and then call the referred Listen method passing in the "something" as a parameter and also passing self as a parameter, to let him know who said it to him.
The Listen method of that object will write into it's own private log "I'll remember for a while: this guy {the passed-in self} told me something", and then perhaps do some other stuff.
Of course this is functional/OO, and a pretty awesome kind of OO, it being Python, not just basic mainstream OO.
I'm interested in functional programming, but I think there are some features of OO that are a bit hard to reproduce in non-OO functional or to do anything similar.
So you have a type. And you have functions that do something with instances of that type.
Are there many functions that do something with it, such as set a certain boolean field in the type to true or false? If yes, you are in a world of hurt when you realize that every time something sets it to false you need to write it into a log, as you will have to change all functions.
If you have just one function that sets that field - haven't you just reinvented a setter method?
There are clumsy ways to do OO. But OO itself shouldn't just be judged from the clumsy ways. Python got it almost perfectly. You have a function, you have your local variables within the function, any time later on you can define functions within a function and then you have something very similar to a class, with the main function being the constructor of it. Or you can do the other way around, you define a class and later on if you need it you add a __call__() method and for all practical matters and purposes you have a function. WIN.
The author doesn't grok what higher education is currently for. The current methods are suitable for the current goals. I think you should first thing about chaning the goals, not the methods.
Um, I'm techie enough, but I don't get it myself. I mean, if you are already using some sort of knowledge base then yes, it should be a wiki, I get that. (Wiki is the closest thing of the original idea of what HTML browsers were created for: cross-referenced knowledge bases.) But if you don't, then not, because in my experience maintaining a knowledge base never really works.
The basic thing is the following: you can only trust data from those software where users have no way of avoiding entering the data. Example: ERP. The truck is waiting there, you need to print a shipment note because the damn truck won't take the goods without it, and the system won't let you print a shipment note before you put in all the data that lets the system amend the stock levels, mark the sales order as shipped etc. Such as system can enforce data entry, you find the data you need in such a system.
Similarly, e-mails are reliable, because if you want to communicate something to another person that's too long for a phone call, you have to send an e-mail. So you will find the information in your e-mails.
But what enforces entering data into a wiki? Just rules won't work.
I'm in a similar position working as a Navision ERP consultant/developer (MS Dynamics-NAV), doing it for 6 years now. But my advice is different.
I think it really boils down to one question: are you American (or Japanese, as your nick seems to suggest) or not?
Americans and Japanese have this cultural thing that your job should be your life, your major form of satisfaction, it should be something you are really motivated to do. In this case do switch, because if you lose your motivation you fall behind those who do have it. And besides, if your job doesn't make you happy, you'll always feel you are losing something from your life. The real reason behind it is that Americans (and Japanese) IDENTIFY with their jobs: they say "I AM an programmer/salesman/whatever". So how good you feel about your job is how good you feel about yourself. In this case best thing is to move to the edges of SAP - get involved in writing other software that communicate with SAP.
But if you are, say, European or British or something, it's differnt. We "oldworlders" tend to think this way: it's just a fucking job. It's just to pay your bills. You don't have to love it, it's not supposed to be your major source of happiness, you don't have to be very motivated, just do it OK. If it's bearable and pays the bills, OK. Reason is that we don't identify with out jobs, we just do programming or sales or whatever for a living and don't think we "are" programmers or salesmen. I'm not "am a Navision developer", it's just something I do. In this case, just stick to SAP, and not just for the money. No, not for the money at all. For the respect. That's the important thing. After 6 years with Navision I'm starting to become something sort of an expert. People praise me all the time, I solve hard problems fast and they think it's magic, all that. Not that I'm very smart or anything, it's just experience. And boy, it feels good, that you are not a beginner anymore whom everybody looks down on, but you are starting to become an authority in your field. Slowly you progress to the situation where nobody cares if you come late in the office and leave the suit at home, because you are the "wizard", and everybody knows "wizards" are different, but yet they are very useful. Man, that feels good, this kind of respect you receive after a certain amount of experience, the self-esteem you can take out of it, it's really great. This is what makes it worth doing it.
There are two kinds of excellence. That of the hacker, the discoverer: who keeps solving new problems. And that of the Zen archer, who solves the SAME problem year by year, decade by decade, but in a more and more perfect way. I think the second one buys more self-esteem because after a while you are simply incapable of making any errors in your narrow field and thus never get chewed out. So I chose the later.
Eh. Does the sticky sugar-candy new-age optimism pouring out of blogs like this disturb only me?
It's pure bullshit. Work was NOT meant as something to love. Work was NOT mean to provide you means do things that make you happy. Take a good, hard look around at the world, dammit: work was meant to give you a chance to SURVIVE.
Perhaps some people who have very well functioning minds - very optimisting, easily get enthusiastic, easily get to love people and/or things - may eventually learn to love their work, or work on something they love.
But for most of us it's out of question. Work, therefore you hate it. Get over. Don't raise unreasonable expectations in people, please.
The problem with most exercise advice is that no exercise in the world helps if you are not willing to do it. And this is what they don't tell you. They just tell you to gather your willpower and make it a habit and whatnot. Does not work. You gather your willpower for a month, maybe two, then it drifts away. So it's of no use.
Instead: try to find an exercise you LOVE. It does not matter much how good it is, the only thing that matters that you love it, that it's fun, play, a hobby, not a duty you hate to do.
"You just made me and every other female/over 30 reader feel like shit."
Why do you care what other people think of your age or anything? If someone wrote "she got a boyfriend with a much smaller beer gut", should I feel bad just because I have a significant beer gut? Nay. Other people's priorities is other people's business.
Always being scared knee-jerk of saying anything less than happy-positive-sugar-candy because it might offend someone somewhere is a sure way to become unable to express anything important.
About the Heisenberg-principle of interacting with others: my experience with Americans is that they tend to be outspoken and direct, and expect the same in return.
In cultures where people are more subtle and polite and reserved, where people regard modesty an important virtue, they misunderstand an outspoken, direct opinion for taking charge, taking leadership, and they think the Yank expects them to follow orders from then on.
Suggestion to Yanks when dealing with foreigners: talk like a Briton. You know, like "I'm not yet entirely convinced doing N is the best way" instead of being outspoken and direct.
It does not matter. All that matters is that it corrodes moral character less than other - socalistisc - arrangements, because in a market you can't just take something away without consent and without compensation.
Not getting enough sleep is bad in itself, but I think my bad habit is world-class in stupidty:
7PM: arrive home
8PM: have dinner
9PM: start drinking wine (3-6 glasses depending on mood)
11-PM - 01 AM: can't sleep because booze is a stimulant in the short run
01 AM: crash. Now, because in the longer run booze is a depressant, I'd need 9-10 hours of sleep instead of 7-8
06AM: but instead I got 5. Congratulations!