Re: what does "serialization" mean?
From: Edward G. Nilges (spinoza1111_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 06/24/04
- Next message: Sisyphus: "Re: Cash for a simple big-integer project"
- Previous message: Alf P. Steinbach: "Re: virtual base class has a virtual base class"
- In reply to: Corey Murtagh: "Re: what does "serialization" mean?"
- Next in thread: Thomas stegen: "Re: what does "serialization" mean?"
- Reply: Thomas stegen: "Re: what does "serialization" mean?"
- Reply: Corey Murtagh: "Re: what does "serialization" mean?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 23 Jun 2004 19:42:22 -0700
Corey Murtagh <emonk@slingshot.no.uce> wrote in message news:<1088031594.10854@radsrv1.tranzpeer.net>...
> Edward G. Nilges wrote:
> > Programmer Dude <Chris@Sonnack.com> wrote in message news:<9vshd01eu4nra04aemjekb9fpl747oiom9@4ax.com>...
> >
> >>Edward G. Nilges writes:
> >>
> >>>But back to "reality" (as presently constructed) we must speak in
> >>>ASCII and this means XML.
> >>
> >>Funny, most of the XML documents I work with (it's the lingua franca
> >>of the application my group supports) start with:
> >>
> >> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-16" ?>
> >>
> >>The remainder start with:
> >>
> >> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
> >>
> >>Look Ma, no ASCII.
> >
> > Look Ma, somebunny can't see the forest for the trees. No, Chris
> > honey, XML is best used exclusively with what is ordinarily meant by
> > ascii.
>
> Regardless of what /you/ may think is 'ordinarily meant' by ascii, the
> American Standard Code for Information Interchange is reasonably well
> defined. As is UTF-8, UTF-16 and a number of other character sets
> and/or codings. And since you seem to be particularly without clue,
> I'll loan you one of mine: ASCII != UTF-8.
Again, the pseudo-expert maintains pseudo-expertise by means of the
self-protective gesture, which is to assert a negative fact without
taking the risk of asserting a positive fact.
Commonly used with adequate precision, ASCII refers to the 256
character set that was introduced by non-IBM computer manufacturers as
an alternative to the 8 bit, 256 character EBCDIC encoding. ASCII
survived and EBCDIC did not because ASCII properly sequenced letters.
The pseudo-expert is typically unconscious of history and therefore
must assert negative facts, for all he knows is there is no knowledge
and no memory.
You are filibustering the important distinction which is between FF
and 100 for this is where international characters begin. You are
trolling this discussion thread in a way Arthur O'Dwyer has appealed
you to cease.
>
> > Part of the reason for the 80% failure rate of enterprise systems is
> > little circles and groups with their own private language.
>
> Ah, nostalgia. Has anyone kept a list of the hundreds of things that
> eddie has claimed are responsible (in part or in full) for that mythical
> 80% failure rate?
>
My name is not Eddie, and again, this is behavior which Arthur O'Dwyer
has requested you cease. Furthermore, since as a pseudo-expert all you
have to disseminate is ignorance in the form of negative claims, you
are obviously resentful of a person with knowledge and memory.
> <snip>
> > I am well aware, however, that because you don't understand OOD (as
> > evidenced by your advising a newbie to use the Set statement in
> > VB.Net), your goal is to filibuster, troll and disrupt this discussion
> > lest your limitations as a developer emerge.
>
> How exactly does not knowing the difference between VB and VB.NET relate
> to lack of understanding of OOD? I submit that it is completely
> unrelated, and that this is yet another of eddies badly-formed ad
> hominem attacks.
How does anything relate to anything when the pseudo expert is without
memory? Chris Sonnack addressed a newbie with authority, telling him
to use a statement which does not exist in a later version of an OO
language. He claims to be an expert on Visual Studio but concentrates
on C++ for VS which is a flawed implementation of C++ and which allows
by its rich set of non-OO features (such as the preprocessor) the
programmer to remain ignorant of OOD and substitute a false,
Sophistical knowledge based on the claims of superiority of C++ and C
versus Pascal and VB.
The ignorance was on display because as a Visual Studio expert, Chris
manifested ignorance of a major OO development inside VS and this is
the disappearance of the need for Set. It disappeared because VB.Net
is fully OO in the sense that all values are objects. Therefore
there's only one kind of assignment.
- Next message: Sisyphus: "Re: Cash for a simple big-integer project"
- Previous message: Alf P. Steinbach: "Re: virtual base class has a virtual base class"
- In reply to: Corey Murtagh: "Re: what does "serialization" mean?"
- Next in thread: Thomas stegen: "Re: what does "serialization" mean?"
- Reply: Thomas stegen: "Re: what does "serialization" mean?"
- Reply: Corey Murtagh: "Re: what does "serialization" mean?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
