Nick Sabalausky Wrote: > "retard" <r...@tard.com.invalid> wrote in message > news:hqt94i$2sg...@digitalmars.com... > > Fri, 23 Apr 2010 08:57:54 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: > > > >> On 04/23/2010 07:00 AM, Clemens wrote: > >>> (As an aside, I'm generally a bit put off by the hostility towards > >>> programming language research and theory in the D community. "We don't > >>> need no stinking theory, we'll just roll our own ad-hoc solution which > >>> will work much better because ivory-tower academics are completely out > >>> of touch with reality anyway." Bleh.) > >> > >> I hope that trend has been definitively reversed. > >> > >> Andrei > > > > Instead of hostility we now have blissful ignorance. Maybe I should post > > here more often again.. > > When the academic researchers keep their work squirreled away in academic > circles and written in such a convoluted style that only other long-term > ivory-tower residents can get far enough past the language to see the actual > meaning, it's a wonder that *anyone* finds it surprising that programmers > are ignorant of it.
I have no formal education in computer science, in fact I'm a self-taught programmer, and I had no problem understanding several papers on Haskell which I was pointed towards. It might take some dedication in some cases, but as Andrei pointed out: the problems are hard. > > And that's just the researchers that actually *do* know what they're doing. > Let's not fool ourselves into thinking that the *majority* of academia > actually knows it's head from it's ass (yea, that's right - I've brought it > back to hostility). Oh well. Thanks for proving my point.