stop
I've requested 50 times to be taken off your mailing list, but you still send me this unwanted mail. I will now report all mail sent to me by you as SPAM Stop sending me spam. 2003 www.hushport.com
unsuscribe me from your list
RE: Training in the Middle and Far East
---Original Message--- From: rp_29 Date: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 11:51:50 AM To: 'Jenda Krynicky'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Training in the Middle and Far East Dear Jenda, pls. read thru... -Original Message- From: Jenda Krynicky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 5:28 AM To: Rajeev Prasad; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Training in the Middle and Far East Hence physics is not a science either. You can't do anything in physics without math. wat do you have to say about phenomenon governed by physical laws? Besides, noone said "programming" is a science. Rob said that. (and this whole thing started from there 'computer science'. Now you have stepped in with a new philosophical definition below. Since this is a programming list computer programming came up to repersent it. Also, it is just hardware + software written to use that hardware power) But you agree 'programming' is not science. now after taking out programming out of the things we can/do with computers. we are only left with system/hardware mntc. task and desgining hardware. I will try again to explain: someone put up some programming questions on the list, which seemed dumb to brother Rob. He suggested training in basic 'computer science' to the people of some region. I only stepped in to clear the mist that there is no such thing as 'computer science'. It is just another abused term as 'clothing science', 'fashion science', 'language science' etc... Programming is something in between craft, art and science. thats pretty philosophical definition. So is it philosophy? But Computer Science or Informatics IS a science. And the fact that it sits on top of Math and that the border between CS and Math is rather foggy doesn't make it any less scientific. Dear, read all my posts again (do not want to repeat myself). All of physics/chemistry and maths is written using english language does that makes english a science? same with computing languages, they are just medium. knowning them is no science, if you know no mathematics, let me see what wonders you can do with any computing language. you might need to read and re-read my previous posts, that make things clear. Desigining computer is science, desigining silicon wafer is science, writing new logical instruction set is science, Desgining and refining the hardware is science. But all of it is Physics, Chemistry and maths. Then what would you put under 'computer science'?? (you have already taken programming out) mathematical science is used in computer programming. to highlisght its complexity or sophistication you may like to call it a science and look upon yourself as a scientist, but that does not make it so. To explain anything in this world you DO NOT need computers. In other words you can solve any mystrey of the material world without ever using a computing device. BUT you can not do it in absence of laws of physics, chemistry, mathematics or biology. that proves the difference. These are the true sciences, everything else(mostly) is the result of the application of these sciences. It is another example of western salesmanship at work. Makes you believe cereals are the best breakfast! (silly no?) do not want to be rude just clear enough. i like people who ask question, and who want to know and respect truth. Jenda = [EMAIL PROTECTED] === http://Jenda.Krynicky.cz = When it comes to wine, women and song, wizards are allowed to get drunk and croon as much as they like. -- Terry Pratchett in Sourcery -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: $x .= $y suddenly breaks and does $x=$y instead!
---Original Message---
From: Rob Dixon
Date: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 5:23:17 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: $x .= $y suddenly breaks and does $x=$y instead!
Hi Richard.
Richard Heintze wrote:
Sorry -- I was not quoting my own code precisely and I am using strict and warnings.
I am using parenthesis. I attached the exact code for the subroutine below.
At the end of this post is my edited version of your program without line wraps.
It compiles fine as I have posted it, and there are no reasons that I can see
why your concatenation shouldn't work.
The problems that I have are:
- Your source layout allows a maximum line length of 196 characters.
It's unlikely that you know what your source is doing off-screen, even
if you think you do. Keep to something like an 80-character limit and
all of the bugs will be on-screen at once.
- Subroutines with more than two or three parameters are unlikely to be
called correctly. 'FormElements' has seven, and to make matters worse
there is a mixture of pass by value and pass by reference.
- There is a mixture of qq() delimiters within the same subroutine. (Square
bracket and pipe). It would be best to build these strings into a scalar
variable as soon as its parameters are known instead of strewing the code
with huge interpolated strings.
I suspect that the bug is in the call to this routine, but first tidy
up your code so that it /looks/ like it works. 'Here' documents
would help to organise your strings instead of having long
interpolated strings as subroutine parameters.
Post your subroutine call. I'll lay $5 that your bug is there :)
HTH,
Rob
# Reformatted source
#
sub FormElements {
my ($me,
$next,
$ev_count,
$curr_true, # integer array created in insert data
$prob_innoc,
$prob_guilt,
$hidden) = @_;
# The first time we view the Enter Probabilities page (display)
# we have the option of specifing admissibility (the probability of the evidence being admissible in court)
# and the probability the fact is true.
#
# When there are subsequent assertions or suspects, there is no need to allow the user to change this information
# so we surpress the text edit box.
#
my $bReadOnly = !$me-bFirstSuspect(); # $me-{pass}==0 $next==1; # Can the user change this? Yes, if this is the first
Suspect/Assertion.
my $t3 = $me-{admissibility};
my $admis = sprintf "%3d", $t3-[$ev_count];
print
($me-bShowAdmissibility()?(qq[
TD ALIGN="CENTER" STYLE="font-family:serif; font-size:18px; font-weight: bold; background-color:#ffcc00"]
.($bReadOnly?qq[$admis INPUT class=debug READONLY TYPE=TEXT NAME=prob_admis$ev_count SIZE="2" VALUE="$admis" /]:qq[INPUT
TYPE=TEXT NAME=prob_admis$ev_count SIZE="2" VALUE="$admis" /])
."/TD"):"");
print qq[TD ALIGN="CENTER" STYLE="font-family:serif; font-size:18px; font-weight: bold; background-color:#ffcc00"];
# older code: $me-{base_type}=~"Rank" || $me-{base_type}=~"RA" || $me-{base_type}=~"Compare Assertions"
# old code: ($me-{base_type} == case_constants::btCompareAssertions || $me-{base_type} == case_constants::btRankSuspects)
if ($me-MultiSuspectCase() $bReadOnly) {
# No input box here!
my $t2 = @{$$curr_true}[$ev_count]; # This is so wierd. Why do I need to explicitly cast it?
$t2 = sprintf "%3.3f", ($t2=0?0:$t2);
my $t3 = qq[INPUT class=debug TYPE=TEXT NAME="prob_true$ev_count" VALUE="$t2" SIZE=2];
print $t2.$t3;
# Why does not this concatenation work?
$$hidden = $$hidden.qq[\nTR class=debugTDprob_true$ev_count/TDTD$t3%/TD/TR\n];
}
else {
# Input box: user can alter this
print qq[ INPUT TYPE="TEXT" ID="prob_true$ev_count" NAME="prob_true$ev_count" SIZE="7"
MAXLENGTH="6"%/TD ];
}
print qq|
TD ALIGN="CENTER" STYLE="font-family:serif; font-size:14px;background-color:#cc9900"
INPUT ID="prob_guilt$ev_count" NAME="prob_guilt$ev_count" SIZE="7" |;
if ($me-{pass}!=1){
print qq| VALUE="|.($prob_guilt?$prob_guilt:"").qq|" |;
}
print qq| MAXLENGTH="6"%/TD
TD ALIGN="CENTER" STYLE="font-family:serif; font-size:14px;background-color:#cc9900"
INPUT TYPE="TEXT" ID="prob_innoc$ev_count" NAME="prob_innoc$ev_count" SIZE="7" |;
if ($me-{pass}!=1) {
print qq|VALUE="|.($prob_innoc?$prob_innoc:"").qq|"|;
}
print " MAXLENGTH=6%/TD\n";
}
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
.
Re: Training in the Middle and Far East
---Original Message--- From: Rajeev Prasad Date: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 10:45:56 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Training in the Middle and Far East the clouds were dark and a lightining striked again.. obviously that was when they parted. :) Hello Brian, To me Physics, mathematics and chemistry are capable enough to explain certain things/phenomenons on their own. Or in other words one can not explain/prove certain things in the absence of any or all of these fundamental blocks of knowledge base. Hence they are true sciences. You can extend the word to show/increase the importance/complexity of a work like 'language sciences', but that does not make language a science. I am not going to dispute what a dictionary has to say about what is science or what can be termed/defined as 'scientific'. English language in itself is very new language and is still evolving, there are many situations and expressions which can not be described using this language alone. (Hence words were bought in from other languages). You can find several articles(even in big publications) abusing such words which eventually dilutes or distort their true meaning (say slangs) (perhapes to increase the importance/complexity or sophistication of the subject they are talking about). I do not want to say that English language has defects or webester is wrong, or anything of that sort, coz i think that is not where i want to go. To me:- To be classified/recognised as a science: A subject has to be pure and able to stand on its own. be able to explain things based on its own principals and fundamentals. be able to explore and unmask the unknown using its own established set of solutions (say, a new theorm using/based on theorms earlier defined/established, in case of mathematics). Without the knowledge of mathematics and physics, one can not do anything with computers (except writing letters in MS Word making goofy powerpoint slides). Mathematical science is employed in computer programming. thanks, Rajeev __ There are as many paths as there are travellers... Hi again Rajeev- I think perhaps we have a basic disagreement on the definition of "science". I have quoted what I accept as a rigorous definition (with cites from a well known authority on the English language, Merriam-Webster). Regardless of whether you have corresponding citations, I would be interested to know what you consider "science" to be. Clearly, you rate mathematics, physics, and chemistry as sciences (I would agree). Examples aside, what is a good definition of science as far as you are concerned? Brian /~~\ | Brian Gerard The moon is covered with the | | First initial + 'lists' results of astronomical odds. | | at technobrat dot com | \__/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ MSN Shopping upgraded for the holidays! Snappier product search... http://shopping.msn.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
