It would be ridiculous to confuse a bit of fun with a life-long commitment; it would be a bit ridiculous to make a life-long commitment when you're just talking to your friends. But we can be bouyed up by friends such that we can see what it is possible for us to do, which has no relation to the time it might take us.
The bouying up doesn't amount to the making of meals, for instance. But it took many of us a long time to realize that we are just peasants, and there's no changing that. If you want to be above peasanthood, you need to have more leisure than someone else.
There are those who cynically suggest that keeping us from having leisure is big business.
There are those who refer big business to grey men who run the world; but we know that Aunt Jemimah does (for those who are not aware, she is the one behind the individual or group behind the inventor of the lava lamp).
Visual effects are big business: I write that for my eyes only.
Having written it, I find it provides continuity; thus I must allow others to see it too.
There's very little money in computers if we remove visual effects; there's very little leisure for thought if whatever we do must please someone else.
But I then find myself fighting myself on the matter of attempting to complete things alone, which must be done by myself alone; which includes the matter of fighting an irrational attitude towards the internet itself.
Working with foreigners who hadn't a clue about how I had committed myself before, I found myself rather led astray. In fact, I believe they saw what I had set out to do as unnecessary.
And their opinions about the workplace had been imported, as had their preconceived ideas about one in my position.
I had to learn that there are only two settings on the matter of the announcement of changes; I then recalled one big business that had adopted GNU fileservers, by the computer department making the change surreptitiously.
I certainly wasn't going to show my faithfulness to a principle I couldn't explain to others by doing the like, but the principle within that recollection was the only way to circumvent the loud-hailer.
As soon as the loud-hailer goes, people start looking for things that don't quite please them.
Strange to say, this seems the right way of doing things, as long as people continue to struggle with simple logic.
For anyone who's thinking about a career in programming, take note that everyone is told to believe in team work, but some members of the team are assumed to not want their name on the company's webpages, for example.
But I was just in it to win it. It's a good thing we're not on this world alone, for we can spend a dozen years or more barking up the wrong tree. It's difficult to say whether the inclusion of my name on the company's site would've given me the needed strength to continue as I was, looking at a ten year plan for the phasing out of C++ code that was itself ten years old.
Which is to say, just how much strength we get from our toys is an unknown factor.
I had chosen C++ because the idea of a hierarchical namespace is attractive; most often, however, we imagine someone else coming along to tidy up our rough work.
When we consider lists we find ourselves in the world we're in, which can't change overnight, so what are we going to do in the mean time?
A linked list is a fundamental structure. While it can be implemented with a handful of macros, we look again at the word fundamental, and think about a language with a standard library. But that would take away much of the fun programmers have with their toys.
Macros are stop-gap measures, sort of like the saying, 'if it ain't broke don't fix it.'
The idea of the paperless office was sold on the idea that what is on the screen can be on the paper: this is what we call, cornering a mathematician. It may be on this account that people were generous enough not to call me one.
Very often I was called Sorry-Brian, on account of those who after twenty years still couldn't distinguish my name from that of one closely related to me. There are those who talk of Platonic friendships; and then there are those who insist that gender is irrelevant, and that they are your friends. But don't let me leave you thinking that gender confusion is a tool of the women's liberation movement.
Let me rather suggest you use your peripheral vision to look at a rectangle within a rectangle; if you're on a mobe, I suggest you look at wasted memory that makes the corners look pretty.
It's important for apps to look pretty; for some programmers they're the only pretty things they get to call their own.
It takes a man to work around nonsense. If you don't agree with me, why are you still reading?
My reference implementation will not match my ideals until I've got something useful to work on.
On the original get go I thought that this time round I aught to be a good boy and make an app icon. But before I start insulting my own creativity for projects that went stale, or talk about the days computers were so slow the splash screen had to be catered for, I must describe what needs to be done before we can think of apps with more than one lot.
The phases of runtime dimensioning, which do not include rationing because that doesn't come cheap, are calculation, reduction, expansion to necessary, and expansion to available.
We reduce first because of the lots which are marked hungry in either dimension. We might call hungry lots boy lots, but we do try to avoid personification. People who preferred to sit their children in front of tvs to look at things which might be described as art if we think that concerning ourselves about what this generation of monkeys can do and calling it art is a reference to what we may call art, might have missed out on the opportunity to develop abstract thought.
The set of lots are what a helpless beggar carries in her handbag. This set is in fact a tree, but we need to restate the important fact that very often the root is implicit. Thus the phases of runtime dimensioning are all depth first searches.
This now bringing us back to when the word warning could only get us shaking with rage, I omit to add any more with this amendment or I'll think of renaming a demo app before it has been perfected.
I don't mean to say that my manhood on any other day of the year is one which will not prick most people's sense of mirth. I might use the identifier, briansprick, but I don't like being careless with my irony.
I might just as well call them brian because the features they won't have will leave a smile on most people's faces.
As the firstborn son of a firstborn son of a firstborn son I still believe in inalienable rights. As one who is disgusted by a language which went from International English into something which allows us to read the bible upside down, I lose my sense of humour when I find it necessary to state to people that there is no difference between the word divine and the word inalienable, when applied to rights.
Hitting on the novel idea of forgetting about navels (and legs and whatever) by making use of my inalienable rights to divorce myself, in spirit, from everything all at once, the rest of this webdoc no longer applies.
I've stopped crying about emotional creatures who lost the plot, and don't have the will to look for it.