Re: RubyGems deciding version formats

[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2006/11/10]

From: David Cantrell
Subject: Re: RubyGems deciding version formats
Date: 15:32 on 10 Nov 2006
On Fri, Nov 10, 2006 at 09:21:49AM -0600, Stephen Deken wrote:
> On 11/10/06, Sean O'Rourke <sorourke@xx.xxxx.xxx> wrote:
> >And end up further into the other Great Ruby Hate of giving
> >programs "clever" names you'll never guess?  Does the library
> >dealing with X have X in its name, or is it named something
> >"cute" and impossible to find, like "sediment" or "ant"?
> To be fair, Ruby didn't start this.  Java did the same thing with
> JavaBeans, albeit with a lesser degree of hate.  At least `jar` wasn't
> named `coffeecan`.

The rot set in far far earlier, with 'awt' and 'swing'.  Neither name
cries out "widget set" to me.

Thankfully, all the Java books I've seen seem to think that writing GUI
apps is the be-all and end-all of programming, and so tell you about
these things in the first few pages.

I expect that both awt and swing have now been deprecated, as they're at
least five minutes old and so are hopelessly uncool.  Their replacement
is probably called something obvious like 'doublelattemocha' or 'Brian'.

-- 
David Cantrell | London Perl Mongers Deputy Chief Heretic

Do not be afraid of cooking, as your ingredients will know and misbehave
   -- Fergus Henderson
There's stuff above here

Generated at 23:01 on 18 Nov 2006 by mariachi 0.52