Re^4: Strong typing and Type Safety.A multilanguage approachby nikosv (Chaplain)
|on Nov 19, 2010 at 15:53 UTC||Need Help??|
I have no control over the look of siteIts almost has a playboy article feel, but without the benefit of nude females.
you know best as you look experienced with those kind of sites ;)Because it is not in depth; it doesn't deliver what it promises and borders on incoherent wishy-washy. Based on the vocabulary its clearly written for experts but its full of vague generalities and not the kind of details experts would need to be demystified.
theory is followed by code snippets to make the concepts clear.maybe you did not get it.please make your critic constructive by pointing out specific things to talk about and don't just say things just to say themA beginner would be very confused but impressed by the authors immense knowledge, and left in awe of the coolness of these things and the author for knowing them.
I play no expert or the smarty one.I just display my findings after I have done my research.I don't have a particular target group
and to tell you truth, the phrase : No, we may not. It's complicated - and if you don't believe me try explaining this strange set of rules to a beginner was added by the editor;it is not my styleAn expert would breeze through this article and think about thanking the author for a laugh, then do his own research.
Mike James who has been on the scene for a couple of decades, runs the site and VSJ magazine and has a couple of PhD's thinks that the article is very good.But you seem more qualified to judge since you have a degree in Astrophysics, work for NASA and have send a bot to Mars :-) And as you seem to know what an expert would think, this automatically upgrades to you an expert and since you surely know all the things that are demonstrated in the article, after you complete your expert ,I am certain, research, please let me know of it. i will be glad to take a look at it
thanks for your opinion anyway