Comment onby gods
|on Feb 11, 2000 at 00:06 UTC||Need Help??|
In have studied cognitive development in children for the purpose of AI ...
I cannot argue against your claimed experience. But ...
thinking in negation
I can counter that.
Waiting, or repeating something until something happens; is not thinking in negation.
However, waiting or repeating something while something has not happened; is!
even experienced programmers, ... make mistakes [when] code that contains negation of large expressions.
I'll take it that by "large expressions" you really mean "complex expressions".
And that points up the error in this justifiction. until (used properly) does not contain a negation.
until (used properly), captures the positive expression of the terminating condition.
Which requires "thinking in negation"?
I have seen a similar argument put forth in the book Perl Best Practices
Never in the history of programming, has so much, been screwed up for so many; by so little justification.
This is far from the worst atrocity that book has inflicted.
With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
In reply to Re^3: Untillian Headache or about the semantic of until