Thu, 09 Sep 2010
Top Posting
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
It seems that major e-mail clients including Gmail encourage people to top-post and actively sabotage any other mode of operation. Recently I have discovered that with many top-posters the conversation is very inefficient, as top-posters when constructing their reply tend to stop reading after answering the first question in the original mail.
It is really hard to keep them focused on the whole mail, because for answering all the questions presented to them, they would have to scroll down and back again.
2 replies for this story:
J.C. wrote: Matter of opinion
I think, top posting is a matter of opinion. I prefer it, for example, when the e-mail contains a discussion; you do not have to scroll down the all the five pages of text to read the newest part.
Yenya wrote: Discussion
Well, the trick is to _not_ have the whole discussion quoted with one line added after 5 pages of quoted text. The quoted text should only contain the necessary context.
Reply to this story:
Wed, 01 Sep 2010
Perl6 - Rakudo
I have installed Fedora 14 Alpha in a virtual machine in order to
test emerging technologies like systemd and Perl 6.
I have not tried the Perl 6 language features yet, just did several
small performance tests:
[root@nausicaa ~]# time perl -e 1
real 0m0.029s
user 0m0.012s
sys 0m0.018s
[root@nausicaa ~]# time perl6 -e 1
real 0m2.773s
user 0m2.137s
sys 0m0.635s
[root@nausicaa ~]# time perl -e 'for (1..10_000) { 42; }'
real 0m0.027s
user 0m0.008s
sys 0m0.019s
[root@nausicaa ~]# time perl6 -e 'for (1..10_000) { 42; }'
real 0m7.705s
user 0m6.779s
sys 0m0.922s
I know Rakudo Perl is not optimized yet, but taking over two seconds just to start the interpreter makes it unusable even for playing and trying.
2 replies for this story:
Peter Kruty wrote: hmm
Interesting, I played with rakudo like 8-9 months ago and it certainly was not so bad with performance. What I was frustrated from was the mismatch between documentation and implementation. When I checked on IRC, guys basically confirmed, that implementation is and will be different, just documentation is outdated. It's fairly difficult to play with Perl 6 and enjoy it, if something is not implemented yet and something is implemented differently and it's not always obvious which is the case.
himdel wrote: hmm
Hmm, I'd say the documentation got much better recently, there's a lot of tutorials floating around. And feature-wise, I'm pretty excited, especially since most of it works *NOW* (well, now + 15s :D). But yeah, the speed sucks and loadin perl5 modules is not supported yet :(.