You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@avalon.apache.org by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> on 2004/03/11 02:37:53 UTC

[Satire Warning] Standards

The creative mind's look at standards;

Blank piece of paper is better than a form, since it can always be used to 
express the same information as the form, but not the other way around. 
Furthermore, there are so many forms out there, that it is meaningless to use 
any of them, since all of them have shortcomings. Corporate jokes are that 
Forms are really good since there are so many to choose between.

Assembly Language is better than Java, since any construct that you can 
express in Java can be done in assembly, but not necessarily the other way 
around. Assembly provides a much more solid computing model, and is free from 
ambiguities. The specification for Java is 700pages long, and most assembly 
models can be expressed in less than 2 pages. Furthermore, many problems can 
be solved at several magnitudes faster speed than in Java. Java is a too 
tight ( and too long!!!) specification for anyone to be comfortable with it.

Open landscape is much better than both roads and railroads, which are 
inherently restricted to certain directions and destinations, yet there are 
too many to choose from, and one needs a advanced computer system to plot the 
most efficient route from point A to point B. One should have the choice to 
go in any direction at any point in time, since the shortest distance between 
two points are a straight line, which can easily be plotted by anyone. 
Furthermore, why waste time to comply with all these rules that are 
associated with roads, only making travel troublesome, must be on a 
particular side of the road, stop even if noone is competing for the same 
road space and endless other meaningless rules.


Take it anyway you like, that is how it was meant.

Niclas
-- 
+---------//-------------------+
|   http://www.bali.ac         |
|  http://niclas.hedhman.org   |
+------//----------------------+

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org


Re: [Satire Warning] Standards

Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Thursday 11 March 2004 19:12, Leo Sutic wrote:
> Just having one type of food, let's call it Food with capital
> F, is preferable to having many types. If we combine it with
> Drink, then it is even better. 

Since in this case, <10 people is working to produce the F&D processing tools, 
I think it might be a pretty good idea. :o)
But when the next 10 people come around, they are free to extend the Food to 
AltFood, and so on...

Cheers
Niclas
-- 
+---------//-------------------+
|   http://www.bali.ac         |
|  http://niclas.hedhman.org   |
+------//----------------------+

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org


RE: [Satire Warning] Standards

Posted by Leo Sutic <le...@inspireinfrastructure.com>.
Just having one type of food, let's call it Food with capital
F, is preferable to having many types. If we combine it with
Drink, then it is even better. All food and drink processing tools
can become Food and Drink processing tools, which makes them 
simpler to build, as there are only two substances with known
properties to handle. Since Food and Drink are healthy, balanced
in nutritients, and so on, this is the ideal solution to those
foolish people who simply can't understand what's best for them.
(But we know better, right?)

We can do the same thing with Nuts and Bolts, as well as
Nails. If there's only one type of Bolt, many problems 
disappear. If we further specify that a Bolt is always torqued
to a given number of Newton-meters (ft*lbs), it is even better.
Things that can't be built with such Bolts aren't worth building 
anyway.

(If you don't understand this, please see the "Satire Specification",
volume 88, chapter 44, section 22.11.1, subsection C. It's the
one titled "Heavy Handed". Pay attention to the fourth point in the
list, titled "Hamhanded".)

/LS

> From: Niclas Hedhman [mailto:niclas@hedhman.org] 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org