Re: Design Decisions and Hurd/L4 work (was: Re: Improving Hurd)

[Jeroen Dekkers]

On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 08:57:31AM +0200, Jan Atle Ramsli wrote:
> "Thomas Bushnell, BSG" wrote:
> > 
> 
> > There are--horror of horrors--data type problems that abstract data
> > types are unable to adequately describe, and this is precisely what
> > led to their demise as a fundamental organizing principle about ten
> > years ago.
> 
> Some more: Now we understand exchother perfectly.
> I _do_ need to read at least two books in order to even contemplate
> doing something useful - I can not, not under any circumstances, program
> on something I do not 100% (not 99.99%!) understand.
> And now I hear that Hurd is based on concepts that have 10 years advance
> on me in matters of basic computer science.
> 
> If necessary, I will retake a course in Software Enginneering ... but I
> need to understand the design priciples, and the scientific philosophy
> behind them.

This is just my hobby. I learned everything with some information from
the internet and reading a lot of code. I don't think you need to know
everything for 100%, you just need to know that much to get the job
done in a right way. And I believe the best way to learn most
programming things is by practice, not by reading some book. Of course
you will fail the first time, but it doesn't matter. You know at least
what not to do when you try the second time.

I'm not saying that theory isn't important either. It's important to
learn about ideas and learn why something is that way and how to do
some things. But I don't think you have to focus too much on it.

Jeroen Dekkers
-- 
Jabber supporter - http://www.jabber.org Jabber ID: jdekkers@jabber.org
Debian GNU supporter - http://www.debian.org http://www.gnu.org
IRC: jeroen@openprojects

pgpTmaGljIUbl.pgp
Description: PGP signature