Martin Jambon wrote:
>
> Imagine Brandon is a girl. Do you think
> honestly it is a proper way to talk to her?

In the politically correct defense of girls, there are a few in heavy
duty computerdom, and I've sparred with at least one capable defender on
the Nebula2 mailing list.  I do not mind or regret that my comments
result in friction.  It is an artifact of my personal style, a choice I
make.  I do mind when a debate becomes abusive, or when the engineering
implications aren't honest, just heavily prioritized.  I don't recall
being guilty of abuse.  I do recall letting my biases run away with me
sometimes, as happens to most of us at least some of the time.

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicators say a lot about what kinds of
communication people do or don't tolerate.  http://humanmetrics.com  It
was invented by a woman in the 1940's who had no formal degree but was a
fan of Jungian archetypes.  She wanted a job placement test, something
that would determine what kind of work people were psychologically
suitable for.  It still has tremendous utility today, and says much
about interpersonal communication as well.  Common schisms that happen
in all technical communities I've participated in:

Introvert vs. Extrovert - is popularity of a product important?

Thinker vs. Feeler - what kind of debate transpires before it becomes
abusive?
                     who perceives what as abusive?

Perceiver vs. Judger - when has someone "had enough" with someone else?

Mercifully, techies and academics in general are usually iNtuitives, not
Sensors.  So we only get to have 3 of the 4 possible schisms.  :-)  On
the other hand, 3/4 of people are Extrovert, and it's way easier for
Extroverts to get along with other Extroverts than for Introverts to get
along with other Introverts.  So others are similarly advantaged.
Communities tend to have 3 of the 4 possible schisms, as they are
generally self-selective on one of the axes.


Cheers,                         www.indiegamedesign.com
Brand*n Van Every               S*attle, WA

Praise Be to the caml-list Bayesian filter! It blesseth
my postings, it is evil crap!  evil crap!  Bigarray!
Unboxed overhead group!  Wondering!  chant chant chant...

Is my technical content showing?

// return an array of 100 packed tuples
temps
  int $[tvar0][2*100]; // what the c function needs
  value $[tvar1]; // one int
  value $[tvar2]; // one tuple
  int $[tvar3] // loop control var
oncePre
eachPre
  $[cvar0]=&($[tvar0][0]);
eachPost
  $[lvar0] = alloc(2*100, 0 /*NB: zero-tagged block*/ );
  for(int $[tvar3]=0;$[tvar3]<100;$[tvar3]++) {
    $[tvar2] = alloc_tuple(2);
    $[tvar1] = Val_int($[cvar0][0+2*$[tvar3]]);
    Store_field($[tvar2],0,$[tvar1]);
    $[tvar1] = Val_int($[cvar0][1]);
    Store_field($[tvar2],1,$[tvar1+2*$[tvar3]]);
    Array_store($[lvar0],$[tvar3],$[tvar0]);
  }
oncePost

-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners