The naming similarity is unfortunate. However, there are many computing
products and services named Go. In the 11 months since our release, there
has been minimal confusion of the two languages, so we are closing this
issue.
Raphaël使用的是 W3C 推荐的 SVG和VML 来创建图片。这意味着所创建的图形对象一样可以是一个DOM对象，可以被你的Javascript的事件来操作。Raphaël 支持所有的主流浏览器：Firefox 3.0+, Safari 3.0+, Chrome 5.0+, Opera 9.5+ d 和 Internet Explorer 6.0+，最强大的是，这个js文件被压缩后也就60K。
生产力时代。1990年代以来主要是如何增进编程生产率的时代，这个时代出现了很多framework，代码库，以及快速开发的IDE，很多公司都在这个时期致力于这些增进生率的工作，如：delphi, power builder, MFC，boost等等。但最重要的还是因为引入了虚拟机——WORA（Write Once, Run Anywhere），JVM 是这方面的代表作。之后的.NET整出来的那些东西都是。今天的JPython, JRuby等都是为整合开发效率和维护效率。参看《基于JVM的语言正在开始流行》
今天在网上看到网页叫“Object Orientation Isa Hoax”——面向对象是一个骗局，标题很有煽动性（注：该网站上还有一个网页叫Object Orientation Is Dead），好吧，打开看看上面有些 什么，发现这个网页是在收集一些关于“面向对象的反动言论”，没想到的是，很多言论出自很多大师之口。比如：Alexander Stepanov和Bjarne Stroustrup。这些言论挺有意思的，所以，我摘两段在下面：
Question:
I think STL and Generic Programming mark a definite departure from the common C++ programming style, which I find is almost completely derived from SmallTalk. Do you agree?
Answer:
Yes. STL is not object oriented. I think that object orientedness is almost as much of a hoax as Artificial Intelligence. I have yet to see an interesting piece of code that comes from these OO people. In a sense, I am unfair to AI: I learned a lot of stuff from the MIT AI Lab crowd, they have done some really fundamental work: Bill Gosper’s Hakmem is one of the best things for a programmer to read. AI might not have had a serious foundation, but it produced Gosper and Stallman (Emacs), Moses (Macsyma) and Sussman (Scheme, together with Guy Steele). I find OOP technically unsound. It attempts to decompose the world in terms of interfaces that vary on a single type. To deal with the real problems you need multisorted algebras – families of interfaces that span multiple types. I find OOP philosophically unsound. It claims that everything is an object. Even if it is true it is not very interesting – saying that everything is an object is saying nothing at all. I find OOP methodologically wrong. It starts with classes. It is as if mathematicians would start with axioms. You do not start with axioms – you start with proofs. Only when you have found a bunch of related proofs, can you come up with axioms. You end with axioms. The same thing is true in programming: you have to start with interesting algorithms. Only when you understand them well, can you come up with an interface that will let them work.
Loading...
