Saturday, December 3, 2016

Digest for comp.programming.threads@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 13 topics

Ramine <ramine@1.1>: Dec 04 12:23AM -0500

Hello....
 
 
Yet about the essence of quality now..
 
You have seen my previous proof about the essence of quality,
but there is still a contradiction that is caused by empirical
facts, like quality can be interpreted like more productivity
and more performance and efficiency neglecting the criterion
of happiness and this can be dictated from the actuel law of force
of concurrence that forces the people to work more and more neglecting
there happiness, so this can not be interpreted like quality, so
science is limited and constrained by empirical facts that introduces
like a contradiction, because science is the consequence of quality,
but quality is constrained by empirical facts like the law
of force of concurrence.
 
 
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.
bleachbot <bleachbot@httrack.com>: Dec 03 10:19PM +0100

bleachbot <bleachbot@httrack.com>: Dec 03 10:38PM +0100

bleachbot <bleachbot@httrack.com>: Dec 03 11:08PM +0100

bleachbot <bleachbot@httrack.com>: Dec 03 11:53PM +0100

bleachbot <bleachbot@httrack.com>: Dec 04 01:05AM +0100

bleachbot <bleachbot@httrack.com>: Dec 04 01:51AM +0100

bleachbot <bleachbot@httrack.com>: Dec 04 02:10AM +0100

bleachbot <bleachbot@httrack.com>: Dec 04 02:18AM +0100

bleachbot <bleachbot@httrack.com>: Dec 04 02:49AM +0100

bleachbot <bleachbot@httrack.com>: Dec 04 03:16AM +0100

bleachbot <bleachbot@httrack.com>: Dec 04 03:46AM +0100

bleachbot <bleachbot@httrack.com>: Dec 04 05:00AM +0100

bleachbot <bleachbot@httrack.com>: Dec 04 06:23AM +0100

Ramine <ramine@1.1>: Dec 03 11:00PM -0500

Hello...
 
What is the essence of quality ?
 
I have said in my previous proof that essence of science
is dependant and correlated and the consequence of the essence
of quality.
 
Because by definition: what is science ?
 
Science is called science because it uses intelligence to
attain a higher degree of quality.
 
But more quality is the consequence of more money and more
intelligence both cultural and genetical, and quality
must proceed logically by giving priorities, so since
the goal is also happiness of people an this is very important ,
and since the goal is also to not degenerate the people towards more
suffering and more problems and this also very important, so higher
quality must guide the people, that means also more money and higher
intelligence must guide people, because more quality is also the
consequence of more money and more intelligence, the characteristic of a
good strategist is in accordance with this logical proof, because a
strategist has to focus on three basic elements:
 
1- Priorities (we will focus resources on these things)
 
2- Sequencing (we will do this first, then that)
 
3- And the theory of victory (we will succeed for the following reasons)
 
 
 
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.
Ramine <ramine@1.1>: Dec 03 09:47PM -0500

Hello....
 
Here is the essence of science:
 
It's like in philosophy, i have used logical proofs an measure
to understand the essence of science.
 
I have said that:
 
Because by definition: what is science ?
 
Science is called science because it uses intelligence to
attain a higher degree of quality.
 
So if you are purist of science, like pure functions of functional
programming, you will say that science can not be called science
if it has a weakness that is not science that make the consequence
of science that is a higher degree of quality a low degree of quality.
 
So from this second logical proof that is rigorous, we can say that
programming is not science and money is not science.
 
So to call it science i think that we must maximize efficiently
the degree of intelligence by both maximize efficiently the genetical
intelligence and the cultural intelligence to be able to call it science.
 
So programming can not be called science if it has genetical
intelligence weaknesses and/or cultural intelligence weaknesses.
 
I think this is mandatory in the essence of science.
 
 
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.
Ramine <ramine@1.1>: Dec 03 09:17PM -0500

Hello...
 
There is something important to know about the essence of science
 
I have said that:
 
Because by definition: what is science ?
 
Science is called science because it uses intelligence to
attain a higher degree of quality.
 
If you are purist of science, like pure functions of functional
programming, you will say that science can not be called science
if it has a weakness that is not science that make the consequence
of science that is a higher degree of quality a low degree of quality.
 
So from this second logical proof that is rigorous, we can say that
programming is not science and money is not science.
 
 
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.
Ramine <ramine@1.1>: Dec 03 08:50PM -0500

Hello....
 
 
By my logical proof:
 
Money is also science.
 
Because with money you can reuse intelligence to attain
higher degree of quality, and reusing a higher intelligence is
also a higher intelligence.
 
It's the essence of science.
 
Because by definition: what is science ?
 
Science is called science because it uses intelligence to
attain a higher degree of quality.
 
 
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.
Ramine <ramine@1.1>: Dec 03 08:19PM -0500

Hello........
 
About my previous logical proof...
 
I have proved to you that modeling in programming by reusing
intelligence is also science.
 
Because by definition: what is science ?
 
Science is called science because it uses intelligence to
attain a higher degree of quality.
 
So by modeling in programming by reusing intelligence,
that means by reusing intelligente technics in programming,
or by reusing intelligente code, is also called intelligence
and is also a higher degree of quality, so it is also called science.
 
 
So my proof is correct i think.
 
 
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.
Ramine <ramine@1.1>: Dec 03 08:10PM -0500

Hello....
 
About my previous logical prof...
 
I have proved to you that modeling in programming by reusing
intelligence is also science.
 
Because by definition: what is science ?
 
Science is called science because it uses intelligence to
attain a higher degree of quality.
 
So by modeling in programming by reusing intelligence,
that means by reusing intelligente technics in programming,
or by reusing intelligente code, is also called intelligence
and is also a higher degree of quality, so it is also called science.
 
 
So my proof is correct i think.
 
 
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.
Ramine <ramine@1.1>: Dec 03 07:52PM -0500

Hello....
 
Take for example mathematical logic, you will learn for example
in mathematical logic that:
 
p -> q (that means: if p then q)
 
is equivalent to:
 
not(q) -> not(p)
 
because it is infered mathematically from:
 
p -> q
 
is equivalent to:
 
not(p) or q
 
 
Why we are using the equivalence: not(q) -> not(p) ?
 
Because there is problems that looks like:
 
a and b -> c
 
that are easier to prove with: not(c) -> not(a) or not(b)
 
 
And this brings efficiency , so it brings a higher level of quality,
so a higher level understanding of logic to formalize logic is
modeling and is also science.
 
This is the essence of programming, because programming is also
modeling, and when you model with big O of datastructures , this
modeling constitute also science, because like in philosophy that
understand the essence of things, the modeling with big O of
datastructures has a consequence of bringing a higher degree of quality
that constitute a good approximation of the high degree of quality
that we find in science, so when you do modeling with intelligente
technics and modeling with big O,so that means by reusing intelligence,
so tht means by reusing intelligente code, that is also science.
 
 
 
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.
Ramine <ramine@1.1>: Dec 03 07:05PM -0500

Hello.......
 
Is programming a science..
 
We have to be smart and do also do philosophy to answer this question
my dear programmer...
 
The goal of philosophy is to use logic and measure to understand the
essence of the things.
 
This is how we must understand programming..
 
So to understand the essence of programming, it's also
to understand the building blocks of programming, but
since the building block of programming is also mathematical
logic and also discrete mathematics and also mathematics that
permit us to calculate also the big O space and time complexity,
so the essence of real programming must not come without
this mathematics, so since it is mathematics that gouvern
real programming, so real programming is also science.
 
Other than that when we say this:
 
Take for example mathematical logic, you will learn for example
in mathematical logic that:
 
p -> q
 
is equivalent to:
 
not(q) -> not(p)
 
because it is infered mathematically from:
 
p -> q
 
is equivalent to:
 
not(p) or q
 
So this higher level logic permit us to formalize logic, so
a higher level understanding of logic is also science, because
for example: p -> q is equivalent to not(q) -> not(p) permit
us to prove efficiently, so that is also science, so a higher
level understanding of discrete mathematics and mathematical logic
is also science, and so a higher level understanding of what
is the big O of mergesort and using mergesort in high level
manner constitute also science, because the consequence
that is a higher level quality in the higher level understanding
is a good approximation of what constitute also science, so
when you learn what is the big O of datastructures and
understand and work with them in higher level manner is
called also modeleling and this modeling constitute
also a good approximation of what is science.
 
So i think that programming is also science.
 
 
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdne.
Ramine <ramine@1.1>: Dec 03 05:59PM -0500

Hello....
 
Real Troll wrote on comp.lang.c++
>Do you also write tutorials for Delphi or C#?
 
We have to be smart my dear programmer, this is
why i have easy the job for you by porting many
of my inventions to C++ in a form of
C++ synchronization objects library, please read about
it here, and the source code that i have compiled with
Freepascal is available there:
 
 
https://sites.google.com/site/aminer68/c-synchronization-objects-library
 
Also i have ported to C++ my Scalable Parallel C++ Conjugate Gradient
Linear System Solver Library:
 
https://sites.google.com/site/aminer68/scalable-parallel-c-conjugate-gradient-linear-system-solver-library
 
Also i have easy the job for you by compiling my Universal Scalability
Law for Delphi and FreePascal programs to windows 32bit and 64bit
executables, they are really fantastic and powerful, they are GUI and
command line, please read about them and download them from here:
 
https://sites.google.com/site/aminer68/universal-scalability-law-for-delphi-and-freepascal
 
 
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.
Ramine <ramine@1.1>: Dec 03 05:08PM -0500

Hello,
 
Yet about my projects...
 
Hope you have read my previous post about my projects..
 
I will add this:
 
You have to know that i have used a Top-Down methodology to design
my projects.. the Top-Down methodology begins with the overall goals
of the program- what we wich to achieve instead of how -, and after that
it gets on more details and how to implement them.
 
And i have taken care with my objects and modules of the following
characteristics:
 
- Logical coherence
 
- Independence:
 
It is like making more pure functions of functional programming to avoid
side-effects and to easy the maintenance and testing steps.
 
- Object oriented design and coding
 
- and also structure design and coding with sequence , iteration and
conditionals.
 
And about the testing phase read the following:
 
Alexandre Machado wrote:
>- You don't have both, unit and performance tests
>Have you ever considered this? I'm sure that it would make
>make it easier for other Delphi devs to start using it, no?
 
You have to know that i have also used the following method of testing
called black box testing:
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black-box_testing
 
This is why i have written this:
 
I have thoroughly tested and stabilized more my parallel archiver for
many years, and now i think that it is more stable and efficient, so i
think that you can be more confident with it.
 
This also true for all my other projects, i have followed the black box
testing also with them...
 
For race conditions , i think for an experienced programmer in parallel
programming like me, this is not a so difficult task to avoid race
conditions.
 
For sequential consistency i have also written this:
 
I have implemented my inventions with FreePascal and Delphi compilers
that don't reorder loads and stores even with compiler optimization, and
this is less error prone than C++ that follows a relaxed memory model
when compiled with optimization, so i have finally compiled my
algorithms implementations with FreePascal into Dynamic Link Libraries
that are used by C++ in a form of my C++ Object Synchronization Library.
 
So this is much easier to make a correct sequential consistency with
Delphi and Freepascal because it is less error prone.
 
Other than that you have to know that i am an experienced programmer in
parallel programming also, so i think that my projects are more stable
and fast.
 
You can download all my projects from:
 
https://sites.google.com/site/aminer68/
 
 
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane..
Ramine <ramine@1.1>: Dec 03 04:40PM -0500

Hello..
 
I correct my english, please read again....
 
Alexandre Machado wrote:
>- You don't have both, unit and performance tests
>Have you ever considered this? I'm sure that it would make
>make it easier for other Delphi devs to start using it, no?
 
You have to know that i have also used the following method of testing
called black box testing:
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black-box_testing
 
This is why i have written this:
 
I have thoroughly tested and stabilized more my parallel archiver for
many years, and now i think that it is more stable and efficient, so i
think that you can be more confident with it.
 
This also true for all my other projects, i have followed the black box
testing also with them...
 
For race conditions , i think for an experienced programmer in parallel
programming like me, this is not a so difficult task to avoid race
conditions.
 
For sequential consistency i have also written this:
 
I have implemented my inventions with FreePascal and Delphi compilers
that don't reorder loads and stores even with compiler optimization, and
this is less error prone than C++ that follows a relaxed memory model
when compiled with optimization, so i have finally compiled my
algorithms implementations with FreePascal into Dynamic Link Libraries
that are used by C++ in a form of my C++ Object Synchronization Library.
 
So this is much easier to make a correct sequential consistency with
Delphi and Freepascal because it is less error prone.
 
Other than that you have to know that i am an experienced programmer in
parallel programming also, so i think that my projects are more stable
and fast.
 
You can download all my projects from:
 
https://sites.google.com/site/aminer68/
 
 
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane..
You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to comp.programming.threads+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)