On Friday 10 February 2006 18:03, Orn E. Hansen wrote:
The object of programming is to reuse code, so the idea of being a "fraud" because you use common code snippets is void.
You're joking, right? Go inspect the code yourself. The whole site appears to be Dreamweaver generated code... it's not just the Javascript "snippets" I was talking about. Go back and re-read my original post. I clearly described the resemblance. Also, I didn't introduce the word "fraud." That was another poster. The only point I was making was that I'd have a great deal more respect for a professional Linux certification organization that "walks the walk" and employs native Linux/OSS tools in every aspect of their business. As I said, I can't *prove* it was Dreamweaver, but clearly there is an uncanny resemblance to Dreamweaver code and vim 6.0 doesn't have this kind of capability, either built-in or via plug-in (yes, I checked the vim.org website.)
Any person, who ever does any form of programming is using code snippets, these code snippets are in a library accessed through a function. The frauds are more those that claim they own something, as they are in reality objects that are standing in the way of progress ... an element promoting stagnation.
Did you bother to contemplate fully what I wrote before posting this? I just pointed out something *humorous.* I've been in this industry for over twenty years if you count my time in analog electronics. I know what "snippets" and "libraries" are. I know what IP is. But I don't see how any of these things are relevant to the joke? Nor do I see how they are relevant to the admittedly small but substantive part of the discussion. Allow me to reiterate:
LPI is promoting itself in and from the Linux community as a public standard and resource. It is fair game for criticism like this. And don't naively suggest that there is just one borrowed "snippet"... the layout of the whole site and indenting of the generated code is classic Dreamweaver with the comments stripped out.
Note: I went back and dug a little deeper. It appears only the top layer pages have the commenting stripped out. And here's the "joke" part again:
I actually interpreted "vim 6.0" as a subtle joke from the site developer to curious people like me
Since you have completely ignored the only part of this discussion worth commenting on, I'll repeat that too:
... I still think, however, native Linux tools would be more appropriate given their visibility. The message this sends to those who know what they're looking at is that Linux tools aren't adequate, and that's just plain wrong!
If you disagree, feel free to explain it to me. Otherwise, the joke part of this thread has long since quit being humorous. I'd rather we just let it die in peace. regards, Carl