Re: [O] [Orgmode] Automatic screenshot insertion

[Jambunathan K]

Skip Collins <address@hidden> writes:

> 2012/1/10 François Pinard <address@hidden>:
>> Some sad people think of me as a programmer.  While deep down, I am
>> fundamentally an artist.  Programming is mere mean of expression :-).
>
> You and Jambunathan K. should form a club.

Since I am being dragged in to the conversaion, I am digging out a
reddit post that resonated with me (in a totally different setting).

The clincher is actually the last paragraph and you need to read the
first few paragraphs to enjoy the last one. 


There is also a story at the end of this post for everyone to ponder
about.

,---- From 
http://www.reddit.com/r/Buddhism/comments/if08k/when_did_you_first_discover_the_illusory_nature/
| At some point in my teens I'd started doing C programming. If you
| don't know, computer code is usually formatted in a systematic way to
| make it easier to read. Most languages give you a lot of freedom in
| this, so every project has its own coding conventions.
| 
| I was really into Linux and assumed Linus Torvalds was probably the
| most wonderful genius hacker of all time. He's got his own write-up
| about the Linux kernel coding style, which you can read here if you
| happen to be interested. Some quotes:
| 
|     First off, I'd suggest printing out a copy of the GNU coding
|     standards, and NOT read it. Burn them, it's a great symbolic
|     gesture.
| 
|     [...]
| 
|     Tabs are 8 characters, and thus indentations are also 8
|     characters. There are heretic movements that try to make
|     indentations 4 (or even 2! [this is the GNU standard]) characters
|     deep, and that is akin to trying to define the value of PI to be
|     3.
| 
|     [...]
| 
|     You've probably been told by your long-time Unix user helper that
|     "GNU emacs" automatically formats the C sources for you, and
|     you've noticed that yes, it does do that, but the defaults it uses
|     are less than desirable (in fact, they are worse than random
|     typing - an infinite number of monkeys typing into GNU emacs would
|     never make a good program).
| 
| So I read this at an impressionable age and it all seemed very obvious
| and plainly true. Linux kernel source code, you could tell by just the
| aesthetic impression of the code style, was fast, clean, and smart. It
| looked good. On the other hand, the source code for GNU projects had a
| weird & ugly style.
| 
| Here's some Linux-style code:
| 
| static char *concat(char *s1, char *s2)
| {
|         while (x == y) {
|                 something();
|                 somethingelse();
|          }
|          finalthing();
| }
| 
| Here's the corresponding GNU-style code:
| 
| static char *
| concat (char *s1, char *s2)
| {
|   while (x == y)
|     {
|       something ();
|       somethingelse ();
|     }
|   finalthing ();
| }
| 
| But then I started using GNU Emacs and became fascinated by the
| founder of GNU, Richard Stallman, who wrote Emacs and popularized this
| coding convention. I gradually began to think Linus was kind of
| annoying and not as profoundly creative as rms (as Mr. Stallman is
| known).
| 
| Then one day I noticed that Linux kernel code looked weird & ugly and
| GNU code looked fast, clean, and smart. This was now the obvious and
| plain truth. When I noticed myself feeling like this, it was obvious
| that something was seriously weird with the aesthetic sense.
| 
| And that's when I realized that subconscious judgments filter
| experience in a very strange way. So I couldn't really trust myself
| anymore. It was like glimpsing some uncanny fluttering in the veils of
| my ego delusion... dun dun dun!
| 
| How weird is this story?
`----

My own opinion on the matter is: 

Great hackers have *a* style and stick religiously to it. But they
remain steady and productive (even) when working with a dump (pun
intended) from a different school.

,---- From http://users.rider.edu/~suler/zenstory/concentrate.html
| After winning several archery contests, the young and rather boastful
| champion challenged a Zen master who was renowned for his skill as an
| archer. The young man demonstrated remarkable technical proficiency
| when he hit a distant bull's eye on his first try, and then split that
| arrow with his second shot. "There," he said to the old man, "see if
| you can match that!" Undisturbed, the master did not draw his bow, but
| rather motioned for the young archer to follow him up the
| mountain. Curious about the old fellow's intentions, the champion
| followed him high into the mountain until they reached a deep chasm
| spanned by a rather flimsy and shaky log. Calmly stepping out onto the
| middle of the unsteady and certainly perilous bridge, the old master
| picked a far away tree as a target, drew his bow, and fired a clean,
| direct hit. "Now it is your turn," he said as he gracefully stepped
| back onto the safe ground. Staring with terror into the seemingly
| bottomless and beckoning abyss, the young man could not force himself
| to step out onto the log, no less shoot at a target. "You have much
| skill with your bow," the master said, sensing his challenger's
| predicament, "but you have little skill with the mind that lets loose
| the shot."
`----

Jambunathan K.
--