Hey guys, gonna try to keep this one short, looking pompous is never my intention (but unfortunately it always seems to come out like that, looking humble while ranting huge-donkey self important lines is so hard to avoid these days, in fact I think the two contradict each other).

Anyway, I'm getting this annoying line now in classes where they tell you to "google" up some information and learn on your own.

Look, I like finding information on my own just as much as the next guy, but I think people are undermining how efficient it is to learn from someone else. I think one of my biggest problems in approaching information is not knowing where to start. Usually I fix that by talking to someone about it and learning information.

I mean like FUUUUUUUUUCK, does anyone know the pain of approaching linux commands in general? It took me such a long donkey time to figure out that I could start vim through terminal and the syntax of compiling + other coding spoon.

One of the teaching assistants told me all this in under _5_ effin minutes. Cool guy, he didn't tell me to google for syntax or search reference manuals into finding how to do something trivial and I was up to speed using the VI editor to pump out some C++ code in under _5_ minutes.

Look, as with any argument there's always a counter argument, sure, I know some people ask things that they should've been paying attention to under some circumstances.

I mean, google it was usually used for questions that had clear documentation that could be readily found, but now I'm being told to "google it" to find out what something like *& would mean in the parameters of a function.

I think the bottom line is google it is now more-so being used in an asinine approach to learning EVERYTHING, which isn't true or the best way of doing it. I think people need to calm the fudge down and have a little more leniency in answering questions is all.

Also I'm just bitching because this line is creeping up in a classroom that I'm paying out my donkey for, so much butthurt there.

And fudge me sideways the word count just went overboard. I'll never fix my way of writing... :/

(This post was last modified: 12/05/2012 01:27 PM by Tetris999.)

I agree.

(13/05/2012 08:56 AM)ProperBritish Wrote:  

Tetris999 Wrote:I mean, google it was usually used for questions that had clear documentation that could be readily found, but now I'm being told to "google it" to find out what something like *& would mean in the parameters of a function.

*& is a pointer to a reference of a variable in memory.

I know that, but I had to keep struggling with the concepts of how something could be a reference and pointer (since a pointer is a reference to a variable), yada yada yada, see where I'm going with this?

Technical terms make no sense to those who are learning them and using them to explain something just makes it worse.

Last.fm | Steam

Who's telling you to Google stuff?  If it's the course staff, then there's a big problem with the course (if they take feedback, hammer them hard on that).  After all, if you could find everything easily on the web, there's no point in taking the class.  Only real exception may be to do with material which is outside the scope of the course, in which they may suggest you search up something if you're interested in finding out about it.
If it's just someone who's studying with you, perhaps they don't really know themselves, or cbf helping, which I guess is fair enough.

But in general, I find people don't try searching enough, which may be why people have gotten used to saying it.

I don't think I've never really seen *& used together before.  & = reference, * = de-reference, so putting them together cancel each other out.  Note that * actually has a double-meaning in the domain of pointers as it also is a type.