f truth is the recognition of the systematic character of a certain kind of error, then it would be fully dependent on the prior existence of this error.
如果真理是,对一种错误的系统化字符的认可,那么它会完全依赖于这个错误的先前存在。
You want to talk about it systematically, but how can you talk about anything systematically if you don't know what it is?
人们总希望系统化地谈一件事,但是你一点都不了解它,怎么能系统化地谈它呢?
But part of the process of being systematic is not assuming that I'm going to get a lucky guess. But not even thinking really hard at this point. But just pruning the search space.
但是系统化的过程是不允许,假设我做出了,一个幸运的猜测的,而是逐步缩小搜索空间。
That means it was something I didn't understand. So I'm going to be cautious and systematic.
这就意味着代码中有一些,我没有理解的东西,因此我需要谨慎,并且系统化的去寻找这个错误。
But it doesn't exist in a systemic space; it exists in an unfolding time, right?
但这并不存在于一个系统化的空间里;,而是打开的时间里,是吗?
You find some way of systematically going through the list. Yet, I often see people, when they're debugging, proceeding at what, to me, looks almost like a random fashion of looking for the bug.
是不是目标元素,我们有一种系统化的,遍历数组的方法,然后我经常看到,有些人调试的时候。
This gets back to my main theme of Tuesday, which is be systematic.
我周二会把这个问题作为主题,也就是系统化编程。
Good debuggers have evolved a way of systematically hunting for the bugs.
优秀的调试员逐步,形成系统化的。
hey'd rather single step it through using Idol or something, than just read it and try and figure things out. The most important thing to remember when you're doing all of this is to be systematic.
比起阅读代码发现错误来他们,宁愿用内置的操作层,或者其他工具一步完成,你要记住的最重要的事情,就是要系统化的去做调试。
And therefore, they are not systematic about interpreting the results.
预期的正确实验结果,因此,他们就没法做到系统化的去分析结果了。
It's systematic.
这就是系统化。
应用推荐