Jay Levitt wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 06:24:46 -0800 (PST), tho_mica_l wrote:
> 
>> Many of these tools are made so that you don't have to care about the
>> underlying concepts but so that the whole problem can be moved to
>> different level where it's easier to handle.
> 
> Sure, and when they succeed, it's beautiful.  I haven't had to think about
> the number of cycles a CPU instruction will take in two decades.

I haven't had to think about that since 1990, but I still *enjoy* it. :)