I concur. I've been waiting for such a smart phone to come out. The iPhone and the Android phone does not repair its file system automatically and it takes a series of somewhat complicated steps to install fsck on the Android.

I have nothing to say against use of comments. They may not be necessary for some, but usually do no harm to anyone. I believe programmers are free to choose any name for a variable so long as they communicate well to people you work with. Using "o" is fine. If it's a problem, change your font. Bad formatting used to a bad practice, but nowadays, we have apps and services to make them neat.

I was 12 when I wrote a BASIC program for friends that wanted a program to show people's biorhythms at a school festival. Alas, I haven't made much progress since then.

Surface is too expensive for school use, I guess, though I would certainly prefer that over the other two for my personal use, because of the robust self-healing NTFS. My friends and relatives are throwing their Android devices away, because, as they say, they don't know how to handle errors that started to be rather frequent after a year of use. So, what's left here as an acceptable choice is iPad.

Don't use the system Hungarian. IDEs and compilers see types. If you declare variable like "int X;" in a statically typed language, X is an int. You won't make it float or double by mistake. On the other hand, the application Hungarian notation is still a good practice. In neural network programming, an input-to-hidden weight is double, and so is a hidden-to-output weight. Compilers cannot detect an input-to-hidden variable holding a hidden-to-output weight by mistake. Therefore, anything that has to do with an input-to-hidden weight should be marked with "ih", and anything, with an output-to-hidden, should be marked with "ho". A mistake like "ihWeights[i][j] += alpha * hoPrevWeights[i][j];" cannot be detected by your compiler, but reading just that line, you see your mistake. You should not be adding hoSomething to ihSomething.

They could improve C# in threading. C# is still a bit clumsy around threading. A thread is provided as a class in the system.threading namespace. And yet a lock is part of the C# language itself. I would like a syntax like:

Future f = async double square(double x){return x * x;}

A variable should be synchronizable with the "synchronized" keyword so that only one thread can access it at a time, like:

synchronized double Balance;

How would you use rundll32.exe to run that function then?

Changing the IDE's text editor background color alone without also changing things like IDE's menu and toolboxes? That would probably make one's eyeballs a bit busy, having to adjust to different level of brightness. If I can not change things around it, I won't change it.

On Windows, there are cases where you can run a function in a dll with rundll32.exe if the function's takes no args and its return type is void. In other words, the function needs to be as much of a standalone as an exe file. For example, in Powersell, PS> rundll32.exe advapi32.dll,ProcessIdleTasks PS> rundll32.exe user32.dll,LockWorkStation