kludgeynessとは 意味・読み方・使い方

名詞

kludgeyness (uncountable)

1. Alternative form of kludginess.
   • 1988 June 10, Mat Waites, “Loading machine language files.”, in comp.sys.cbm‎ (Usenet), archived from the original on 2025-06-05:

     The problem is that commodore basic is strange. Every LOAD is treated as if you are loading another basic program. The interpreter runs the basic program in memory from the beginning after the load is finished. Of course, in your case, it is the same basic program as you started with. You need a little kludgeyness to pull it off: 05 IF A = 1 THEN 20 / 07 A = 1 / 10 LOAD "ML PROG AT $C000",8,1 / 20 POKE THE CIA REGS / 30 OTHER BASIC STUFF / 40 END / This way, A is 0 the first time through and the ML is loaded. When your program runs the second time, it skips the load.

   • 1991 September 30, David Coursey, Ron Copeland, “Hardware upgrades: getting into first class”, in Stewart Alsop, editor, InfoWorld, volume 13, number 39, San Mateo, Calif.: InfoWorld Publishing, →ISSN, →OCLC, page S53, column 3:

     On the hardware side, [Sheldon] Laube says, because of the inherent “kludgeyness” of the upgrade, it is not just the microprocessor that needs replacing. “In machines like these, everything else is crummy,” Laube complains. [“]The reliability goes down if you start replacing those parts.”

   • 1994 January 10, William, “HP motor question...”, in rec.models.rockets‎ (Usenet), archived from the original on 2025-06-05:

     The most common seems to be an engine block at the rear of the motor, frequently consisting of a tape wrapping. I don't know whether I should be disappointed by the kludgeyness of this, or impressed by the strength of tape...

   • 1994 May 7, Brian Beakley, “AI, Ethics, and Noam Chomsky”, in comp.ai‎ (Usenet), archived from the original on 2025-06-05:

     While there are generative linguists who accept an evolutionary story about the origins of language -- syntax specifically (e.g., Pinker and Bloom, in their 1990 *Behavioral and Brain Sciences* article), a (perhaps surprisingly) large number of generative linguists accept something like Chomsky's view (e.g., Massimo Piatelli-Palmerini, "Evolution, Selection, and Cognition" in *Cognition,* 27 (1989). pp. 1-52; and Frederick Newmeyer, *Grammatical Theory,* (1983), pp. 100ff.). So Chomsky could very well claim that it's irrelevant how selected mechanisms look (in terms of "hairy kludgeyness"), since there's no assumption on his part that language *is* such a selected capacity.

   • 2018 July 27, Brian Feldman, “It’s Not a Bug”, in Intelligencer‎, New York, N.Y.: New York Media, →ISSN, →OCLC, archived from the original on 2018-11-06:

     We are used to technology meant to accomplish very specific tasks, which either accomplishes those tasks completely or fails entirely. Sorting algorithms do not exist on this binary. They are intended to show you (or not show you) what they perceive to be the most relevant results, using factors that change on the fly dozens of times every second. They process hundreds of variables and when the people tasked with overseeing them change one variable, it’s almost impossible to predict how it will behave across millions of users each receiving a personalized result. Their kludgeyness and imperfection are accepted by-products of this work.