Slashdot Mirror

Whistler will have the option to only run signed applications. You can turn this off.

The average user does not tweak defaults, especially when the menu options are as hidden as they are in Microsoft products. After all there has been an option to turn of scripting support in Outlook for several years yet Melissa and ILOVEYOU theoretically caused billions of dollars in damage because people do not change the default settings.

Anyway, how many non-computer savvy people are going to run an executable if Windows pops up a suitably scary error message up? After all Microsoft effectively killed Dr DOS with phony error messages. If Microsoft decides to implement this policy it is very conceivable that all the major software houses will get Windows Certified(TM) thus pressurizing smaller shops to do the same. Where does this then leave independent developers?

Second Law of Blissful Ignorance

Dr. Dobbs has as an article about C-Sharp in comparison against C++ and Java. Has some sample code too.

Hey, I've been doing my part all evening to spam investment boards about the upcoming Digital Convergence IPO. The more the merrier, though! Bust in! Here's a sample:

Digital Convergence (DGTL) recently filed plans for an IPO. This company gives out free barcode scanners (called "CutCat") and accompanying software. The idea is that you can scan things and their software will pull up an appropriate web page in your browser. On the side, they can collect demographic data. For example, they could determine which gender and age group most often scans a certain type of product.

I think this is a horrible company, a must avoid stock for the following reasons:

• DGTL gives away CueCat barcode scanners and software, hoping to get money from advertisers and publications. The problem is that their software is inessential: it took folks a matter of hours to write substitute software that reads a barcode without contacting DGTL. So at the key step where they're supposed to cash in, they're completely cut out of the loop! Whoops!
• Apparently realizing the enormity of their error, DC has been sending vague, threatening letters to people already distributing alternate software. Unfortunately, these letters appear to be legal bluffs. Decoding software is available on dozens of sites and appears to have no real legal strings attached.
• A clearly disconcerted president of the technology group at DGTL fired off a letter showing gross misunderstanding of intellectual property law-- upon which the health of the company critically depends. (Or would depend, were the IP law favorable to their cause-- which it isn't.)
• These threatening letters have incensed the open source community-- a group well-qualified to undermine DC's business model by providing alternate software to drive the CueCat, shutting of DC's revenue.
• The product raises privacy concerns. You register with DGTL and then every time you scan something, they know it. Apparently DGTL has given assurances about privacy. Then again, they left their entire customer database unguarded for hackers to take. Read their own toned down account. (DGTL has also touted the scanner's "built in encryption", which turned out to consist of XORing each byte with the letter 'C'. I fear these some of the stupidest people ever put on God's Good Earth.)
• A key asset that DGTL hopes to develop through the barcode scans is a database of demographic data. There's a problem, however: Digital Convergence has a lot of enemies now. It would be a simple matter for ONE PERSON write a little program that sends fake scans with fake user IDs to DGTLs servers. This could permanently corrupt the demographic database, making it worthless, because-- quite possibly-- there could be no way to distinguish real scans from fakes after the fact.
• Just as the company's fundamental business model has fallen under shadow, they file for an IPO. Avoid, avoid, avoid.

These are just my opinions, of course. I did my best to get the facts straight, but I'm not perfect. Additional comments on this corporate disaster slouching toward NASDAQ are available at:

• Salon : ...there are a million problems with this concept.
• Linux World: In the end, the :CueCat is a classic example of a broken business model.
• Dr. Dobbs Journal: What ought to scare Digital Convergence more [...] is a database of all CueCat barcodes/URLs, whereby users could go to a specific web page without being tracked.
• Dallas Observer: ...you can simply drag the scanner 600 or 700 times over bar codes printed next to stories and ads, and presto, you get an error message.
• Internet News Radio:The CueCat is starting to look like a mangy stray.

I am suspcious about .NET, because it looks like another way to make proprietary MS technologies defacto standards

Now here comes the real shine in .NET. When repeatedly asked what prevents C# and CLR being ported to any operating system (say Unix or Linux), often with wry smiles Microsoft officials, often with wry smiles, said "nothing." This means the .NET Framework of C# and CLR makes Microsoft software not only highly interoperable but also portable. So if Linux takes off, Microsoft software will be there. If some .NET appliance software/hardware combination skyrockets -- Microsoft software can quickly move there. And if the DOJ splits up Microsoft, C# and some portions of CLR are already pledged to be standardized through the European organization, ECMA.

This article was written three years ago by the Rijndael authors, describing their algorithm in detail. Back then they were calling it the "block cipher square algorithm," but I guess they found a catchier name! (DDJ is also running a shorter notice about Rinjdael with a few links.)

This article was written three years ago by the Rijndael authors, describing their algorithm in detail. Back then they were calling it the "block cipher square algorithm," but I guess they found a catchier name! (DDJ is also running a shorter notice about Rinjdael with a few links.)

Here is a Java bytecode implementation of the Z3. Dr. Dobbs Journal had an article on it in their Sept. 2000 issue.

... and published on Doctor Dobb's Journal (yes, the source code is available). See http://www.ddj.com/articles/2000/0005/0005i/0005i. htm The guy who wrote it works for Microsoft (so of course his implementation is Windows-dependant) but he makes some pretty good points on using multicast for file distribution, and naturally the idea and/or algorithms could be reimplemented in some D-O-S (Decent Operating System) like Linux...
Best Regards,
--
Durval Menezes.

See this interview in the Sept 2000 issue of Dr. Dobbs journal. Doug Engelbart has an amazing foresight into the future of computing. Even now he is innovating through his Bootstrap Institute and the items at his site is a must read for anyone interested in the field of computing and man-machine interfaces.

While not all people would act in the way I fear, a substantial number, I believe a majority, certainly would.

Would virtual tipping jars==shareware as far as the number of people paying? I myself have been known to hand-edit my Registry so I can reinstall Paint Shop Pro and use it for 60 more days. According to Dr. Dobb's Journal, 90% of shareware used is unregistered or bootlegged (Oct 2000, p. 124). The reason we're seeing ads in software now is because shareware didn't work well enough...
<<< CmdrTHAC0 >>>

Is the title of an op-ed at Dr. Dobb's.

(from the 3D Action Planet story about half-way down)

• Concerning consoles, Carmack said that an Xbox version of the Doom game will be a "no brainer", since it will be so easy to port the code to the PC-like console.
• However, on the topic of the Playstation 2 and the Dreamcast Carmack was much less optimistic, since the technologies those consoles use don't support many of the "cool things" he wants to do with the new game. The consoles also lack the 128 MB or RAM [emphasis mine] that Carmack anticipate will be required to run the game. Porting the game would require a major rewriting and reworking of many of its parts, and if such ports happen at all they will happen several months after the PC/Linux/Mac/Xbox release.

So on the one hand we have the great Carmack, seemingly confirming the 128MB rumours (by implying that the X-Box is somehow immune from the 128MB problem - either by actually having 128MB, or some other method), and on the other hand we have Mike Abrash's DDJ article, seemingly confirming the 64MB configuration.

Hmmm, that's actually quite amusing: Carmack & Abrash together again (albeit pointing in opposite directions).

Of course, the DDJ article could be MS misdirection. Of course, the rumours could be MS misdirection. :)

Al

Simply because Open Source projects do not use it does not make CORBA a failure. This is the same as saying Java/COM/iMacs/Oracle databases etc. are failures because you haven't seen an Open Source project that uses them.

There are a large number of closed source, large scale (millions of lines of code) products that use CORBA that the average sysadmin/linux hacker/whatever will never see or get to use. As an example, the company I worked at this summer (i2 technologies ITWO) has a been generating millions of dollars in revenue with a CORBA based Supply Chain Management application for the past couple of years.

You see Corba is broken. but only a little. In order to use it you must build something else on top that actually talks to your apps.

Isn't that what the CORBA Component Model was designed to fix?

PS: I am a distributed computing junkie and am currently doing research into RMI/CORBA/DCOM and have found a bunch of interesting articles that break down these technologies for people who are wondering what exactly they are...here's an article that compares all three.


(-1 Troll)

Inserting a disclaimer here: I currently work for KL Group, the makers of JProbe.

Anyway, KL has published some articles and delivered some lecture's about performance-tuning Java, particularly in the area of memory use.

They are fairly helpful. Some of the points made in these articles are the same as what woggo made above, others are also useful information. These can be found off the JProbe page, but I've included two of them below.

How do you plug Java Memory Leaks? This was published in Dr. Dobbs Journal.

Our CTO, Ed Lycklama, gave a talk entitled "Designing for Performance on the Java Platform" at JavaOne this year. There's a graphical and a text on the KL site.

This past weekend I picked up The C++ Standard Library by Josuttis. I've found this to be a wonderful reference, with sections not only covering the STL, but also strings, numerics, iostreams, i18n and allocators. It has a good TOC and index. I've not read it straight through (or even made an attempt), but it is very easy to find what I need. Explanations are clear and concise. Reading one page of the iostreams chapter halped me successfully derive a new stream buffer and class in five minutes. All previous documents were either too esoteric or verbose -- I couldn't get my head around the problem.

Sounds like the C++ version of Plauger's like book for C. Something very useful.

Perhaps you'd be interested in the following books:

• Large-Scale C++ Software Design
• Inside the C++ Object Model
• The Design and Evolution of C++

I've only read D&E. This is probably where you should start. It is very small. It's whole purpose is to explain why things are they way they are (i.e. you don't pay for what you don't use).

I have D&E and read some of it. It didn't seem to be useful for learning C++ at all. I saw LSC++SD in a "brick and mortor" bookstore, but wasn't impressed enough to hold on to it for more than about 20 seconds. However, Inside the C++ Object Model sounds from the title like it might be worth looking into.

In addition, journals like DDJ and the (now-defunct) C++ Report have good articles about practical software development. I hear many of the C++ Report folk are heading over to the C++ User's Journal.

I've rarely ever found magazine articles to be much helpful in things.

The most important thing to remember about C++ is that it is complicated. But only as complicated as you make it. For all intents and purposes, you can write C in C++. A good place to start is using it as "C with classes" to get encapsulation, then move on to polymorphism. It's also important to understand when to use language features (i.e. templates and specialization vs. inheritance) and books like Effective C++ help in that regard.

That I can write C in C++ is probably one of the big negatives for C++ for me. I would be so tempted to just do what I know. Why do I need to "get" encapsulation when I already have it in the abstract sense of the design? C is just the vehicle I use to bridge the abstraction-to-reality gap. Don't assume that because I code in C, that I didn't do anything object oriented in the design (I do to varying degrees in many projects).

Most of the documentation out there for so much stuff is written with the idea of sequential reading in mind. I don't have the time to do that in most cases, so documentation that gives an introductory concept explanation (without the usual sales talk that most use as introductions), and has all the rest as a well indexed reference, would do better for me (and a lot of people I know).

This past weekend I picked up The C++ Standard Library by Josuttis. I've found this to be a wonderful reference, with sections not only covering the STL, but also strings, numerics, iostreams, i18n and allocators. It has a good TOC and index. I've not read it straight through (or even made an attempt), but it is very easy to find what I need. Explanations are clear and concise. Reading one page of the iostreams chapter halped me successfully derive a new stream buffer and class in five minutes. All previous documents were either too esoteric or verbose -- I couldn't get my head around the problem.

In a previous post, you suggested:

If you still want to convert C programmers to use C++ then I suggest writing a book ... a short one, that explains every concept in C++ ... not just language syntax, but practical concepts ... clearly and concisely. Don't drag it out for newbies; focus on experienced C programmers. Explain how it is that C++ takes basic OO design concepts and puts them into a programming language. Explain how C++ behaves with each concept at higher abstract as well as lower real levels. Include a full reference section. And make sure there are examples of whole programs, not just snippets everywhere. Maybe then you might see more converts. But until someone does this, I doubt you will see very many.

Perhaps you'd be interested in the following books:

• Large-Scale C++ Software Design
• Inside the C++ Object Model
• The Design and Evolution of C++

I've only read D&E. This is probably where you should start. It is very small. It's whole purpose is to explain why things are they way they are (i.e. you don't pay for what you don't use).

In addition, journals like DDJ and the (now-defunct) C++ Report have good articles about practical software development. I hear many of the C++ Report folk are heading over to the C++ User's Journal .

The most important thing to remember about C++ is that it is complicated. But only as complicated as you make it. For all intents and purposes, you can write C in C++. A good place to start is using it as "C with classes" to get encapsulation, then move on to polymorphism. It's also important to understand when to use language features (i.e. templates and specialization vs. inheritance) and books like Effective C++ help in that regard.

Hope this helps!

--

The designers of C# have admitted the usefulness of genericity, but also confessed that C# is not going to support genericity on first release. More interestingly, they are unhappy with C++'s approach to genericity, which is based entirely on templates. It would be interesting to see what approach C# would take towards the concept, seeing as templates are pretty much synonymous with genericity at the moment.

I've used GJ quite a bit, and I'm quite happy with it. Furthermore, there's reason to hope that code written in GJ (the syntax of which is similar to C++ templates) will be compatable with future versions of Java, since Sun is looking into adding genericity to Java, and looking at GJ in particular.

SETI@Home uses Fast Fourier Transforms.

Fast Fourier Transforms on digitised samples can be done using large-integer or arbitrary-precision-number algorithms.

Therefore even Pentiums can do SETI@Home without generating errors.

Former id guy, now at MS, working on Xbox. Scroll down to about the middle, where he says:

For those who prefer OpenGL, NVIDIA will provide a fully Xbox-enhanced version.

Your dream will come true.

Textures will need to be mip-mapped so as not to stall the cache.

Why don't you have a go at saying that again? It just makes no sense the way you wrote it.

Abrash explains the issues (concisely, clearly) in this link at the top of the original article referenced by Slashdot - it's easy to miss the link if you're skimming the article.

In a recent column, he mentioned in passing how he intentionally did not name the language c-sharp because he thought the play on words was so obvious that surely someone had trademarked the phrase. I hope so. I'd like to see Microsoft have to change the name or settle out of court for some undisclosed sum.

D Flat is a text mode UI framework by Al Stevens and described over a series of columns he wrote for Dr. Dobb's Journal.

I was surprised by the Tim O'Reilly / Patent Office interview posted yesterday. Dickinson's attitude was outrageous in that he felt the current system is adaquate.

I remember reading editorials 10 years ago, month after month in DDJ declairing software patent office to be totally inept regarding technology patents.

A few years later, I ran into a problem implementing a self-service banking application due to a DC-based company's patent on finacial transactions originated from a consumer's home and secured with a password! "PIN-based transactions" originating from a home as opposed to a bank-run system like an ATM.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Dr. Dobbs Jornal had one called idtAudio, and did an audio stream. The decoder was in Java, and the encoder in C. It streamed over HTTP. You can get the source there.

DDJ has covered alot of the compression field, and has many articles on the topic.

---
Another non-functioning site was "uncertainty.microsoft.com." The purpose of that site was not known. -- MSNBC 10-26-1999 on MS crack

Dr. Dobbs Jornal had one called idtAudio, and did an audio stream. The decoder was in Java, and the encoder in C. It streamed over HTTP. You can get the source there.

DDJ has covered alot of the compression field, and has many articles on the topic.

---
Another non-functioning site was "uncertainty.microsoft.com." The purpose of that site was not known. -- MSNBC 10-26-1999 on MS crack

Dr. Dobbs Jornal had one called idtAudio, and did an audio stream. The decoder was in Java, and the encoder in C. It streamed over HTTP. You can get the source there.

DDJ has covered alot of the compression field, and has many articles on the topic.

---
Another non-functioning site was "uncertainty.microsoft.com." The purpose of that site was not known. -- MSNBC 10-26-1999 on MS crack

There's a quick mention on the Dr. Dobb's Journal webpage here.
That's where I first heard about it.

I remember well the first time I encountered pkzip.
I was so amazed at how much smaller it could make things than arc.
I remember feeling vaguly disappointed when, being over optimistic in the power of that mighty software I tried re-zipping a file over and over trying to get it down to fit on a 360 k disk :-)
I was still impressed even after I failed.

It was rather shocking to hear of his death.

Here is an implementation I found of Enigma in Java, FYI.

Actually you can create a foo.h file that includes everything you need, and parse it with gcc -E -dD foo.h > foo.ph. This outputs the preprocessed code with all the definitions, so when you include it in every file you need, the preprocessor has to do a lot less work.

Many of the incremental linking benefits may be obtained with shared libraries, as described in this article from Dr. Dobbs Journal.

Of course, I don't know how this would require changes in the Corel's codebase, and probably Wine had to be used anyway, so... but, as you see, these are not real issues with new projects.

Just my 0.03 Euro (damned inflation :-)

The article can be found here:

Pseudo-Incremental Linking for C/C++

Cheers

That was the title of an op-ed posted at DDJ a couple years ago.

CPAN is a collection of free, downloadable modules that can be use'd in your Perl programs. It's a wonderful resource and the true strength of Perl. Code gets written once and used and tested by many. Over time the modules just get better tested and more robust. Everybody wins.

Why doesn't an equivalent CCAN (Comprehensive C++ Archive Network) exist if C++ truly is reusable?

You're right. It's there at:
http://www.ddj.com/articles/2000/0003/0003toc.htm

The link is broken to get to the March 2000 index page, so I had to fake it.
The full article isn't up yet (if it's going to be), but there's a brief description.
Part II next month.

INSIDE BLUETOOTH: PART I

by James Y. Wilson and Jason A. Krontz

Bluetooth technology is an open specification for wireless communication and networking. In the first of a two-part series, Jim and Jason lay out the basics.

I can't find any reference to bluetooth in the latest Dr Dobb's Journal. Care to provide a citation.

I also searched http://www.ddj.com/

In short, Jonathan Erickson disagrees with you and points to some fairly compelling evidence that the labor shortage is a hoax concocted by the industry so that it can favor cheaper college grads and foreign workers over retraining expensive midcareer professionals. The editorial also has some interesting insights into the probable long-term effects.

[From the Software Carpentry project coordinator]

Thank you all for your postings regarding the Software Carpentry project. To answer some of the points that have come up several times:

This is a design competition, rather than a programming competition. Good entries should be relatively language-neutral --- we believe that at the 5000-word level, the similarities between modern object-oriented languages (C++, Java, Python, etc.) are more important than their differences.

Designs based on existing tools are very welcome. If, for example, you think the only way to meet the criteria for the "build" category is to extend the syntax of standard Makefiles, then please submit that as a design. (However, for the reasons discussed in the FAQ, if your plan for an implementation is simply to provide a Python scripting interface to GNU Make, you'll have to convince the judges that there's no "pure Python" way to achieve the same ends.)

No, Software Carpentry is not a company looking for some publicity. The project is being funded by Los Alamos National Laboratory, who believ that computational scientists and engineers need easier-to-use software engineering tools, and administered by CodeSourcery, LLC, who believe that those tools would be of use to the whole Open Source community. The FAQ talks about LANL's reasons for funding the project, as does this article from Doctor Dobb's Journal.

Yes, one of the project's goals is to give up-and-coming software designers a chance to get some attention, just as architects and classical musicians do.

Yes, the competition is open to submissions from any country.

No, this is not part of some perfidious Pythonesque plot for world domination :-). We thought very seriously about using Perl for the implementations, but after teaching classes in both Perl and Python at Los Alamos National Laboratory, came to the conclusion that the latter had a gentler learning curve. (This is not meant as disparagement of Perl as a tool for full-time professional programmers, it is simply an empirical observation of computational scientists and engineers.) Neither Guido nor any other member of the Python development team had any part in setting up the project, choosing Python, or choosing the competition categories.

[From the Software Carpentry project coordinator]

Thank you all for your postings regarding the Software Carpentry project. To answer some of the points that have come up several times:

This is a design competition, rather than a programming competition. Good entries should be relatively language-neutral --- we believe that at the 5000-word level, the similarities between modern object-oriented languages (C++, Java, Python, etc.) are more important than their differences.

Designs based on existing tools are very welcome. If, for example, you think the only way to meet the criteria for the "build" category is to extend the syntax of standard Makefiles, then please submit that as a design. (However, for the reasons discussed in the FAQ, if your plan for an implementation is simply to provide a Python scripting interface to GNU Make, you'll have to convince the judges that there's no "pure Python" way to achieve the same ends.)

No, Software Carpentry is not a company looking for some publicity. The project is being funded by Los Alamos National Laboratory, who believ that computational scientists and engineers need easier-to-use software engineering tools, and administered by CodeSourcery, LLC, who believe that those tools would be of use to the whole Open Source community. The FAQ talks about LANL's reasons for funding the project, as does this article from Doctor Dobb's Journal.

Yes, one of the project's goals is to give up-and-coming software designers a chance to get some attention, just as architects and classical musicians do.

Yes, the competition is open to submissions from any country.

No, this is not part of some perfidious Pythonesque plot for world domination :-). We thought very seriously about using Perl for the implementations, but after teaching classes in both Perl and Python at Los Alamos National Laboratory, came to the conclusion that the latter had a gentler learning curve. (This is not meant as disparagement of Perl as a tool for full-time professional programmers, it is simply an empirical observation of computational scientists and engineers.) Neither Guido nor any other member of the Python development team had any part in setting up the project, choosing Python, or choosing the competition categories.

• It was XOR encrypted, obfuscated, and self-modifying
• It fiddled with the "single step" interrupt to defeat debuggers
• It used an artificial and irrelevant test for DOS compatibility

I can't sit here and read this crap without feeling pissed as hell. Who the fsck moderated this up?
I don't blame the poster for his words because he admits to being young and not being at MSFT when this story broke...but to moderate it up is just obscene.

Moderators and all interested parties please read this article from a September 1993 issue of Doctor Dobb's Journal and decide for yourself if Caldera had a reason to sue for billion$ and if this was a frivolous lawsuit. Also remember that even though the offending code never shipped to consumers it was shipped to the trade press, who then would review Dr-DOS and in their reviews state that certain error messages popped up...(effectively killing Dr-DOS as a viable option for anyone who planned to buy it based on favorable reviews). Secondly, MSFT would not risk shipping the offending code to consumers less some enterprising hacker discover the truth about the error message, but they failed to account for enterprising hackers in the trade press .
PS: DDJ is a first-class magazine. A bit over my head sometimes but first class nonetheless.

As a consumer, I just can't WAIT to get my hands on one, Intel. I'm just seething with anxiety over new features. Heaven forbid that they should f00f this one up.

Of course it's all simple mathematics, really. The more Intel rushes things, the more likely AMD will come out ahead.

:-)

Best regards,

SEAL

As a consumer, I just can't WAIT to get my hands on one, Intel. I'm just seething with anxiety over new features. Heaven forbid that they should f00f this one up.

Of course it's all simple mathematics, really. The more Intel rushes things, the more likely AMD will come out ahead.

:-)

Best regards,

SEAL

As a consumer, I just can't WAIT to get my hands on one, Intel. I'm just seething with anxiety over new features. Heaven forbid that they should f00f this one up.

Of course it's all simple mathematics, really. The more Intel rushes things, the more likely AMD will come out ahead.

:-)

Best regards,

SEAL

While you're at it, don't forget a subscription to Dr. Dobbs Jounal

Next?


...phil

To all those chalking this fiasco up to a "mistake" on MS' part, check out this article. I believe some of you may be familiar with the "AARD" incident.

http://www.ddj.com/articles/1993/9309/9309d/9309d. htm or just click here.

Chuck

>I love Java, but I'm not a completly fanatical idiot about it. Right now, you simply couldn't implement the low-level parts of a decent OS in Java.

Does this mean that you do not feel that JBED can work well? (See link for details)

JBED info here

Later, Ray Noorda's Caldera Systems bought the skeleton of Digital Research and sued Microsoft. See Caldera's Web page on the resulting anti-trust lawsuit.

• It tested an undocumented (and as far as I can tell irrelevant) DOS function that would only work properly in MS-DOS.
• It was XOR Encrypted, to trip up any attempts to use a disassembler
• Once decrypted, the code was self-modifying and obfuscated to make reverse-engineering difficult
• It was written to disable a conventional single-step debugger, making it that much harder to trace through the code

Has anyone tried emacspeak? I've read a bit about it and it seems pretty cool (esp. since it was developed by a blind Unix programmer).

Here's a scientific american story which I felt was neat. And a linux HOWTO. And a DDJ article on the design

I always felt this was a very underrated tool.

w/m

I like these concepts, but I would love to write a broader replacement for these that uses generic video capture boards, for example.
I'd love to elaborate more, but I have to go back to work now. I might write more when I get home.