Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Domains

Domain: jussieu.fr

Stories and comments across the archive that link to jussieu.fr.

Comments · 54

  1. Re:How? by Alsee · · Score: 2 · on A Much Bigger Piece Of Pi

    Considering this is the beginning of the file it seems pretty obvious unless you're blind.

    Some of us DO read the web in braille you know.

    -

  2. Re:Mandating compatibility is a good idea, but... by aebrain · · Score: 1 · on U.S. Asked to Put Purchasing Power to Good Use
    ...in the past thinking like this has resulted in things like Ada.

    Yes, this is true. Ada was devised as the result of 4 groups competing against each other, and the best of em (though opinions vary) selected as the Mandated Language for the DOD.

    The whole process is described thusly:

    The driving concern of the HOLWG was to assure that the design was guided by a responsible principle investigator, and to preclude "design by committee". On the other hand, picking a single contractor to do the job and trusting to luck would have been imprudent. The procurement was through multiple competitive contracts, with the best products to be selected for continuation to full rigorous definition and developmental implementation.

    And it was a disaster from the Defence Contractor's viewpoint. Firms fell over themselves trying to get exemptions from using it, ANYTHING was better. Because Ada had

    • Objects
    • Exceptions
    • Generics (templates)
    • Multiple-threading/Tasking
    • Strong Typing
    and a whole host of other advanced software technologies that were risky or unimplementable. This of course was in 1983. Now the fact that Ada had a standard definition, and that there was a standard test-suite for it, proved that the technologies were perfectly implementable. But Ada was mandated by the DoD, so had to be a boondoggle. After much to-ing and fro-ing, the Ada Mandate was removed, in 1997. And there was much joy, as major defence firms got billions more in maintenance work, and ships broke down requiring costly repairs. Some suggested that it was a Cosy Relationship between Deefence Contractors and the DOD that had been the reason for not using Microsoft before. Which rather ignores the fact that when it comes to safety-critical applications, Boeing switched from C to Ada rather than the other way round, and the military has had to pay bundles in .

    So yes, had compatibility been mandated in the past, we might all have systems far more reliable and robust. But Microsoft wouldn't have $40 Billion and a number of tame Congresscritters.

  3. Re:Advice by clasher · · Score: 2, Informative · on Requirements for Embedded Linux
    I would take a look at using uClibc a C library for embedded Linux systems. (they are currently working on pthread support in the cvs which is supposedly what is keeping it from being used to compile mozilla/galeon)
    BusyBox for basic embedded versions of common linux apps (e.g. init, cp, sed, etc.)
    KDrive a tiny X server from XFree86
    Galeon for a fairly small browser (there are some other smaller ones in development (for example Skipstone and Dillo)

    What I would do is compile a stripped down kernel, use busybox for most system apps, and have your init scripts call the tinyX server and then instead of using a window manager have the startx script start galeon in full screen mode using tabs instead of separate windows for popups. The only difficult part may be getting mozilla or galeon compiled because of the gtk requirements) You could try the Xlib mozilla port perhaps.

    For a little bit of info on how I have done a similar project take a look at my linux on a floppy page.

  4. Re:Is inference an art? by IngramJames · · Score: 3, Insightful · on Black Hole Sans Donut Puzzles Astronomers

    Oh, boy, will you get flamed!

    But not by me. I'm nowhere near a pro, but even I recognise the huge faws in your arguments.

    Wobbly suns mean planets are orbiting around them, even though they cant be seen. Maybe they just wobble once in awhile. I know I do. ;)


    Nothing moves without a force being applied to it. If there is no force, there is no motion. In your case, the force is alchol and gravity. In the case of a star it must be gravity, unless there's some really bizarre other force as yet undiscovered. However, since our own sun wobbles in accordance with the laws of gravity, as do the planets with moons, it's pretty safe to assume other stars are acting under the same forces.
    There are also other methods of detecting extra-solar planets.

    The universe keeps getting older, because we know exactly how light behaves over time and space. What happens when we invent yet larger and/or more powerful telescopes? Will galaxies continue to be found which are further and further away?

    Up to a point. You never read "A Brief History of Time", did you? :) Better telescopes will only reveal older galaxies, further away up to the point where galaxies were first created. Once you get to that point, you can't see new galaxies, onlythe material from which they were formed.. which probably will be undetectable. And this assumes, of course, that the earliest galaxies gave off light and radiation which has not been blocked by an object between them and the Earth (say a younger galaxy in our own cluster). It also assumes that the radiation is strong enough to be picked up.. it's travelled an awful long way and it may be impossible to detect no matter how sensitive the device.

    The moon must only be about 5-10 thousand years old, since it only had a half-inch or so of dust on it, uniformly and consistently.

    This article should cover pretty much everything there. Here's a brief quote:

    Even though the creationists themselves have refuted this argument, (and refutations from the mainstream community have been around for at least a decade longer than that), the "moon dust" argument continues to be propagated in their "popular" literature, and continues to appear in talk.origins on a regular basis

    So you've fallen foul of a popular myth propogated by some Creationists. Took me 2 minutes to find that article using Google and a search for "age of the moon".. please do some basic checking of this kind of thing.. propogation of ignorance is not a good thing.