It's easily possible to write a program that plays a game better than the programmer; in fact, this very thing happened early on in the history of computers that play games (in this case, checkers).
I guarantee you that Deep Blue and Deep Junior play chess better than their programmers, and for that matter, almost everyone on earth. That's why they get to play Kasparov.
JWZ is perfectly capable of installing Gentoo, Debian, etc., etc., although he probably likes RedHat's ease of installation better. And he is by no means a newbie. Also, remember that "the newbie" in general never has to install an OS; newbies buy computers with pre-installed Operating Systems.
Now, I don't really count, since I've been installing the OS myself, starting with DOS. And I have to say that Gentoo was less painful than some other installations, just because it has excellent documentation.
Obviously Gentoo can be more work for the user initially, but in the end it's far less work. And if something breaks, you might have a chance in hell of fixing it yourself! Also, although Gentoo tends to compile stuff from source, I never have to do it by hand--the system does all the work!
I agree with you, though, in that a Gentoo-based distribution geared to newbies that has a friendly installer, does hardware autoconfiguration, helps with package selection, and perhaps has a nice selection of binary packages as well, would be a very nice thing for some people.
Or there's Debian, which I hear also has very sane package management. Or RedHat could get their act together and make their package management system handle dependencies properly -- because that's why RedHat is not for me.
Yeah, I'd be similarly distraught if I were installing RPM's on RedHat 7.2; therefore, I'm pretty happy that I made the switch to Gentoo.
mplayer is all I use for video playback, and this is all almost anyone needs to know... type mplayer followed by a space and the filename, and hit Enter.
What happens on my system? Glorious full-screen video with sound. Sure, there are other keys and options and GUIs and crap, but I don't want or need 99% of it... mostly I just want something that'll play video, and mplayer does a great job of that. (And mencoder looks pretty sweet too...)
As for video editing, I haven't done it, but if I wanted to, I'd probably start here -- ignore the gimpy-looking page, I've used some of this software in the past, and it struck me as being very usable and well-written; maybe not enough to please jwz, but what is? He bitches about Unix too. In fact, I propose that jwz bitching is just a fact of life. If he ever stops bitching, worry.
If you do it in SoftWindows, a window will pop up that says "SoftWindows does not support ROM BASIC".:)
Re:question for all you Java experts
on
Effective Java
·
· Score: 1
The BYTEmarks are CPU performance tests, designed to measure the performance of a new CPU or platform. Both the C and the Java tests were run on the same P90 (an INT and FP score of 1.00 = P90 performance) and can therefore be compared to that.
You're right about the JVM performance issue--I think it was originally normalized with Symantec's Visual Cafe? I can only assume they tried to use the best Java implementation they could at the time, but judging from straight CPU performance, I can only infer that JVMs have gotten worse, or that there are other factors at work. Maybe I should try those JVMs under Windows to see how drastic the performance difference is.
Re:question for all you Java experts
on
Effective Java
·
· Score: 1
I happen to enjoy benchmarking; it's a good way to compare different languages and language implementations, and also a good way of testing how much a particular language implementation (or set of them) has matured over time.
Obviously the times to care about benchmarking are 1) before you start coding -- if performance is important, find a good set of tools for your project and 2) when you're done with a cycle of development, to test the performance of your application, and see how it can be improved.
So far, I've found that C implementations haven't (or can't?) improve too much more (i.e., an order of magnitude) while Java implementations easily can (and, in fact, can easily show orders of magnitude performance differences).
But most of the time, your tips are applicable, much like the first rule of optimization.
Alas, all of that pertinent voucher information is hidden in a "link", in the "article", where you might never think to look....and unless Microsoft is actually a bad spelling of "Mandrakesoft", no, I don't think you'll be able to use those vouchers for that purpose.
So continue with your regularly scheduled MS bashing, but do think about reading the article now, ok?
Re:question for all you Java experts
on
Effective Java
·
· Score: 1
I'll think about doing so when next I reboot; I already tried IBM's JRE, and it is most definitely faster than Sun's.:)
After doing a bit more research about JVMs, I installed IBM's JVM, which outperforms both GCJ and Sun here:
IBM INT: 5.8 FP: 6.4
These results still aren't as good as I'd hoped, but it does show that all of the JVMs aren't up to par yet, and therefore should be careful in choosing one!
question for all you Java experts
on
Effective Java
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I'm not a big fan of Java, but I was impressed by everything that has been said here about how much Java has matured, so I figured I'd put it to the test.
I dug up some old benchmarks (the BYTEmarks, which includes a jBYTEmark, normalized to that same P90) that I can use to fairly compare Java and C performance.
I've got a 1.2Ghz Duron, and the C version of the BYTEmarks seems to reflect this accurately--with scores of 26.6 Integer and 21.4 FP, with a P90 being 1.00.
I'm comparing this against two separate Java implementations--Sun's JVM for Linux, and gcj (I also tried out a program that translates Java bytecodes to C, but the resultant executable didn't perform correctly). Here's a table of results:
C Bytemark: INT: 26.6 FP: 21.4 SUN (--server) INT: 4.21 FP: 1.80 GCJ INT: 3.63 FP: 1.71 SUN (Default) INT: 2.18 FP: 2.14
Now, I'm not surprised that the C version ran so fast, but I am surprised the the Java benchmarks did so badly, considering that both benchmarks were normalized to an index of 1.0 for the same Pentium 90! Maybe I got a bad copy of the jBytemarks--it was hard to find a copy at all--but it looks pretty legit.
Do any of you Java people have some amazing tips for me? I did use all the optimization flags I could find. Or is this typical performance for Java, making a 1.2Ghz Duron run as slow as a P200 or a K6/300?
I Stand Corrected!
on
Effective Java
·
· Score: 1, Offtopic
Intelligent Slashdot Moderations!
Or my personal favorite,
on
Effective Java
·
· Score: -1, Offtopic
But maybe if I found out that Einstein's brain weighed as much as mine, I'd be able to do anything I wanted to, like write a new hit single and top the charts!
Yes, a ringtone is *way* too short to be anything but fair use. If a one minute, low-quality clip on Amazon.com (or anywhere!) is fair use, then a TEN SECOND SEQUENCE OF CRAPPY BEEPS is DEFINITELY fair use.
So tell those stupid greedy bastards to read their copyright law again before they start reaching for our wallets on this one...
I guess my point is, I would like to have a web browser on my system, and let's say that I use Internet Explorer on Windows for that (I don't, but that's beside the point...). Now let's also say that I would like to have an e-mail client on my system, but I specifically don't want Outlook Express (or anything with the word "Outlook" in it) on my system. Now the problem presents itself...
And actually, I wish that all of the 'functionality' that (only) Outlook Express exploits could be removed as well, to enhance system security. I agree with you that it's nice to have handy libraries to automate common tasks. But I don't want to have these ones, because one common task I don't want to automate is the macro virus.
So as long as glibc doesn't add that added, handy macro virus functionality, I should be fine. Windows users should still be careful, however.
required as in: try to install Internet Explorer without installing Outlook Express. If you do it, show me how. Microsoft's installer seems convinced that they're the same thing, or at least essential for IE to function...
I was just looking into this the other day--since Intel just supplies their own binaries, it wasn't thrilled about my Gentoo install. Sure, I had rpm, and I could use --nodeps to make it shut up during the install, but even then it didn't like my binaries. Maybe they're too new to be RedHat compatible?...not to mention the silly license file I had to copy to get the thing to even attempt to install. Thanks, Intel, but no thanks. Until you open the source on this one, I see no need to test it out on my ATHLON.;)
It might also be a matter of interpretation -- in a document like "Release Highlights", there is an implicit context involved. So this might be the first publicly available graphics driver for that card on the Hammer.
So, no, the vga16 drivers wouldn't count in that case.:)
Besides, who needs X for graphics drivers? I'm sure NVIDIA could write drivers for the framebuffer...
But my main point is that your post wasn't phrased in the form of a query, but rather an accusation--be careful before you start tossing those around too freely (unless you're posting on/. of course...).
* First publicly available Athlon 64 graphics driver
However, if you want to possibly commit libel while accusing someone else of it, go right ahead, I won't stop you.
And I think there's some value in being first to do something, regardless of the licensing status or any other factors. "Yeah, whatever, first space satellite... but they were COMMIE BASTARDS!" <-- sour grapes
Slashdot Mirror
It's easily possible to write a program that plays a game better than the programmer; in fact, this very thing happened early on in the history of computers that play games (in this case, checkers).
I guarantee you that Deep Blue and Deep Junior play chess better than their programmers, and for that matter, almost everyone on earth. That's why they get to play Kasparov.
JWZ is perfectly capable of installing Gentoo, Debian, etc., etc., although he probably likes RedHat's ease of installation better. And he is by no means a newbie. Also, remember that "the newbie" in general never has to install an OS; newbies buy computers with pre-installed Operating Systems.
Now, I don't really count, since I've been installing the OS myself, starting with DOS. And I have to say that Gentoo was less painful than some other installations, just because it has excellent documentation.
Obviously Gentoo can be more work for the user initially, but in the end it's far less work. And if something breaks, you might have a chance in hell of fixing it yourself! Also, although Gentoo tends to compile stuff from source, I never have to do it by hand--the system does all the work!
I agree with you, though, in that a Gentoo-based distribution geared to newbies that has a friendly installer, does hardware autoconfiguration, helps with package selection, and perhaps has a nice selection of binary packages as well, would be a very nice thing for some people.
Or there's Debian, which I hear also has very sane package management. Or RedHat could get their act together and make their package management system handle dependencies properly -- because that's why RedHat is not for me.
Yeah, I'd be similarly distraught if I were installing RPM's on RedHat 7.2; therefore, I'm pretty happy that I made the switch to Gentoo.
mplayer is all I use for video playback, and this is all almost anyone needs to know... type mplayer followed by a space and the filename, and hit Enter.
What happens on my system? Glorious full-screen video with sound. Sure, there are other keys and options and GUIs and crap, but I don't want or need 99% of it... mostly I just want something that'll play video, and mplayer does a great job of that. (And mencoder looks pretty sweet too...)
As for video editing, I haven't done it, but if I wanted to, I'd probably start here -- ignore the gimpy-looking page, I've used some of this software in the past, and it struck me as being very usable and well-written; maybe not enough to please jwz, but what is? He bitches about Unix too. In fact, I propose that jwz bitching is just a fact of life. If he ever stops bitching, worry.
Provided they aren't .GIFs of Mickey Mouse!
You could just call the ROM BASIC interrupt.
:)
:)
That was my first assembler program, too.
If you do it in SoftWindows, a window will pop up that says "SoftWindows does not support ROM BASIC".
The BYTEmarks are CPU performance tests, designed to measure the performance of a new CPU or platform. Both the C and the Java tests were run on the same P90 (an INT and FP score of 1.00 = P90 performance) and can therefore be compared to that.
You're right about the JVM performance issue--I think it was originally normalized with Symantec's Visual Cafe? I can only assume they tried to use the best Java implementation they could at the time, but judging from straight CPU performance, I can only infer that JVMs have gotten worse, or that there are other factors at work. Maybe I should try those JVMs under Windows to see how drastic the performance difference is.
I happen to enjoy benchmarking; it's a good way to compare different languages and language implementations, and also a good way of testing how much a particular language implementation (or set of them) has matured over time.
Obviously the times to care about benchmarking are 1) before you start coding -- if performance is important, find a good set of tools for your project and 2) when you're done with a cycle of development, to test the performance of your application, and see how it can be improved.
So far, I've found that C implementations haven't (or can't?) improve too much more (i.e., an order of magnitude) while Java implementations easily can (and, in fact, can easily show orders of magnitude performance differences).
But most of the time, your tips are applicable, much like the first rule of optimization.
Alas, all of that pertinent voucher information is hidden in a "link", in the "article", where you might never think to look. ...and unless Microsoft is actually a bad spelling of "Mandrakesoft", no, I don't think you'll be able to use those vouchers for that purpose.
So continue with your regularly scheduled MS bashing, but do think about reading the article now, ok?
I'll think about doing so when next I reboot; I already tried IBM's JRE, and it is most definitely faster than Sun's. :)
After doing a bit more research about JVMs, I installed IBM's JVM, which outperforms both GCJ and Sun here:
IBM INT: 5.8 FP: 6.4
These results still aren't as good as I'd hoped, but it does show that all of the JVMs aren't up to par yet, and therefore should be careful in choosing one!
I'm not a big fan of Java, but I was impressed by everything that has been said here about how much Java has matured, so I figured I'd put it to the test.
I dug up some old benchmarks (the BYTEmarks, which includes a jBYTEmark, normalized to that same P90) that I can use to fairly compare Java and C performance.
I've got a 1.2Ghz Duron, and the C version of the BYTEmarks seems to reflect this accurately--with scores of 26.6 Integer and 21.4 FP, with a P90 being 1.00.
I'm comparing this against two separate Java implementations--Sun's JVM for Linux, and gcj (I also tried out a program that translates Java bytecodes to C, but the resultant executable didn't perform correctly). Here's a table of results:
C Bytemark: INT: 26.6 FP: 21.4
SUN (--server) INT: 4.21 FP: 1.80
GCJ INT: 3.63 FP: 1.71
SUN (Default) INT: 2.18 FP: 2.14
Now, I'm not surprised that the C version ran so fast, but I am surprised the the Java benchmarks did so badly, considering that both benchmarks were normalized to an index of 1.0 for the same Pentium 90! Maybe I got a bad copy of the jBytemarks--it was hard to find a copy at all--but it looks pretty legit.
Do any of you Java people have some amazing tips for me? I did use all the optimization flags I could find. Or is this typical performance for Java, making a 1.2Ghz Duron run as slow as a P200 or a K6/300?
Intelligent Slashdot Moderations!
Intelligent Slashdot Comments
...because I'm fresh out of Zorkmids!
The best code comment I heard about (in a discussion about code commenting, I believe) was something like this: /*** DRUNK -- FIX LATER! ***/
But maybe if I found out that Einstein's brain weighed as much as mine, I'd be able to do anything I wanted to, like write a new hit single and top the charts!
Yes, a ringtone is *way* too short to be anything but fair use. If a one minute, low-quality clip on Amazon.com (or anywhere!) is fair use, then a TEN SECOND SEQUENCE OF CRAPPY BEEPS is DEFINITELY fair use.
So tell those stupid greedy bastards to read their copyright law again before they start reaching for our wallets on this one...
...now if only they could automate that somehow... hmm.
I guess my point is, I would like to have a web browser on my system, and let's say that I use Internet Explorer on Windows for that (I don't, but that's beside the point...). Now let's also say that I would like to have an e-mail client on my system, but I specifically don't want Outlook Express (or anything with the word "Outlook" in it) on my system. Now the problem presents itself...
And actually, I wish that all of the 'functionality' that (only) Outlook Express exploits could be removed as well, to enhance system security. I agree with you that it's nice to have handy libraries to automate common tasks. But I don't want to have these ones, because one common task I don't want to automate is the macro virus.
So as long as glibc doesn't add that added, handy macro virus functionality, I should be fine. Windows users should still be careful, however.
required as in: try to install Internet Explorer without installing Outlook Express. If you do it, show me how. Microsoft's installer seems convinced that they're the same thing, or at least essential for IE to function...
[nt]
I'm still trying to figure out why Outlook Express is a required part of Internet Explorer!
I was just looking into this the other day--since Intel just supplies their own binaries, it wasn't thrilled about my Gentoo install. Sure, I had rpm, and I could use --nodeps to make it shut up during the install, but even then it didn't like my binaries. Maybe they're too new to be RedHat compatible? ...not to mention the silly license file I had to copy to get the thing to even attempt to install. Thanks, Intel, but no thanks. Until you open the source on this one, I see no need to test it out on my ATHLON. ;)
It might also be a matter of interpretation -- in a document like "Release Highlights", there is an implicit context involved. So this might be the first publicly available graphics driver for that card on the Hammer.
:)
/. of course...).
So, no, the vga16 drivers wouldn't count in that case.
Besides, who needs X for graphics drivers? I'm sure NVIDIA could write drivers for the framebuffer...
But my main point is that your post wasn't phrased in the form of a query, but rather an accusation--be careful before you start tossing those around too freely (unless you're posting on
However, if you want to possibly commit libel while accusing someone else of it, go right ahead, I won't stop you.
And I think there's some value in being first to do something, regardless of the licensing status or any other factors.
"Yeah, whatever, first space satellite... but they were COMMIE BASTARDS!" <-- sour grapes