This is a good point for when you want to re-implement basic language features and keywords, and not functions. The "Lisp approach" is seamless.
However, the reason that we end up with trivial examples in C or C++ is that almost everything in those languages is implemented as a function, and functions CAN be replaced seamlessly.
However, I suppose that if the C language had been extensible in the first place, then there would have been no need for C++, since it could have been entirely implemented in C as common headers supporting various different features. And the same would go for Java, or at least the Java features that aren't incompatible with C and C++.
Oh, and who said that programmers were sane? That robot you described is commonly written by programmers to cope with the inadequacies of whatever language they are forced to work under, or for migration from one language to another. I recently wrote a (fairly trivial) Perl script to partially convert from one bogus web pre-processing interface to another, but their feature sets map much more readily than, say, Lisp and Java...
DirectX support in Wine is pretty bad, and could definitely use something like this. Of course, OpenGL support in Wine has it's own problems, but this can only be a good thing for porting to non-Windows platforms.
I don't know if it's a good thing for Wine or not, though, because I couldn't find any details of the license. Wine is released under an artistic style license, so if this thing is GPL (or similar) it couldn't get merged directly into Wine.
However, they seem like nice enough people, so hopefully the Wine folks will check into it... Otherwise, we'll end up with a forked, GPL-compatible version of Wine for gaming, which wouldn't be so bad, but would be less than ideal.
Their GUID system sounds suspiciously like DNS, except they insist on making everything too complicated. Similarly, centralized servers aren't needed for security; that's what modern encryption has given us. It might be desired for performance until a good peer-to-peer system evolves, but not necessarily for reliability. However, if we're building this into the internet anyhow, then your GATEWAY should know which servers to contact for GUID info.
Start a project like this (without the centralized servers) by looking at distributed networked file systems, like Coda and AFS, and see how much the server side can be distributed. The same goes for authentication systems, like Kerberos. Obviously the security would come from encryption and redundancy, but this is a very complicated scenario when the servers are distributed.
In fact, distributing even as much as has been outlined in the article onto the clients would be difficult, and would likely kill network thoroughput if not done very carefully. If distributed as suggested in the article, it would place a massive load on the internet, by making thousands of requests for bits and pieces of files where there should be one request.
However, with a centralized system, the problem is already solved, essentially. Any large-scale university (like MIT) has already developed the kinds of network file sharing and authentication technologies required herein. The distributed applications have already been written, and would merely contact these central servers for information instead of their own central servers. The economic framework is interesting, but already done, and the payment services exist as well.
Interesting, but it simply confirms my point (have you read that paper?); these people are VERY experienced Java developers, and they ended up with a product that runs THREE orders of magnitude slower than a normal JVM, and constantly had to apologize for shortcomings in the Java language. So, yes, it isn't impossible, but it can't be done quickly and well.
I'm just sorry that they never had to build a native function implementation; from the paper, it sounds like they used the standard one, or made a broken look-up table of some sort. C has function pointers, of course, but what you really want is a jumptable of some sort.:)
I agree that your solution is much more elegant, that languages like Lisp and Scheme and Perl and Forth make it much easier to create functions that work like language primitives, and that closures and lexical scoping of variables are good things.
However, it is certainly possible to implement the functionality of a while() loop in C, C++, or Java using their primitives; and the solution might end up being crippled or somewhat braindead, but I disagree with your assertion that no one would use it. They're already using Java, aren't they?:)
Also, remember that while() is already implemented in C. C, C++, and Java are generally implemented in C, so it's not just possible, it's essential. Now, it might be considered cheating to write a whole COMPILER to do this instead of a function, but that's what happens when you aren't working with a language that was designed to be interpreted. (except Java; there's no excuse for Java here)
Pseudo-code outline of while class in C / C++ / Java
* make a comparison function whilecomp();
* make a function for the body whilebody();
* pass them to your while class, and loop
whilefunc() {
if (whilecomp()) {
whilebody();
return whilefunc();
}
}
This is all done through tail recursion, which is supported in all three languages. Obviously, you'd need to make these calls function pointers in C, or override/implement them in C++ or Java (functions aren't first-class in any of these languages, but that doesn't make calling them impossible) and possibly make the functions handle an arbitrary number of arguments. But it is by no means impossible.
That having been said, tail recursion generally isn't that well optimized in these languages, so you might as well use the goto primitive in C and C++, and shoot yourself in Java, to implement while() decently.
But since there's already a built-in while, what was with the stupid fake example? What are you trying to prove? That these languages are geared towards efficiency and readable syntax instead of generalized object-oriented programming? Well, if so, you're right.:)
Actually, Java ITSELF overloads the '+' operator; therefore, it's obviously a good thing just so long as no one ELSE can do it.
That's one thing I dislike about Java; it intentionally cripples the features available to the user whilst using similar features in the design of the language. For example, you wouldn't want to write Java in Java, because it just isn't functional enough to do a decent job.
It sounds like C++ and/or Java is your best bet based on the list of requirements, and what your boss probably wants. However, how important are each of these items? Different languages have different levels of support for all of these, and different ways of accomplishing the same tasks.
For example, garbage collection in Java or Perl is generally not very good compared to a modern Lisp / Scheme interpreter. C++ has templates, while Scheme has functions as a first-class type. Scheme and Perl have closures, which can be used to build complicated object-oriented systems from the ground up, while Java has inner classes, which is not quite the same...
Also, please realize that object-oriented programming, multiple inheritance, garbage collection, and operator/function overloading are all very powerful language features that require careful design and consideration to use correctly. There are times when each of these is a massive help to the programmer, and there are other times when they can each create intractable messes.
So figure out why you need each feature, and what its role is in the project, and if you could use other language features to fulfill the same roles. The language you're looking for probably doesn't exist, and even if it does, there's no guarantee you'd want to use it.
Also, if you really want this (imaginary) language, I'm sure you can write it in C; that's what they do for all the other languages I've mentioned.:)
Apparently piracy isn't hurting the video game market, then, even though there IS rampant piracy, especially with the consoles.
This might be due to the popularity of online gaming and MMORPGs, and the fact that there are three huge new consoles that people are working on cracking more fully.
However, I just hope that the trend towards moving everything online doesn't go too far; I still like to buy and own things, and not have to pay for extra services when I don't have to.
If the movie and music industry ever do catch on to how the gaming industry operates, we could all be in trouble, and end up paying for our media without having our own copy! But that day should be a couple of years away for now, just due to basic bandwidth considerations.
That's still a bit too near for 1984 for my comfort, though.
Excellent. I'll take care of the rabbits and the guinea pigs, and cockroaches should be no problem in NYC. However, if we need a backup location, let's meet over Staten Island; no one ever goes there.
As usual, I've been had from the lack of journalism on slashdot and the sites they point to; thanks for pointing out that the real manual is 46 pages long, and not ONE.:)
My imagination originally came up with a similar scenario, and then it all FIT! That's why the POLAR ICE CAPS are MELTING! It isn't global warming; it's a BEOWULF CLUSTER! I figure they have TUNNELS connecting the supercomputing centers to the ESCAPE ROUTES for the ARK.
Yeah, man, that's great. Instead of having that one guy using Pov-Ray tieing up the server for HOURS, you can have that one guy using massive clustering, tieing up EVERY computer for HOURS.
Make no mistake, he wouldn't get his old projects done in minutes; he'd just up the detail and number of frames.
Even if you were on a private network, you'd want to make clustered tasks the lowest priority task (the idle task) and even then you'd want priorities amongst clustered tasks. If you aren't on a private network, then just shoot yourself right now before you install this!
This macintosh clustering app (pooch) is both an amazing piece of technology and a remarkably stupid idea, from what I can tell (in the article and the ONE PAGE of documentation provided).
All you have to do is write an application for pooch (that, for example, does your linear algebra homework, or perhaps pingfloods slashdot.org) and run it on all the cable/dsl mac machines that now run pooch because of slashdot.org, and enjoy the amazing technology!
Now, if what I have outlined isn't possible, please let me know; this is all from the article and the incredibly meager documentation I have read. But as usual, it looks like the security ramifications for this are enormous, perhaps worse than other common and incredibly boneheaded ideas, such as auto-updating software, and executing code in e-mails from random people...
I agree that there's nothing wrong with having more tools out there. However, I sincerely doubt that many Linux users would pay to install a third-party C++ compiler suite when they already have the standard C++ compiler for Unix (g++) free and already bundled with the system. This fact alone significantly narrows Borland's potential audience on Linux.
Factors that might change this:
(1) Borland releases it free of charge or under some open source license; this is a possibility, but isn't clearly stated in the article--perhaps the command-line compiler will be available free of charge, which would encourage many Linux enthusiasts to try it out.
(2) Borland's C++ compiler supports advanced features not in gcc, such as compatibility with Borland's existing C++ compiler for Windows, better support for templates, better optimization, you name it. I already mentioned that this product might be aimed at people porting applications already written for Borland's compiler.
However, the main problem I have with your point is your imaginary conversation; you neglected to date those statements. That first statement was made years ago! At the time, Linux was not very well known and companies were just starting to take notice of it. Borland took a survey and started work on Linux products. Then other companies actually wrote and marketed Linux versions of their products whilst Borland was busy having an identity crisis (remember Inprise?). This also caused Borland to lose credibility with some of their long-time supporters, who likely ported their applications to Linux with some other product (like g++) and forgot about Borland/Inprise. Only now are they waking up and marketing this product again!
Therefore, I sincerely hope that this is a sign that the old Borland is back, and I hope they release a wonderful product, and gain massive support on Linux, and kick the gcc/g++ development crew into high gear to keep up. But understand if I fear the worst, especially from the vague tone of that Infoworld article, where they pretend that Linux doesn't already have a decent C++ compiler.:)
Borland has always put out wonderful tools, and really worked hard on making their compilers optimized on their platforms, but I think they've missed the boat here. This is most likely for easy porting of other applications written with Borland tools to Linux, because Linux already has a solid toolchain of its own. Regardless, I hope they get back on track.
What I miss most is the old text-based Borland IDE. That was the most productive development environment ever. RHIDE is close, but wasn't stable on Linux when last I checked.
I admit that I'm not deeply into Anime, but I've seen my fair share, including Bastard, Tyler, Utena, and other random stuff. Therefore, I feel comfortable with saying that the only well-known MOVIE called "Metropolis" isn't animated. It's still incredible, even in black and white, and it's definitely highly rated.
But if slashdot (which pretends to be a news outlet of some kind) actually wants to make any sense even to the people who read it, a footnote is in order here explaining what "Metropolis" is for the vast majority of us who only know about the much more well-known movie by the same name.
Proposed: a method for reducing any file down to 16 bytes and losslessly restoring it.
1. Create an MD5 hash of the file.
2. Share it on a Peer-to-Peer filesharing client.
3. Delete the original file.
4. Find it again!
Note: in trials, this method seems to work best for Britney Spears songs and videos; further research is being done on how to restore Barry Manilow songs and videos, and what to do about hash collisions (bug those uppity MD5 people again).
I know for a fact that the Gnome desktop in RH7.1 automounts CD-ROMs. Also, there IS an automounter already installed in RedHat (if you installed it, I believe it's a daemon...) that will deal with anything else mountable. (floppies, USB, whatever...) And PC's can't properly automount a floppy anyhow, at least not in the Amiga/MacOS sense, because the hardware doesn't tell them when a disk is inserted. They can do the rest, though.
As for FAT32 partitions, I don't see why they'd need automounting; generally either they're there in the first place, or not... You could tell it how and where to mount those by default, when you INSTALLED RedHat.
I couldn't tell you how Linux is for USB devices, because I don't have any; I don't have a laptop, so I don't feel the need to pay a premium for something I can buy cheaper for a desktop already. (and c'mon, USB keyboards? Even I don't type *that* fast...) But I assume that if you plug one in under Linux, and USB support works, then you could try to mount it with the automounter, which would access the device for the first time, and load the module, all seamlessly.
This DOES require configuration of the modules AND the automounter, but then, how else would it know that you wanted to do that?Linux works fine if you don't set it up, but if you DO, it'll even do what you want it to do! And I honestly can't say that for Windows 98. It never did what I wanted it to, and no amount of coaxing has changed its opinion. It doesn't shut down properly, and when it tries to powersave, it freezes about half the time. (XP Beta 2 was much more reasonable, actually, but it expired.:)
Personally, I'd like it if Windows recognized my ext2 or reiserfs partitions automatically, instead of offering to format my "empty" drive D. (actually a software RAID parition on the windows drive for Linux:) But it doesn't know any better, and it won't let me tell it to stop, so what is my recourse THERE, exactly? Call up the guy who wrote "explorer.exe" and tell him to cut the crap and check the partition IDs before displaying a drive in "My Computer"? Yeah. Right.
Best of luck to you with your Windows and Linux woes.:)
that is mostly true; it depends on that first part, which is getting wine to emulate an i386 for you. At the moment this is almost nonexistent (listed at 5%, no serious effort, from the Wine Status page).
However, if it ever is, then Wine will end up being a modern replacement for tools like Wabi (which was very cool at the time) instead of just a toy/tool for us Intel users.
Until then, there's always Bochs, at least, but that's pretty slow; Plex86 is not quite ready for prime time, and DOSEmu doesn't have that much support for i386 emulation, but more than Wine does... --- pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
So... once we crossbreed humans with cockroaches, we'll have the perfect soldiers?
Don't get me wrong, biotechnology might have some interesting applications here, but it's easy to see how this could be taken too far. Quite readily taken WAY too far.
Personally, I'd be more in favor of CLONING the perfect soldier than actually creating something non-human. Somehow I find that less frighteningly creepy. --- pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
Slashdot Mirror
This is a good point for when you want to re-implement basic language features and keywords, and not functions. The "Lisp approach" is seamless.
However, the reason that we end up with trivial examples in C or C++ is that almost everything in those languages is implemented as a function, and functions CAN be replaced seamlessly.
However, I suppose that if the C language had been extensible in the first place, then there would have been no need for C++, since it could have been entirely implemented in C as common headers supporting various different features. And the same would go for Java, or at least the Java features that aren't incompatible with C and C++.
Oh, and who said that programmers were sane? That robot you described is commonly written by programmers to cope with the inadequacies of whatever language they are forced to work under, or for migration from one language to another. I recently wrote a (fairly trivial) Perl script to partially convert from one bogus web pre-processing interface to another, but their feature sets map much more readily than, say, Lisp and Java...
DirectX support in Wine is pretty bad, and could definitely use something like this. Of course, OpenGL support in Wine has it's own problems, but this can only be a good thing for porting to non-Windows platforms.
I don't know if it's a good thing for Wine or not, though, because I couldn't find any details of the license. Wine is released under an artistic style license, so if this thing is GPL (or similar) it couldn't get merged directly into Wine.
However, they seem like nice enough people, so hopefully the Wine folks will check into it... Otherwise, we'll end up with a forked, GPL-compatible version of Wine for gaming, which wouldn't be so bad, but would be less than ideal.
Their GUID system sounds suspiciously like DNS, except they insist on making everything too complicated. Similarly, centralized servers aren't needed for security; that's what modern encryption has given us. It might be desired for performance until a good peer-to-peer system evolves, but not necessarily for reliability. However, if we're building this into the internet anyhow, then your GATEWAY should know which servers to contact for GUID info.
Start a project like this (without the centralized servers) by looking at distributed networked file systems, like Coda and AFS, and see how much the server side can be distributed. The same goes for authentication systems, like Kerberos. Obviously the security would come from encryption and redundancy, but this is a very complicated scenario when the servers are distributed.
In fact, distributing even as much as has been outlined in the article onto the clients would be difficult, and would likely kill network thoroughput if not done very carefully. If distributed as suggested in the article, it would place a massive load on the internet, by making thousands of requests for bits and pieces of files where there should be one request.
However, with a centralized system, the problem is already solved, essentially. Any large-scale university (like MIT) has already developed the kinds of network file sharing and authentication technologies required herein. The distributed applications have already been written, and would merely contact these central servers for information instead of their own central servers. The economic framework is interesting, but already done, and the payment services exist as well.
Interesting, but it simply confirms my point (have you read that paper?); these people are VERY experienced Java developers, and they ended up with a product that runs THREE orders of magnitude slower than a normal JVM, and constantly had to apologize for shortcomings in the Java language. So, yes, it isn't impossible, but it can't be done quickly and well.
:)
I'm just sorry that they never had to build a native function implementation; from the paper, it sounds like they used the standard one, or made a broken look-up table of some sort. C has function pointers, of course, but what you really want is a jumptable of some sort.
I agree that your solution is much more elegant, that languages like Lisp and Scheme and Perl and Forth make it much easier to create functions that work like language primitives, and that closures and lexical scoping of variables are good things.
:)
However, it is certainly possible to implement the functionality of a while() loop in C, C++, or Java using their primitives; and the solution might end up being crippled or somewhat braindead, but I disagree with your assertion that no one would use it. They're already using Java, aren't they?
Also, remember that while() is already implemented in C. C, C++, and Java are generally implemented in C, so it's not just possible, it's essential. Now, it might be considered cheating to write a whole COMPILER to do this instead of a function, but that's what happens when you aren't working with a language that was designed to be interpreted. (except Java; there's no excuse for Java here)
Ahh but Java doesn't have a preprocessor either; either way, they're cheating. :)
...
I'd love it if they did, though, because I'd #define away their ridiculous verbose names into something short and memorable
Pseudo-code outline of while class in C / C++ / Java
:)
* make a comparison function whilecomp();
* make a function for the body whilebody();
* pass them to your while class, and loop
whilefunc() {
if (whilecomp()) {
whilebody();
return whilefunc();
}
}
This is all done through tail recursion, which is supported in all three languages. Obviously, you'd need to make these calls function pointers in C, or override/implement them in C++ or Java (functions aren't first-class in any of these languages, but that doesn't make calling them impossible) and possibly make the functions handle an arbitrary number of arguments. But it is by no means impossible.
That having been said, tail recursion generally isn't that well optimized in these languages, so you might as well use the goto primitive in C and C++, and shoot yourself in Java, to implement while() decently.
But since there's already a built-in while, what was with the stupid fake example? What are you trying to prove? That these languages are geared towards efficiency and readable syntax instead of generalized object-oriented programming? Well, if so, you're right.
Actually, Java ITSELF overloads the '+' operator; therefore, it's obviously a good thing just so long as no one ELSE can do it.
That's one thing I dislike about Java; it intentionally cripples the features available to the user whilst using similar features in the design of the language. For example, you wouldn't want to write Java in Java, because it just isn't functional enough to do a decent job.
It sounds like C++ and/or Java is your best bet based on the list of requirements, and what your boss probably wants. However, how important are each of these items? Different languages have different levels of support for all of these, and different ways of accomplishing the same tasks.
...
:)
For example, garbage collection in Java or Perl is generally not very good compared to a modern Lisp / Scheme interpreter. C++ has templates, while Scheme has functions as a first-class type. Scheme and Perl have closures, which can be used to build complicated object-oriented systems from the ground up, while Java has inner classes, which is not quite the same
Also, please realize that object-oriented programming, multiple inheritance, garbage collection, and operator/function overloading are all very powerful language features that require careful design and consideration to use correctly. There are times when each of these is a massive help to the programmer, and there are other times when they can each create intractable messes.
So figure out why you need each feature, and what its role is in the project, and if you could use other language features to fulfill the same roles. The language you're looking for probably doesn't exist, and even if it does, there's no guarantee you'd want to use it.
Also, if you really want this (imaginary) language, I'm sure you can write it in C; that's what they do for all the other languages I've mentioned.
Apparently piracy isn't hurting the video game market, then, even though there IS rampant piracy, especially with the consoles.
This might be due to the popularity of online gaming and MMORPGs, and the fact that there are three huge new consoles that people are working on cracking more fully.
However, I just hope that the trend towards moving everything online doesn't go too far; I still like to buy and own things, and not have to pay for extra services when I don't have to.
If the movie and music industry ever do catch on to how the gaming industry operates, we could all be in trouble, and end up paying for our media without having our own copy! But that day should be a couple of years away for now, just due to basic bandwidth considerations.
That's still a bit too near for 1984 for my comfort, though.
Excellent. I'll take care of the rabbits and the guinea pigs, and cockroaches should be no problem in NYC. However, if we need a backup location, let's meet over Staten Island; no one ever goes there.
Are you feeling lucky, punk?
As usual, I've been had from the lack of journalism on slashdot and the sites they point to; thanks for pointing out that the real manual is 46 pages long, and not ONE. :)
My imagination originally came up with a similar scenario, and then it all FIT! That's why the POLAR ICE CAPS are MELTING! It isn't global warming; it's a BEOWULF CLUSTER! I figure they have TUNNELS connecting the supercomputing centers to the ESCAPE ROUTES for the ARK.
Work on the ark continues...
Yeah, man, that's great. Instead of having that one guy using Pov-Ray tieing up the server for HOURS, you can have that one guy using massive clustering, tieing up EVERY computer for HOURS.
Make no mistake, he wouldn't get his old projects done in minutes; he'd just up the detail and number of frames.
Even if you were on a private network, you'd want to make clustered tasks the lowest priority task (the idle task) and even then you'd want priorities amongst clustered tasks. If you aren't on a private network, then just shoot yourself right now before you install this!
This macintosh clustering app (pooch) is both an amazing piece of technology and a remarkably stupid idea, from what I can tell (in the article and the ONE PAGE of documentation provided).
All you have to do is write an application for pooch (that, for example, does your linear algebra homework, or perhaps pingfloods slashdot.org) and run it on all the cable/dsl mac machines that now run pooch because of slashdot.org, and enjoy the amazing technology!
Now, if what I have outlined isn't possible, please let me know; this is all from the article and the incredibly meager documentation I have read. But as usual, it looks like the security ramifications for this are enormous, perhaps worse than other common and incredibly boneheaded ideas, such as auto-updating software, and executing code in e-mails from random people...
I'm familiar with XWPE, and I tried it out a long time ago (6 years?) but I never liked it as an X application.
However, I hadn't seen WPE before, so I might try that out; thanks!
FYI, RHIDE is another TurboVision IDE clone, which is also very good, but not that stable under Linux.
I agree that there's nothing wrong with having more tools out there. However, I sincerely doubt that many Linux users would pay to install a third-party C++ compiler suite when they already have the standard C++ compiler for Unix (g++) free and already bundled with the system. This fact alone significantly narrows Borland's potential audience on Linux.
:)
Factors that might change this:
(1) Borland releases it free of charge or under some open source license; this is a possibility, but isn't clearly stated in the article--perhaps the command-line compiler will be available free of charge, which would encourage many Linux enthusiasts to try it out.
(2) Borland's C++ compiler supports advanced features not in gcc, such as compatibility with Borland's existing C++ compiler for Windows, better support for templates, better optimization, you name it. I already mentioned that this product might be aimed at people porting applications already written for Borland's compiler.
However, the main problem I have with your point is your imaginary conversation; you neglected to date those statements. That first statement was made years ago! At the time, Linux was not very well known and companies were just starting to take notice of it. Borland took a survey and started work on Linux products. Then other companies actually wrote and marketed Linux versions of their products whilst Borland was busy having an identity crisis (remember Inprise?). This also caused Borland to lose credibility with some of their long-time supporters, who likely ported their applications to Linux with some other product (like g++) and forgot about Borland/Inprise. Only now are they waking up and marketing this product again!
Therefore, I sincerely hope that this is a sign that the old Borland is back, and I hope they release a wonderful product, and gain massive support on Linux, and kick the gcc/g++ development crew into high gear to keep up. But understand if I fear the worst, especially from the vague tone of that Infoworld article, where they pretend that Linux doesn't already have a decent C++ compiler.
Borland has always put out wonderful tools, and really worked hard on making their compilers optimized on their platforms, but I think they've missed the boat here. This is most likely for easy porting of other applications written with Borland tools to Linux, because Linux already has a solid toolchain of its own. Regardless, I hope they get back on track.
What I miss most is the old text-based Borland IDE. That was the most productive development environment ever. RHIDE is close, but wasn't stable on Linux when last I checked.
Since when was "Metropolis" an Anime film?
I admit that I'm not deeply into Anime, but I've seen my fair share, including Bastard, Tyler, Utena, and other random stuff. Therefore, I feel comfortable with saying that the only well-known MOVIE called "Metropolis" isn't animated. It's still incredible, even in black and white, and it's definitely highly rated.
But if slashdot (which pretends to be a news outlet of some kind) actually wants to make any sense even to the people who read it, a footnote is in order here explaining what "Metropolis" is for the vast majority of us who only know about the much more well-known movie by the same name.
Proposed: a method for reducing any file down to 16 bytes and losslessly restoring it.
1. Create an MD5 hash of the file.
2. Share it on a Peer-to-Peer filesharing client.
3. Delete the original file.
4. Find it again!
Note: in trials, this method seems to work best for Britney Spears songs and videos; further research is being done on how to restore Barry Manilow songs and videos, and what to do about hash collisions (bug those uppity MD5 people again).
I know for a fact that the Gnome desktop in RH7.1 automounts CD-ROMs. Also, there IS an automounter already installed in RedHat (if you installed it, I believe it's a daemon...) that will deal with anything else mountable. (floppies, USB, whatever...) And PC's can't properly automount a floppy anyhow, at least not in the Amiga/MacOS sense, because the hardware doesn't tell them when a disk is inserted. They can do the rest, though.
:)
:) But it doesn't know any better, and it won't let me tell it to stop, so what is my recourse THERE, exactly? Call up the guy who wrote "explorer.exe" and tell him to cut the crap and check the partition IDs before displaying a drive in "My Computer"? Yeah. Right.
:)
As for FAT32 partitions, I don't see why they'd need automounting; generally either they're there in the first place, or not... You could tell it how and where to mount those by default, when you INSTALLED RedHat.
I couldn't tell you how Linux is for USB devices, because I don't have any; I don't have a laptop, so I don't feel the need to pay a premium for something I can buy cheaper for a desktop already. (and c'mon, USB keyboards? Even I don't type *that* fast...) But I assume that if you plug one in under Linux, and USB support works, then you could try to mount it with the automounter, which would access the device for the first time, and load the module, all seamlessly.
This DOES require configuration of the modules AND the automounter, but then, how else would it know that you wanted to do that?Linux works fine if you don't set it up, but if you DO, it'll even do what you want it to do! And I honestly can't say that for Windows 98. It never did what I wanted it to, and no amount of coaxing has changed its opinion. It doesn't shut down properly, and when it tries to powersave, it freezes about half the time. (XP Beta 2 was much more reasonable, actually, but it expired.
Personally, I'd like it if Windows recognized my ext2 or reiserfs partitions automatically, instead of offering to format my "empty" drive D. (actually a software RAID parition on the windows drive for Linux
Best of luck to you with your Windows and Linux woes.
This subject has come to us, pre-flogged, like the dead horse it is, so I'll be brief.
1) Block ads. Proxies. Junkbuster.
2) Disable Java, disable JavaScript, whenever possible, disable, disable, disable.
3) Avoid sites with annoying ads, wherever possible. Like those annoying OSDN sites... some even with banners on the top and the bottom!
4) This is NEWS??
5) oh... there is no five. I lost interest. Sorry. What was this about again?
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
that is mostly true; it depends on that first part, which is getting wine to emulate an i386 for you. At the moment this is almost nonexistent (listed at 5%, no serious effort, from the Wine Status page).
However, if it ever is, then Wine will end up being a modern replacement for tools like Wabi (which was very cool at the time) instead of just a toy/tool for us Intel users.
Until then, there's always Bochs, at least, but that's pretty slow; Plex86 is not quite ready for prime time, and DOSEmu doesn't have that much support for i386 emulation, but more than Wine does...
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
So... once we crossbreed humans with cockroaches, we'll have the perfect soldiers?
Don't get me wrong, biotechnology might have some interesting applications here, but it's easy to see how this could be taken too far. Quite readily taken WAY too far.
Personally, I'd be more in favor of CLONING the perfect soldier than actually creating something non-human. Somehow I find that less frighteningly creepy.
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
I sense... a bad...
remake... coming to...
my cable... network...
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.