The way Java handles protected variables (due to packages) is starkly different from the way C++ handles protected variables. Fortunately, it looks like PHP picked the (less broken, IMHO) C++ way to do it.
As for your final comments--all too many PHP developers don't know "CS 101 stuff", serious or no. Also, I know that when I first learned about the OO methodology, it was quite confusing. Now that I know more about it, I'm convinced that there's a lot there to be avoided, and all of it should be carefully considered.
Fortunately, (like the crippled "object system" in PHP 4) if you don't want to use it, you still don't have to use it.
The wording in this act is just too frickin' *vague*. If it could be construed to affect VCRs (which do have substantial legitimate uses) then it could be construed to affect copy machines, printers, or just about anything else.
In fact, that PDF of the act I just read might be effectively outlawed as well! I mean, how could Congress function without copy machines, printers, e-mail, websites, and all sorts of other tools that can potentially be used for copyright infringement? It would shut down entirely!
Hmm... actually, maybe this isn't such a bad idea after all...
It's like if H.R. Geiger got together with IKEA to build a computer. Avoid. Not to mention the gigantic ugly logos everywhere. Maybe I should add Nike onto the list.
On the other hand, what do I know about art, eh? Actually, what do nerds know about it in general. If green neon and shower tubing floats your boat, then who am I to judge. But I'd take a beige box over that monstrosity any day of the week. Just my opinion, mind you.
And anyhow, who cares how pretty your webserver looks, after/. kicks it to the curb.:)
Naturally it's helpful to use libraries in C. However, the 'libraries' I speak of in Perl are actually built-in language features that don't natively exist in C. If you read the post I was replying to, you'll see that the poster was talking about *re-implementing* all of this in C. Naturally it wouldn't have to be re-implemented in Perl, because it's already a part of Perl. And if you used external libraries that you didn't write yourself in C, then you'd have to make sure they were (a) equivalent to Perl's built-in language features, and (b) faster.
All things being equal, any equivalent program written in C is highly likely to be far longer, more complex, and more difficult to write than the same in Perl--that's because Perl does a ton of things for you, many of which I have already outlined. Of course, if you don't need these features in the first place, it might make sense to write it in C. But given an arbitrary Perl program and then being tasked to write an 'equivalent' program in C... well, it's just going to end up being way more complex. If that Perl program uses eval, you might just have to write an entire Perl interpreter.:)
Of course this entire line of argument has been ridiculous from the start--Perl and C work together just fine, so you can always use Perl for the rapid development, and C for speed, as needed. In fact, there are tons of Perl modules that just consist of a Perl API to a bunch of C functions, usually for speed, or just to use an existing C API in Perl.
I know what you mean about being I/O bound--I do a lot of PHP programming. Now, PHP can be an embarassingly slow language sometimes, but that doesn't matter when you're busy waiting on a network connection to a database!
Actually, there's a Perl module that does this. But if you wanted to write said C program from scratch, it could take you a while--writing the Perl program would be much faster. And then there's the choice of algorithms involved. Have fun writing your own sorting functions in C, your own regular expression library in C, your own arbitrary precision number library in C, your own reference-counting garbage collector in C, your own closures in C...
Of course, there are other pre-existing C libraries you could use that do all of these things, but there's no telling whether or not they're faster than what Perl uses internally, and since you're re-implementing everything in C anyhow, you might as well just write your own!
So the point I'm trying to make here is this--Perl is convenient because it has all these things written for you and integrated together. Sure you could write a C program that does the same thing, but you'd end up re-inventing the wheel many times over, and you'd have to work hard to make it a better wheel.
Or you could target Parrot instead, for a lot of things it's already faster than Perl. It also has a JIT compiler, so who knows--it might generate some code here and there that's faster than what your C compiler generates.:)
I think it's really nice of Microsoft to go out and fund all these independent studies to determine the relative merits of Windows vs. Linux. I mean, because Linux is free and all, the opensource community can't really afford to spend the money to fund these complex studies by high-profile analysts and IT think-tanks.
But fortunately for us, Microsoft *can* afford to do so! It's really amazing how they can spend all this money on marketing, advertising, touring the countryside, etc., and *still* be more affordable than Linux, which has none of these added expenses. How do they do it?
Well, if I were Microsoft, I'd commission a think-tank to study the issues. But since I'm not, I'll just naively assume that they must find a way to pass the costs along to consumers and OEMs.
Come to think of it, that might also explain why it's Bill Gates--and not Linus Torvalds--who is worth billions of dollars. Hmm...
Tux for President! Penguins for software reform! Web browsers for welfare mothers! Put Bill on trial for his crimes!...um... nevermind, got a bit carried away there.:)
As flash memory speeds and capacities increase, maybe we could start using them for swap partitions or something. As long as it's faster than a hard drive and cheaper than RAM, I think they'd be quite useful.
is already built into many motherboards, for example. Press the power button, and it will do a soft power down. Hold it for a while, and it will do a hard power down.
Similar concepts have been used in the past, like morse code, binary, the ENIAC (which had ten distinct states!), the visual spectrum of light, and Paul Revere's ride (which actually *was* revolutionary).
That is not do-able without withholding his claim to authorship on said book... and for his translator also.
P.S. Note that this post is similarly lacking said glyph; I concur that this is difficult!
TIGER -- look again
on
Open Maps?
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Go to freshmeat and search for "tiger maps"; check out the Tiger Map Server project.
Note that they don't have labels rendered on the streets yet, but plan to add this. However, all the code is there, and the data is available, so there's no need to reinvent the wheel here.
In that case, add an extra $1.5 billion to our Iraq expenses. More significantly, we'd owe the Iraqi people about $20 billion more in reparations. Of course we've already spent those amounts several times over...
'Our view isn't that you take the right video game, stick it in a classroom and everything gets better'
Funny, that's always been my opinion. For instance, compare a history lesson with, say, Star Control 2's Super Melee. Or don't, there's really no comparison. Super Melee is better in all respects!
Slashdot Mirror
The way Java handles protected variables (due to packages) is starkly different from the way C++ handles protected variables. Fortunately, it looks like PHP picked the (less broken, IMHO) C++ way to do it.
As for your final comments--all too many PHP developers don't know "CS 101 stuff", serious or no. Also, I know that when I first learned about the OO methodology, it was quite confusing. Now that I know more about it, I'm convinced that there's a lot there to be avoided, and all of it should be carefully considered.
Fortunately, (like the crippled "object system" in PHP 4) if you don't want to use it, you still don't have to use it.
Look into PearPC or QEMU... of course it's probably more like ATHLONtoG3.exe :P
...you can go full-circle, and use Cursed GTK!
It is spelled 'existence'; it's even correct in the article body. So please fix it in the title.
Thank you.
Or for that matter, "fast user switching". I guess that's only an innovation for a single user OS, eh?
The wording in this act is just too frickin' *vague*. If it could be construed to affect VCRs (which do have substantial legitimate uses) then it could be construed to affect copy machines, printers, or just about anything else.
In fact, that PDF of the act I just read might be effectively outlawed as well! I mean, how could Congress function without copy machines, printers, e-mail, websites, and all sorts of other tools that can potentially be used for copyright infringement? It would shut down entirely!
Hmm... actually, maybe this isn't such a bad idea after all...
It's like if H.R. Geiger got together with IKEA to build a computer. Avoid. Not to mention the gigantic ugly logos everywhere. Maybe I should add Nike onto the list.
/. kicks it to the curb. :)
On the other hand, what do I know about art, eh? Actually, what do nerds know about it in general. If green neon and shower tubing floats your boat, then who am I to judge. But I'd take a beige box over that monstrosity any day of the week. Just my opinion, mind you.
And anyhow, who cares how pretty your webserver looks, after
Naturally it's helpful to use libraries in C. However, the 'libraries' I speak of in Perl are actually built-in language features that don't natively exist in C. If you read the post I was replying to, you'll see that the poster was talking about *re-implementing* all of this in C. Naturally it wouldn't have to be re-implemented in Perl, because it's already a part of Perl. And if you used external libraries that you didn't write yourself in C, then you'd have to make sure they were (a) equivalent to Perl's built-in language features, and (b) faster.
:)
All things being equal, any equivalent program written in C is highly likely to be far longer, more complex, and more difficult to write than the same in Perl--that's because Perl does a ton of things for you, many of which I have already outlined. Of course, if you don't need these features in the first place, it might make sense to write it in C. But given an arbitrary Perl program and then being tasked to write an 'equivalent' program in C... well, it's just going to end up being way more complex. If that Perl program uses eval, you might just have to write an entire Perl interpreter.
Of course this entire line of argument has been ridiculous from the start--Perl and C work together just fine, so you can always use Perl for the rapid development, and C for speed, as needed. In fact, there are tons of Perl modules that just consist of a Perl API to a bunch of C functions, usually for speed, or just to use an existing C API in Perl.
I know what you mean about being I/O bound--I do a lot of PHP programming. Now, PHP can be an embarassingly slow language sometimes, but that doesn't matter when you're busy waiting on a network connection to a database!
Actually, there's a Perl module that does this. But if you wanted to write said C program from scratch, it could take you a while--writing the Perl program would be much faster. And then there's the choice of algorithms involved. Have fun writing your own sorting functions in C, your own regular expression library in C, your own arbitrary precision number library in C, your own reference-counting garbage collector in C, your own closures in C...
:)
Of course, there are other pre-existing C libraries you could use that do all of these things, but there's no telling whether or not they're faster than what Perl uses internally, and since you're re-implementing everything in C anyhow, you might as well just write your own!
So the point I'm trying to make here is this--Perl is convenient because it has all these things written for you and integrated together. Sure you could write a C program that does the same thing, but you'd end up re-inventing the wheel many times over, and you'd have to work hard to make it a better wheel.
Or you could target Parrot instead, for a lot of things it's already faster than Perl. It also has a JIT compiler, so who knows--it might generate some code here and there that's faster than what your C compiler generates.
...it must be the $3 crack again... :)
I think it's really nice of Microsoft to go out and fund all these independent studies to determine the relative merits of Windows vs. Linux. I mean, because Linux is free and all, the opensource community can't really afford to spend the money to fund these complex studies by high-profile analysts and IT think-tanks.
But fortunately for us, Microsoft *can* afford to do so! It's really amazing how they can spend all this money on marketing, advertising, touring the countryside, etc., and *still* be more affordable than Linux, which has none of these added expenses. How do they do it?
Well, if I were Microsoft, I'd commission a think-tank to study the issues. But since I'm not, I'll just naively assume that they must find a way to pass the costs along to consumers and OEMs.
Come to think of it, that might also explain why it's Bill Gates--and not Linus Torvalds--who is worth billions of dollars. Hmm...
[stands on soapbox]
...um... nevermind, got a bit carried away there. :)
Tux for President! Penguins for software reform! Web browsers for welfare mothers! Put Bill on trial for his crimes!
As flash memory speeds and capacities increase, maybe we could start using them for swap partitions or something. As long as it's faster than a hard drive and cheaper than RAM, I think they'd be quite useful.
... prelinking.
What distro are you using?
is already built into many motherboards, for example. Press the power button, and it will do a soft power down. Hold it for a while, and it will do a hard power down.
Similar concepts have been used in the past, like morse code, binary, the ENIAC (which had ten distinct states!), the visual spectrum of light, and Paul Revere's ride (which actually *was* revolutionary).
I told you it was difficult. :)
That is not do-able without withholding his claim to authorship on said book... and for his translator also.
P.S. Note that this post is similarly lacking said glyph; I concur that this is difficult!
Go to freshmeat and search for "tiger maps"; check out the Tiger Map Server project.
Note that they don't have labels rendered on the streets yet, but plan to add this. However, all the code is there, and the data is available, so there's no need to reinvent the wheel here.
The real picture would look like a dot or a blob at best?
Now we hunt him down and execute him, right?
In that case, add an extra $1.5 billion to our Iraq expenses. More significantly, we'd owe the Iraqi people about $20 billion more in reparations. Of course we've already spent those amounts several times over...
No, no it wouldn't. And it especially wouldn't when compared to Lisp. :)
It's called The New Jersey Approach.