Do you realize you're too stupid to see the analogy between his (your?) attacks on some hack and my attacks on his (your?) journal? You probably do realize it, which is why you chose to post cowardly.
Re:Way too much time on their hands...
on
PC In An XP Box
·
· Score: 1
+5 Insightful? Try "redundant", "flamebait", "overrated", and maybe even "lost, you must be looking for 'My-Hobbies-are-more-worthy-than-yours.org'".
What in the world do you hope to accomplish with your worthless journal entries?
... require very large (read: industrial) bits of equipment....
If you had meant us to read very large as industrial, why didn't you just write industrial?
Just curious (read: baffled (read: confused) by this common (read: prevelant on slashdot (read: idiot funhouse)) idiom (read (read: interpet and understand writing): little bit of stupidity (read: you)).
If your program is the only program that will ever use a library, there is still benefit from shared libraries, if you ever have more than one instance of the app running at a time.
I've been running windows off and on since version 1.0 and small versions of MS-DOS before/during that time, and while version compatibility is pretty good, it's not nearly as good as good as you or the OP make it out to be. DLL hell in the 3.1 and win95 days was a nightmare.
Still, I think it's a testament to Microsoft that an.EXE can run under Windows 95, 98, 2K and XP and most of the time, it's just going to work.
If the.exe is statically linked perhaps, otherwise, you're going to have all kinds of library problems when moving the sam app between win 95, win 98, win 2k, and win XP. Keep in mind for earlier OSes in the chain, apps frequently shipped with their own shared libraries causing other apps or even the whole system to break.
I'm not sure about device drivers for Windows, but I would be suprised if there weren't problems with using win 95/98 device drivers with win XP.
Not to say that updading linux is painfree, I just think you're overstating the case for microsoft products. C library upgrades aren't a big deal, most distros contain compatibility libraries for older versions. There were some serious issues with libc upgrades, but that was years ago. It's really a non-issue in my development experience. Other libraries cause more headaches than libc.
Attn Mods:
How a post that intends to comment on the strain imposed on developers for linux kernel and libc upgrades and also says this "it's been a long time since I've been active in Linux development" can get modded up to +5 informative is beyond me. Insightful or perhaps inciteful, but not informative.
I agree, her stuff is really engaging, even for non-science-fiction fans. The latest book of hers I read, Passage, while basically a good story and very touching, was way to long for the material. Willis communicates urgency, frustration, and dispair better than just about anyone, but it just went on a little too long in Passage.
A good (or merely ok) compiler will generate the same instructions for both "i = i + 1;" and "i++;" However, in the spirit of generic programming, one should typically get in the habit of avoiding temporaries explicitly, because if "i" is a user defined type, you'll want to use "++i;" to avoid the temporary if you can get away with it. This is obviously c++ I'm talking about here.
Joking about bombs at airports is expressly prohibited. Joking about viruses on weblogs isn't. Get a grip coward, don't let the man take your free speech away.
For $7000, you could have a week with a hooker like Julia Roberts and still have some change left over for some coke! It's what your aunt would have wanted, respect her with some good old-fashioned sex-for-cash.
I'll give you $3 for it, plus shipping. Do you have a support contract option? Because I'd be willing to shell out another $1.37 for that. Let the bidding commence.
I do expect Gentoo to come in the lead of the Linux distros having tried them all and found it the fastest in empircal testing...
Beautiful.
Back a while, when gentoo was still had the smell of pop novelty, you would hear all this great stuff about how gentoo distros were the fastest, something about being able to specify --funroll-all-the-bad-loopies and --enable-r0xor-opts and --omit-random-instructions to the compiler. Of course, all these claims of gentoo's speed have never been backed up. On the contrary, the only results we've seen published tend to indicate that you average gentoo distro is composed of slower-than-average or average applications.
These days, we hear the new mantras of the gentoo-fanboys: it's not the speed (good thing!) that they use gentoo for, but instead the ease of use or robust package management or configuration flexibility. That's great and all, but it's all a bunch of green-is-my-favorite-color kind of advocacy: opinionated, unsupported, and unconvincing. People who've gone through the long laborious pain of installing gentoo (reminiscent of slackware 3.0 and libc upgrades, what year is it again?), and then having wasted the effort on a system that will probably spend more cycles compiling itself than serving the users, they justify the waste with a belief that their system is better managed or more finely tuned or whatever. Emphasis on whatever.
Of course, none of the supposed benefits of gentoo are backed with anything approaching rigorous analysis. Instead we get vague anecdotes and slashdot fanboyism. When we inevitably learn that the gentoo portage system is riddled with problems, conflicting package maintenance mechanisms and policy, broken and overtweaked package scripts, and that the whole thing needs a certain amount of voodoo to work, the gentoo boys will probably come up with some other reason why it is the one distro to rule them all.
The rest of will just wait for the results of your empirical studies with smiles on our faces!
You assume he was modded up "informative" for the link to the duped local
newsrag article. I disagree, it's obious he was modded up for these portions of
his post:
I live in Utah...
Very informative. I didn't know jlechem lived in Utah. Did you know he lived
in Utah? I would guess few slashdot readers knew that. Now we all do. If
I'm ever in Utah, I know I can pop over to jlechem's house for a beer and
nachos and Mormon apologetics.
I just was reading it on lunch at work...
More +1 informative revelations from jlechem.
Good stuff, I'm sure you'll agree, so be kind to the moderators on this one.
This works like you want with Firebird. Select link somwehere, go to browser, click on url bar, entire url is highligted, hit del, middle click, the correct link shows up. YMMV.
That statements about as true as your average bumper sticker. Never trust anyone who thinks slogans are an accurate picture of the world (except this one).
Yet here you are, a man of your immense importance and responsibility, responding in this very forum that you (is this you? who is you? we'll never no) hold in such ill-regard. If you ever can break away from you heroic efforts to have a life and bear the weight of the world on your shoulders, I'll be waiting here for you so that we can have another scintillating drive-by conversation!!!! Glued to the monitor and eternally yours, Scotch.
I'd respond to you in full if I you would just log in. I might even tell you you're wrong and why, but you'll have to log in and see, I'm not going to spoil it.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you realize you're too stupid to see the analogy between his (your?) attacks on some hack and my attacks on his (your?) journal? You probably do realize it, which is why you chose to post cowardly.
What in the world do you hope to accomplish with your worthless journal entries?
Uncertainty is built into the fabric of the universe. Read some physics books. For some systems, predictability is impossible.
If you had meant us to read very large as industrial, why didn't you just write industrial?
Just curious (read: baffled (read: confused) by this common (read: prevelant on slashdot (read: idiot funhouse)) idiom (read (read: interpet and understand writing): little bit of stupidity (read: you)).
Sorry, couldn't resist.
Nobody wants to see a couple ACs arguing like school girls. Log in or shut up, asshat.
I've been running windows off and on since version 1.0 and small versions of MS-DOS before/during that time, and while version compatibility is pretty good, it's not nearly as good as good as you or the OP make it out to be. DLL hell in the 3.1 and win95 days was a nightmare.
If the .exe is statically linked perhaps, otherwise, you're going to have all kinds of library problems when moving the sam app between win 95, win 98, win 2k, and win XP. Keep in mind for earlier OSes in the chain, apps frequently shipped with their own shared libraries causing other apps or even the whole system to break.
I'm not sure about device drivers for Windows, but I would be suprised if there weren't problems with using win 95/98 device drivers with win XP.
Not to say that updading linux is painfree, I just think you're overstating the case for microsoft products. C library upgrades aren't a big deal, most distros contain compatibility libraries for older versions. There were some serious issues with libc upgrades, but that was years ago. It's really a non-issue in my development experience. Other libraries cause more headaches than libc.
Attn Mods: How a post that intends to comment on the strain imposed on developers for linux kernel and libc upgrades and also says this "it's been a long time since I've been active in Linux development" can get modded up to +5 informative is beyond me. Insightful or perhaps inciteful, but not informative.
A good (or merely ok) compiler will generate the same instructions for both "i = i + 1;" and "i++;" However, in the spirit of generic programming, one should typically get in the habit of avoiding temporaries explicitly, because if "i" is a user defined type, you'll want to use "++i;" to avoid the temporary if you can get away with it. This is obviously c++ I'm talking about here.
Joking about bombs at airports is expressly prohibited. Joking about viruses on weblogs isn't. Get a grip coward, don't let the man take your free speech away.
For $7000, you could have a week with a hooker like Julia Roberts and still have some change left over for some coke! It's what your aunt would have wanted, respect her with some good old-fashioned sex-for-cash.
You said "boxen". I hereby lower my previous bid to $2.75.
Beautiful.
Back a while, when gentoo was still had the smell of pop novelty, you would hear all this great stuff about how gentoo distros were the fastest, something about being able to specify --funroll-all-the-bad-loopies and --enable-r0xor-opts and --omit-random-instructions to the compiler. Of course, all these claims of gentoo's speed have never been backed up. On the contrary, the only results we've seen published tend to indicate that you average gentoo distro is composed of slower-than-average or average applications.
These days, we hear the new mantras of the gentoo-fanboys: it's not the speed (good thing!) that they use gentoo for, but instead the ease of use or robust package management or configuration flexibility. That's great and all, but it's all a bunch of green-is-my-favorite-color kind of advocacy: opinionated, unsupported, and unconvincing. People who've gone through the long laborious pain of installing gentoo (reminiscent of slackware 3.0 and libc upgrades, what year is it again?), and then having wasted the effort on a system that will probably spend more cycles compiling itself than serving the users, they justify the waste with a belief that their system is better managed or more finely tuned or whatever. Emphasis on whatever.
Of course, none of the supposed benefits of gentoo are backed with anything approaching rigorous analysis. Instead we get vague anecdotes and slashdot fanboyism. When we inevitably learn that the gentoo portage system is riddled with problems, conflicting package maintenance mechanisms and policy, broken and overtweaked package scripts, and that the whole thing needs a certain amount of voodoo to work, the gentoo boys will probably come up with some other reason why it is the one distro to rule them all.
The rest of will just wait for the results of your empirical studies with smiles on our faces!
I'd rather emerge my fist with your face. ;)
It's still the shift operator, it just happens to be overloaded for streams. You have your arrows backwards, too. Should be 'cout << "blah";'
elvis? use vim
Very informative. I didn't know jlechem lived in Utah. Did you know he lived in Utah? I would guess few slashdot readers knew that. Now we all do. If I'm ever in Utah, I know I can pop over to jlechem's house for a beer and nachos and Mormon apologetics.
More +1 informative revelations from jlechem.
Good stuff, I'm sure you'll agree, so be kind to the moderators on this one.
Yeah, but the people who know what you mean don't need the answer to the question. Elucicate, oh mystical one.
HTH
That statements about as true as your average bumper sticker. Never trust anyone who thinks slogans are an accurate picture of the world (except this one).
Yet here you are, a man of your immense importance and responsibility, responding in this very forum that you (is this you? who is you? we'll never no) hold in such ill-regard. If you ever can break away from you heroic efforts to have a life and bear the weight of the world on your shoulders, I'll be waiting here for you so that we can have another scintillating drive-by conversation!!!! Glued to the monitor and eternally yours, Scotch.
I'd respond to you in full if I you would just log in. I might even tell you you're wrong and why, but you'll have to log in and see, I'm not going to spoil it.