I just felt like I had to stick up for php5. The transformation between php 4 and 5 was remarkable. It is a real language now, with enough native oop features to create real grown-up apis and frameworks (see Zend Framework).
When was the last time you looked at php? The "php is ugly but useful for the web because of its built-in functions" meme is from 2 releases ago (php3).
I've been using php 5.2 for largish web projects for a while now, and find its grammar and object model to be really nice. Seriously.
PHP > 5 is very different, making it truly multiparadigmatic (or at least duoparadigmatic). Visibility keywords, interfaces, and namespaces in 5.3 make it acceptable for writing a framework. See http://www.zendframework.com/.
Of course you're right about drupal, as all the cms's (like nearly all other big php software) are stuck in the pre-oop days. So-called "api's" which use magic constant parsing to implement home-baked patterns... No need for that now in php, as the real stuff exists. Api's and frameworks are possible now... All of these projects are just too titanic to be moved in a different direction.
Overall, I think your point is correct. But I think you may have some misconceptions about the shuttle. The operating software is amazingly compact (700k I think) and written in a high-level language. The total memory available is just 1 megabyte. While it's true that there are multiple computers, the reasoning behind this is redundancy (there are five, are think, that check eachother out for reliability). So in reality - tiny software environment (loaded from tapes!), 1 MB total system memory, and one kind of wimpy (but EXTREMELY simple and reliable) computer.
Quite right. If wikipedia results are favored, or if this feature makes it in to a production version of the interface, it's sure to re-ignite the wikipedia accuracy debate.
(Not that I have anything against wikipedia, btw. Well, not that much against it, anyway.)
I'm a bit surprised that TFA has no mention of what must be the most controversial feature: integrated wikipedia. Does the foundation get anything from google for this?
Slashdot Mirror
You, sir, have a point.
I just felt like I had to stick up for php5. The transformation between php 4 and 5 was remarkable. It is a real language now, with enough native oop features to create real grown-up apis and frameworks (see Zend Framework).
When was the last time you looked at php? The "php is ugly but useful for the web because of its built-in functions" meme is from 2 releases ago (php3).
I've been using php 5.2 for largish web projects for a while now, and find its grammar and object model to be really nice. Seriously.
Therefore, there is no value in the government's environmental agency knowing how much energy data centers are using.
Despite your beliefs, there are some things that national governments excel in. Surveys of issues of a national scope is one of them.
Slightly OT: I would love to know how much power the NSA datacenters suck down.
This is a big reason I can't stand television news, and here it is on /. And the source? A CareerBuilder study?! WTF?
And, anecdotally, at least in Austin (where we have a nice park system), the IT set seems pretty fit. Bicycles, kung fu, wii, etc...
http://xkcd.com/356/
I agree.
My pet theory is that they are actually out to destroy competing application platforms, in this case LAMP(php) + YUI.
PHP > 5 is very different, making it truly multiparadigmatic (or at least duoparadigmatic). Visibility keywords, interfaces, and namespaces in 5.3 make it acceptable for writing a framework. See http://www.zendframework.com/ .
Of course you're right about drupal, as all the cms's (like nearly all other big php software) are stuck in the pre-oop days. So-called "api's" which use magic constant parsing to implement home-baked patterns... No need for that now in php, as the real stuff exists. Api's and frameworks are possible now... All of these projects are just too titanic to be moved in a different direction.
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=9F74AFA03AA06A11 , just in case someone hasn't dug on these yet (my personal fave).
Why would you not expect to see dicksucking on Sunday?
The link seems to go to a totally pedestrian arstechnica article. Anyone know how that worked?
Overall, I think your point is correct. But I think you may have some misconceptions about the shuttle. The operating software is amazingly compact (700k I think) and written in a high-level language. The total memory available is just 1 megabyte. While it's true that there are multiple computers, the reasoning behind this is redundancy (there are five, are think, that check eachother out for reliability). So in reality - tiny software environment (loaded from tapes!), 1 MB total system memory, and one kind of wimpy (but EXTREMELY simple and reliable) computer.
For whatever it's worth, here's some wikipedia.
Quite right. If wikipedia results are favored, or if this feature makes it in to a production version of the interface, it's sure to re-ignite the wikipedia accuracy debate.
(Not that I have anything against wikipedia, btw. Well, not that much against it, anyway.)
I'm a bit surprised that TFA has no mention of what must be the most controversial feature: integrated wikipedia. Does the foundation get anything from google for this?