There's no reason why it couldn't. The underlying code can still live in a collection of.h/.c/.cpp files, I'm just asking that the IDE present that code to the developer in a different way.
Another benefit of moving away from explicitly managing files is that the computer is probably in a better position than the user to decide how to present the code to the compiler / linker. It could also have benefits in source control where you could track the history of an individual function better (imagine if someone refactors a function from one file into another).
Files are not the best representation of code, just a convenient serialization.
I've been thinking about this for a while and I think we do need a new generation of IDE which isn't based around showing source files in tabs, but rather code snippets (functions, class definitions etc.) on some kind of desktop. When I'm debugging code I don't want to jump through X files, I just want to see the X related functions so I can understand the programs flow etc.
Surely of more concern is that the number of Firefox users has stalled for the last year? In the same period Chrome has gained > 5% and it's rate is accelerating.
The Guardian is a left wing paper, probably dangerously left wing by US standards, but it's not a tabloid of the same ilk as the Daily Mail or the Sun.
There has to be some middle ground / compromise in this battle.
Producers need to acknowledge that making digital copies is not the same as physical theft.
Consumers need to acknowledge that massive wholesale copyright infringement isn't good.
How about limiting the copyright period for a work to when the producers has recovered their legitimate production costs * X (X to be debated)? Producers won't be driven out of business, consumers will get a chance to get their hands on the work for free in a reasonable time frame.
A university spokesman said: “UCL does not approve of or condone this site. We therefore advised the student to take the site down, but he declined to do this. UCL has no jurisdiction over the site, as it is not UCL-hosted. We have, however, taken disciplinary action against the student for bringing the college into disrepute and he has been fined.”
I am a profession game developer (animation programmer) and programming is only one discipline, probably less than a third of the staff, that it takes to make a game.
PC / 360 / PS3 game development is a massive undertaking these days with team sizes in the several hundreds. There are plenty of people in these teams (designers, artists, level designers, production etc.) who have no experience in programming.
Even within the programming staff the "close to the metal" programmers are limited in numbers. Most performance optimizations are made at the algorithm level, not the fancy assembler trick level.
The problem with all of the Apollo and Shuttle era technologies that they don't scale. We're never going colonize anywhere sending six people at a time.
If we define the problem as building a spacecraft capable of transporting 1000 people to Mars with equipment to support them for 10 years, and that it should be able to make this journey four times a year for the next 50 years, you would have to come up with a solution that is based on fundamentally different principles.
The first powered aircraft that where built share similar principles to our largest air transports today. I believe Apollo and the Shuttle are not going to share principles with the spacecraft we colonize the solar system with.
(full disclosure, I worked for GW for a year back in 1995)
I don't disagree that their behavior is shady and underhanded, but if you're signing a contract with all these restrictions surely alarm bells should be going off. It's only sensible then that you should do some research into what you're getting yourself into.
It just sounds like classic selling your soul to the devil for short term gain.
I don't get this whining about contracts that have been freely entered into. If it's so bad, why do people (you?) agree to their terms? Just don't sell Games Workshop product, sell something else.
There seems to be a lot of hate for tabs-on-top but there is good evidence that it improves usability as it takes advantage of Fitt's Law. In particular, interface elements which are placed on the edge of the screen effectively becomes infinitely tall or wide and a much easier target for a user to hit.
Slashdot Mirror
Expand the pool of candidates applying for the job.
I've checked in the fix...
There's no reason why it couldn't. The underlying code can still live in a collection of .h/.c/.cpp files, I'm just asking that the IDE present that code to the developer in a different way.
Yep, but without the eye bleeding UI ;)
Another benefit of moving away from explicitly managing files is that the computer is probably in a better position than the user to decide how to present the code to the compiler / linker. It could also have benefits in source control where you could track the history of an individual function better (imagine if someone refactors a function from one file into another).
From the article:
Files are not the best representation of code, just a convenient serialization.
I've been thinking about this for a while and I think we do need a new generation of IDE which isn't based around showing source files in tabs, but rather code snippets (functions, class definitions etc.) on some kind of desktop. When I'm debugging code I don't want to jump through X files, I just want to see the X related functions so I can understand the programs flow etc.
Surely of more concern is that the number of Firefox users has stalled for the last year? In the same period Chrome has gained > 5% and it's rate is accelerating.
The Guardian is a left wing paper, probably dangerously left wing by US standards, but it's not a tabloid of the same ilk as the Daily Mail or the Sun.
Graphing Calculator - $1.99 on the app store right now.
There has to be some middle ground / compromise in this battle.
Producers need to acknowledge that making digital copies is not the same as physical theft.
Consumers need to acknowledge that massive wholesale copyright infringement isn't good.
How about limiting the copyright period for a work to when the producers has recovered their legitimate production costs * X (X to be debated)? Producers won't be driven out of business, consumers will get a chance to get their hands on the work for free in a reasonable time frame.
Follow the logic...
Piracy = !Bad
Piracy = Copyright Infringement
GPL = Copyright
GPL Infringment = !Bad
Well, I'm off to infringe the GPL as it's not bad to do that apparently.
A university spokesman said: “UCL does not approve of or condone this site. We therefore advised the student to take the site down, but he declined to do this. UCL has no jurisdiction over the site, as it is not UCL-hosted. We have, however, taken disciplinary action against the student for bringing the college into disrepute and he has been fined.”
Another triumph for Slashdot accuracy...
6. Get a rubber stamp made of the word PLEASE.
Interesting and providing the link was useful. It allowed me to find my own quote from that article:
The author freely admits that there is no way to back up his claims of what Mitterrand apparently said.
I am a profession game developer (animation programmer) and programming is only one discipline, probably less than a third of the staff, that it takes to make a game.
PC / 360 / PS3 game development is a massive undertaking these days with team sizes in the several hundreds. There are plenty of people in these teams (designers, artists, level designers, production etc.) who have no experience in programming.
Even within the programming staff the "close to the metal" programmers are limited in numbers. Most performance optimizations are made at the algorithm level, not the fancy assembler trick level.
The problem with all of the Apollo and Shuttle era technologies that they don't scale. We're never going colonize anywhere sending six people at a time.
If we define the problem as building a spacecraft capable of transporting 1000 people to Mars with equipment to support them for 10 years, and that it should be able to make this journey four times a year for the next 50 years, you would have to come up with a solution that is based on fundamentally different principles.
The first powered aircraft that where built share similar principles to our largest air transports today. I believe Apollo and the Shuttle are not going to share principles with the spacecraft we colonize the solar system with.
P.S. I'm a big space elevator fan :)
A fully-pimped out iPad is $1,000.00 (anyone who buys the base model is going to experience lunch-bag letdown within 6 months).
I call bullshit! The top of the range model costs $829.99. http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_ipad/family/ipad
I actually agree with you, but your fighting a lost cause here.
The George Bernard Shaw quote would seem to apply: "I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig, you get dirty; and besides, the pig likes it."
Word 2010 supports ligatures.
(full disclosure, I worked for GW for a year back in 1995)
I don't disagree that their behavior is shady and underhanded, but if you're signing a contract with all these restrictions surely alarm bells should be going off. It's only sensible then that you should do some research into what you're getting yourself into.
It just sounds like classic selling your soul to the devil for short term gain.
I don't get this whining about contracts that have been freely entered into. If it's so bad, why do people (you?) agree to their terms? Just don't sell Games Workshop product, sell something else.
This is not entirely correct. You don't need a license to view catch-up programmes but you do need one for live simulcast programming.
Do I need a TV licence to watch programmes on BBC iPlayer?
Wikipedia currently doesn't support downloading complete image dumps. I guess it has something to do with the 2.8 terrabyte file size.
Most game developers I've worked with cut their programming teeth on PCs as either bedroom programmers or at school/uni.
Everything I know about 360 and PS2/3 programming I learned on the job with 360 and PS2/3 dev kits.
There seems to be a lot of hate for tabs-on-top but there is good evidence that it improves usability as it takes advantage of Fitt's Law. In particular, interface elements which are placed on the edge of the screen effectively becomes infinitely tall or wide and a much easier target for a user to hit.
I'm calling bullshit on this. The Wii is not more powerful than the most powerful gaming machines of a few years ago.
Just take a look at the technical specifications for the Wii.
Compare them with the requirements for running Unreal Tournament 2004 or Doom 3 and you can see that the Wii is not in that league at all.
The Wii is essentially a suped up GameCube with an innovative input method.