Did you provide a decent source? Are you willing to provide a link to this particular incident? Not saying you're wrong, but it's possible there's another side to this.
Yes, indeed, but in a conflict-of-interest halfway-house sort of way: the.Net codebase remains entirely separate from Mono, presumably because MS wants Windows to be the best place to run C# code, but they also want to be able to say C# is genuinely cross-platform. HotSpot, however, runs on just about everything.
Yeah... not really, no. Suppose there's a name-collision between C functions in two different libraries you're using. Better get the link-order right. You need to know the way that linking concepts interact with with inline functions, static functions, and templates. C++ member-functions always have external linkage. Forward declarations of template classes to reduce compile-times. The magic that goes on enforcing the One Definition Rule in the face of templates. None of these concerns arise in Java. In Java,.class files act as both the header and the dynamic library, and it 'just works'.
Atop all that, you may need to chose a cross-platform build-system like CMake, and maintain its makefiles. In Java you normally have either a NetBeans project or an Eclipse project, and I believe the two are trivially converted. In C++, getting a completely portable codebase but with an autotools build system, to build in Visual Studio through CMake, might take some real doing.
Also, Urkki is right - not sure where you're getting this idea than each function gets its own object file.
Do shut up and take your obtuse time-wasting elsewhere. Sigh I'll bite anyway.
Which language did you learn first? Which language did you learn second? I suspect the second took you less time to learn than the first, but I suspect also that it was still a non-trivial learning experience.
Being a "programmer" absolutely does not mean you are able to pick up a new language and get your head round it in a few short hours. That is my point.
I can use any one of those languages, and have in the past
So you can use C, C++, and COBOL. So, three procedural/OOP languages, then. If you were tasked with bug-fixing a Haskell code-base, you'd be facing totally alien programming concepts. Your idea of I am not defined by a language goes out the window, as you realise you aren't a competent functional programmer.
You only need to learn one oo procedure based language. All others are just a book exercise.
I guess C++ doesn't count as an 'OO language', then, because you sure as hell can't take a Java programmer and turn them into a competent C++ programmer overnight.
This whole idea of programming languages share the same basic concepts, so once you can program in one language, it's easy to learn new languages needs to die. You cannot take a Java or PHP programmer and have them learn to make proper use of C++, or Lisp, or Haskell, or assembler, or even C, without considerable effort. Even just the compile/link model of C takes some real work to get used to.
Oh, and that in Java, the 'culture' is to deliberately avoid anything non-standard or specific to any JVM. In the C# world, though, there are things like WinForms: vital parts of the 'ecosystem' which are platform-specific and non-standard.
C# never enjoyed that confidence, which is why there's precious little C# work done on the non-Windows OS's.
Well, let's be clear: it's not just because Sun had more goodwill than Microsoft.
For a start, Sun made JVMs for all major platforms. Microsoft made.Net for Windows only. They made Silverlight for Windows and Mac, granted, but never even a nod to Linux. Mono had to make its own way.
Indeed. A 'perfectly center' source, or rather, a source written with a political bias which is the mean of the positions on the spectrum of two parties, might be considered biased by both. Likewise a perfect unbiased source (if such a thing can exist) might not reflect the world-view of either of two parties, and so again might be accused of bias.
It doesn't get a pass. Neither do you. I can ask you for citations. I can't ask the article for citations. If in doubt, I'm afraid I'm inclined to give more weight to a random website than to a random slashdotter.
Writing an (unoriginal) article without citations is bad (unless you know, proper journalistic reasons). Challenging that article whilst providing no citations is worse: now I'm left with no idea who to believe.
Slashdot Mirror
them
Nice generalisation, there.
There's an analogy to be made with employment law. 'Right to hire' is not an idea that gets much sympathy in Europe.
Did you provide a decent source? Are you willing to provide a link to this particular incident? Not saying you're wrong, but it's possible there's another side to this.
Haha. Oh dear.
Surely this sort of thing hurts eBay's image - aren't they motivated to stamp on this stuff?
Errr... what? You may have noticed that nothing lasts forever.
From the eBay page:
It's a nvidia chipset if you think it's a fake one so please don't bid thank you
Is this really definitive proof that it's a fake?
To Steam's credit, they too provide Indie Game: The Movie without DRM. You can just pull out the file after it's downloaded.
Indeed. And yet, in Java, it's impossible for me to accidentally shoot myself in the face with pointer arithmetic.
I use C++, and like it in its way, but you don't have much of a point.
Of course, the C standard library itself is hardly a shining example of secure library design.
Yeah.... we're discussing California law and Google's driverless cars. You might have noticed.
Most "driverless car" situations involve a human with controls sitting on the other side of a radio signal connection...
Uh... no, no they most certainly do not. Where are you getting this?
our ISPs are not above direct HTTP injection just to let you know you're approaching the bandwidth cap
It's shit like this...
It sounds like their intentions are good with that particular case though, if I'm understanding correctly. I'd far prefer an SMS, personally...
Mono had development support from Microsoft
Yes, indeed, but in a conflict-of-interest halfway-house sort of way: the .Net codebase remains entirely separate from Mono, presumably because MS wants Windows to be the best place to run C# code, but they also want to be able to say C# is genuinely cross-platform. HotSpot, however, runs on just about everything.
Yeah... not really, no. Suppose there's a name-collision between C functions in two different libraries you're using. Better get the link-order right. You need to know the way that linking concepts interact with with inline functions, static functions, and templates. C++ member-functions always have external linkage. Forward declarations of template classes to reduce compile-times. The magic that goes on enforcing the One Definition Rule in the face of templates. None of these concerns arise in Java. In Java, .class files act as both the header and the dynamic library, and it 'just works'.
Atop all that, you may need to chose a cross-platform build-system like CMake, and maintain its makefiles. In Java you normally have either a NetBeans project or an Eclipse project, and I believe the two are trivially converted. In C++, getting a completely portable codebase but with an autotools build system, to build in Visual Studio through CMake, might take some real doing.
Also, Urkki is right - not sure where you're getting this idea than each function gets its own object file.
Do shut up and take your obtuse time-wasting elsewhere. Sigh I'll bite anyway.
Which language did you learn first? Which language did you learn second? I suspect the second took you less time to learn than the first, but I suspect also that it was still a non-trivial learning experience.
Being a "programmer" absolutely does not mean you are able to pick up a new language and get your head round it in a few short hours. That is my point.
I can use any one of those languages, and have in the past
So you can use C, C++, and COBOL. So, three procedural/OOP languages, then. If you were tasked with bug-fixing a Haskell code-base, you'd be facing totally alien programming concepts. Your idea of I am not defined by a language goes out the window, as you realise you aren't a competent functional programmer.
You only need to learn one oo procedure based language. All others are just a book exercise.
I guess C++ doesn't count as an 'OO language', then, because you sure as hell can't take a Java programmer and turn them into a competent C++ programmer overnight.
This whole idea of programming languages share the same basic concepts, so once you can program in one language, it's easy to learn new languages needs to die. You cannot take a Java or PHP programmer and have them learn to make proper use of C++, or Lisp, or Haskell, or assembler, or even C, without considerable effort. Even just the compile/link model of C takes some real work to get used to.
Oh, and that in Java, the 'culture' is to deliberately avoid anything non-standard or specific to any JVM. In the C# world, though, there are things like WinForms: vital parts of the 'ecosystem' which are platform-specific and non-standard.
C# never enjoyed that confidence, which is why there's precious little C# work done on the non-Windows OS's.
Well, let's be clear: it's not just because Sun had more goodwill than Microsoft.
For a start, Sun made JVMs for all major platforms. Microsoft made .Net for Windows only. They made Silverlight for Windows and Mac, granted, but never even a nod to Linux. Mono had to make its own way.
It has it's niggles (if I were king I'd change oh so many things)
You're not the only one.
Indeed. A 'perfectly center' source, or rather, a source written with a political bias which is the mean of the positions on the spectrum of two parties, might be considered biased by both. Likewise a perfect unbiased source (if such a thing can exist) might not reflect the world-view of either of two parties, and so again might be accused of bias.
Did you reply to the wrong comment?
Not necessarily. A libertarian-slanted, or communist-slanted article might be accused of bias by all sides.
It doesn't get a pass. Neither do you. I can ask you for citations. I can't ask the article for citations. If in doubt, I'm afraid I'm inclined to give more weight to a random website than to a random slashdotter.
Writing an (unoriginal) article without citations is bad (unless you know, proper journalistic reasons). Challenging that article whilst providing no citations is worse: now I'm left with no idea who to believe.
Anyway, thanks for the sources.
So essentially you're just saying What the parent said?
Not saying you're wrong, but: {{citation needed}}. Right now it's your word vs the article.