..is the way to gets things done. You are welcome to drool over stupid desktop themes as much as you want. While normal people just use there applications and computer for work.
..out of the box compression will drop it. Properly selected one will not, and will be more efficient than Fourier, MA or other denoising technique. It is also very efficient for automating your analysis. Think machine vision.
I use wavelet transform too search for some features in time series data. Works excellent. Unlike windowed FT preserve important singularities.
WT is a broad subject, and it seemed to me you picked up one particular implementation that is not up to your goal. E-mail me if you want to discuss this problem, I am always interested in new applications:)
Wavelet based techniques are much better - less artifacts (no blockiness and other crap), smaller. But - most of algorythms are proprietory;(
BTW. The example in the post above - with a faint line - is exactly where DWT based techniques shine - they preserve singularity type structure in the data. Look up publications on wavelet denoising.
...then convert your design into C++. Java will force you into sensible design, and is much easier to use. Though memory management would be painful after Java...
Should ask Babayan's (Elbrus inventor) daughter, Osana, about that. Last what I heard from her, her dad was not very happy with how his team was working. Luck of funds etc. BTW - she leaves in Palo Alto... Rather natural.. Called brain drain.. (Say hello to myself) :) Hope she does not read this...:) In case she does - hi, how about Kirkwood this weekend..:)
Is there a problem to make bindings from C++? There is already C binding for QT, AFAIK.
And just how would you create your custom, derived widgets. If you are happy with a limited number of premade objects, then OK. But that is not an efficient approach.
Well I first wrote my analysis code in C. Then got a clue, and reused it as methods for C++ classes. No performance change - well if one spends hours inside a single method, why should there be any. But a better structure of the project allowed me to save days of debugging, allow for much better future reuse of the code etc. etc. Then I found a better way to arrange the process - it halfed execution time. I would have never discovered this clever way of organising things without proper OO code organization. OOP was not invented out os the blue - it IS more productive. Point is - if you do not worry about organising your code, you can concentrate on real performance issue, which is not the virtual pointers, but the general way you do things. As far as UI toolkit goes - OO is mandatory. If you want - you can implement it in assembler. It just will be pain to reuse and build upon.
first reference i found on the web
on
KDE 1.1 is out
·
· Score: 1
GTK+ is fine. I looked at it. If you just use what is there. But I need custom widgets. That behave like an object. Making it happen in C is a pain. It is not an OO language. Yes, I can write a wrapper, but why not just to start from a good approach?
..would you create a compound widget with a clean interface for future reuse in C? With a procedural language you are limited (bound, if you wish) to a toolkit, which is very limiting. What if you want a Plot widget? A systemStatusMonitor widget that includes a plot widget? Now change it to a different type of plot.. so on. How would you use exeption handling? You just have to implemnt all OO functionality crawling on your knees. Ouch. I agree C++ is not the best. Personally, I am waiting for a good native before time compiler for Java (hello Cygnus:)
So you propose to put development effort into crappy hack of a toolkit, just because someone doesn't want to learn C++? What a waste of time.
...would you like to bind C++ to C? I thought the progress was moving in a direction from procedural to object-oriented programming. What C++ lacks that C has? (asctually, IMO, that's the probel with C++, but tastes aside). Compilers for some DSP? Are you using a window toolkit on a DSP?
Graphical tookit have to be object oriented, sorry, that's the only sane way to include asyncronyous, random user generated events. Of course it does not mean you have to use an OO language,- hell, you can find a way to code it in assembler,- but that (OO) surely does help. In any case, for anything resembling a good UI you will have to expand the toolkit, to match your needs and to create your own compund objects. It is to be done in the same language the toolkit is written in. And that's better be an OO language if you value your time. Just inherit from widgets you like, and create what you need and give it to other people to use. I do not even use a single default Component in Java or Widget in qt, only my own library, that does what I need. And you can use it too. What a pain in the ass to try to use C for such coding.
Slashdot Mirror
Our group converted to Linux from NT. How would they reverse it?
Ahh, why I bother to answer to morons.
Slow day
I guess I'm just stupid
Yes, you are.
Good whore makes more per hour then you do.
Fucking with ugly, smelly drag dealers.
Ability to make money off something does not imply it is a good technology.
When Linux wins, you will be doing 10 projects per month.
Of course you are just bragging. Stupid troll.
..immigration to Burma?
..is the way to gets things done. You are welcome to drool over stupid desktop themes as much as you want. While normal people just use there applications and computer for work.
...encrypted file system driver for Linux?
..is abacus.
You moron.
..out of the box compression will drop it.
:)
Properly selected one will not, and will be more efficient than Fourier, MA or other denoising technique. It is also very efficient for automating your analysis. Think machine vision.
I use wavelet transform too search for some features in time series data. Works excellent.
Unlike windowed FT preserve important singularities.
WT is a broad subject, and it seemed to me you picked up one particular implementation that is not up to your goal. E-mail me if you want to discuss this problem, I am always interested in new applications
...they are closer to fractals - zooming property is linked to self-similarity. That's what makes them good for edge detection and compression.
Wavelet based techniques are much better - less artifacts (no blockiness and other crap), smaller. ;(
But - most of algorythms are proprietory
BTW. The example in the post above - with a faint line - is exactly where DWT based techniques shine - they preserve singularity type structure in the data. Look up publications on wavelet denoising.
Good start page
..333 is not enough? Hydrodynamics simulations?
...then convert your design into C++.
Java will force you into sensible design, and is much easier to use.
Though memory management would be painful after Java...
Should ask Babayan's (Elbrus inventor) daughter, Osana, about that. Last what I heard from her, her dad was not very happy with how his team was working. Luck of funds etc. :) :)
BTW - she leaves in Palo Alto... Rather natural.. Called brain drain.. (Say hello to myself)
:)
Hope she does not read this...
In case she does - hi, how about Kirkwood this weekend..
..and how can I try it on x86 machine..
...not HTML - it is not the same, is it? (sorry, I am rather dumb in this area)
... get KDE 1.1 and be happy ;)
Not that he is truly evil, and yes, he is talented, but his attitude sucks big time and cause trouble.
Just IMO.
I had my classes in Russia where they taught Pascal and C
FORTRAN and BASIC anyone?
What's LISP?
..if this is true - Sprint has some morons employed...
Is there a problem to make bindings from C++?
There is already C binding for QT, AFAIK.
And just how would you create your custom, derived widgets. If you are happy with a limited number of premade objects, then OK. But that is not an efficient approach.
Well I first wrote my analysis code in C. Then got a clue, and reused it as methods for C++ classes. No performance change - well if one spends hours inside a single method, why should there be any. But a better structure of the project allowed me to save days of debugging, allow for much better future reuse of the code etc. etc. Then I found a better way to arrange the process - it halfed execution time. I would have never discovered this clever way of organising things without proper OO code organization. OOP was not invented out os the blue - it IS more productive.
Point is - if you do not worry about organising your code, you can concentrate on real performance issue, which is not the virtual pointers, but the general way you do things.
As far as UI toolkit goes - OO is mandatory.
If you want - you can implement it in assembler. It just will be pain to reuse and build upon.
comparing C++ and C speed under EGCS
was this
Seems you are wrong..
damn bolsheviks..
GTK+ is fine. I looked at it. If you just use what is there. But I need custom widgets. That behave like an object. Making it happen in C is a pain. It is not an OO language. Yes, I can write a wrapper, but why not just to start from a good approach?
..would you create a compound widget with a clean interface for future reuse in C? With a procedural language you are limited (bound, if you wish) to a toolkit, which is very limiting. What if you want a Plot widget? A systemStatusMonitor widget that includes a plot widget? Now change it to a different type of plot.. so on. How would you use exeption handling? You just have to implemnt all OO functionality crawling on your knees. Ouch. :)
I agree C++ is not the best. Personally, I am waiting for a good native before time compiler for Java (hello Cygnus
So you propose to put development effort into crappy hack of a toolkit, just because someone doesn't want to learn C++? What a waste of time.
...would you like to bind C++ to C? I thought the progress was moving in a direction from procedural to object-oriented programming.
What C++ lacks that C has? (asctually, IMO, that's the probel with C++, but tastes aside).
Compilers for some DSP? Are you using a window toolkit on a DSP?
Graphical tookit have to be object oriented, sorry, that's the only sane way to include asyncronyous, random user generated events.
Of course it does not mean you have to use an OO language,- hell, you can find a way to code it in assembler,- but that (OO) surely does help.
In any case, for anything resembling a good UI you will have to expand the toolkit, to match your needs and to create your own compund objects. It is to be done in the same language the toolkit is written in. And that's better be an OO language if you value your time. Just inherit from widgets you like, and create what you need and give it to other people to use. I do not even use a single default Component in Java or Widget in qt, only my own library, that does what I need. And you can use it too. What a pain in the ass to try to use C for such coding.