I don't see anything in your post that absolves the parents from their responsibilities to watch their children. Especially if your children are at the age where they instinctively put things in their mouths, you need to watch them at all times.
The fact is that what you suggest is literally impossible.
If your friend has loaded guns lying around his house, is it the gun's fault for going off when the child picks it up?
No, but that of the friend, and that of lax gun regulation that allows him to have guns in the first place.
When your stack is limited to 1KB**, and any unintentional malloc could crash the entire application (or spacecraft), then C is absolutely your friend.
If you are writing stuff for a spacecraft, why not spend some cash in a decent computer? You are spending a megabuck on hardware, but have to live with 1k of stack? Sounds like bad engineering to me.
Rule 1 (language)
All C code shall conform to the ISO/IEC 9899-1999(E) standard for the C
programming language, with no reliance on undefined or unspecified
behavior.
That quote you show is a bit like a sign reading "when smoking at a gas station, make sure no hot ashes touch the ground".
The other rules in the JPL coding guidelines are also interesting.
What I find most "interesting" is that these are guidelines for C, a language known for having many features that make it unsafe. Heck, it is less safe than many dynamically typed languages out there.
IMO, good coding guidelines for mission-critical code in C shold be a lot shorter. Basically consisting in the text "C is unsafe. Please go program in something else, like Ada, OCaml, even Pascal. Avoid C++ like the plague though, its worse".
So you are saying that it's better that the US is now killing the Iraqis, rather than Saddam. Got it.
Firstly, they are killing each other in rather large numbers.
Secondly, what Atilla's post was getting at is that yes, it was progress to get rid of Saddam. I don't understand how you can debate that point.
Bush and Cheney were morons, otherwise they would never have been so gung-ho over the Irak thing. Everyone who knew a bit of history knew that once Saddam was gone, Irak was going to go down in civil war. But arguably, the Americans have actually made a very good job of keeping the thing from melting down. And gave the country a chance that would not be there if Saddam or his crazy son were still in power. All of this has cost the US a lot of lives and money. For very little return.
While speed for single and double floats is all well and good, I wonder - when will there finally be hardware support for 128 bit (quadruple precission) floats?
The last time I checked, Kali was some sort of VPN to tunnel IPX (NetWare protocol) over IP. It appears to have been popular when Warcraft II was around. Oh well, there are only so many names for things.
They could have called it Cali Linux, which would have been a little more original and also fitting.
'illicit' is meaningless when the term is applied by people who are no better than the 'crooks' they lock away.
As much as you, tantrum throwing AC, may want it, it is not at all meaningless. There is a difference between the rule of law as imposed by a nation, and whatever the crooks and rats that end up in jail are doing.
For example, If you use bitcoins for laundering money you deserve jail and will most likely get it. If BCs get used regularly for money laundering, they will be outlawed. And it will be good that way.
The first release candidate of Debian 7.0 "Wheezy" has been released as the official release of the "Squeeze" successor approaches in the coming months
and the rest is also misleading. So, basically, the original headline ammounts to a halfway acceptable honest mistake.
A moron who once had business cards with "I'm CEO, bitch !" thinks scientists are going to take him serious because of... what ? Money ? Dontlemmelaugh.
There are a lot of scientists in the world, and some of them are quite cynical and needy of recognition - and money, anyway. I don't think they'll have trouble getting rid of that money.
For Common Lisp there is the "infix" package, which you can just load as part of your program. You can write infix using a #i() reader macro. Thus, #i(1+1) is equivalent to (+ 1 1), etc.
Programmers that use Lisp or Scheme for a while end up using plain prefix. The percieved inconvenience of prefix notation is due to not being used to it. After a while you realize that prefix notation is a lot more readable and less error-prone than infix.
I.e., the ruling didn't do squat to help the defendants in this case.
No, because it was a purely commericial issue.
The clarification of the court concerns things like leaked documents that trigger a political scandal, which in the past have been successfully taken down on copyright grounds. The court has made it clear that it intends to stop this practice.
It is interesting that the court felt the need to clarify this issue even though it had no bearing on the case at hand.
Quite a few pages have hidden flash elements that are vital to the operation of the page. Most web music players, for instance. Blocking flash by default would break quite a few sites.
True, although many sites, especially fash-heavy ones are only bearable when broken.
The web music player issue can be solved in firefox with flashblock by right-clicking on the icon, and unblocking all flash content from that site.
Lisp 1.5 was the first widely distributed Lisp sytem (and it includied an interpreter AND a compiler). Many people have completely forgotten about it, but among its contributions were to pioneer dynamic programming languages (as are ruby, python, etc, etc) AND garbage collecting. And many other things. It was staggeringly innovative.
I don't see how it's either, since auto-complete is based on what people are entering as search terms. It's the result of an algorithm, not a human.
From a human point of view, his complaint has merit. I do not see why he should have to live with this just because it is an algorithm - whatever the legal terms.
Things which typical on-line systems don't do which publishers do:
- quality selection / control on articles (some do better on this than others)
- editors (for some reason, people take the content of text more seriously when it's to be printed)
- graphic artists to re-draw illustrations, colour correct and fix graphics (sure, you can just slap a.png on-line, but it's wasteful if instead it could be a nice re-drawn or re-created graph or chart done as a vector graphic)
Very little of this happens in maths journals, and when it happens, it is usually the editor that does it, and he does it for free. Or rather, payed by his employing institution, not by the publisher.
When the plots look ugly, it's usually the author who gets to fix them.
- designers to create pleasing layouts for a publication so that not everything written has a boring sameness and so that the layout is adapted to make for more efficient reading of a text.
I don't think any of that has happened in ages in maths. Perhaps the publishers pay for the cover illustrations, and a secreatary for handling correspondence, but everything else is done by people who are not paid by the publisher.
The simple truth for most people is that the difference between a hunting rifle and an "Assault Weapon" is that an assault weapon looks scary. Actual functionality doesn't really mater.
Well, if you carry a hunting rifle in NYC, that's pretty scary. I'd say ban them too.
Of the ~750 murders with firearms a year in NY, 5 were with rifles of any kind... So, banning "assault rifles" is nothing other than a feel good measure to make idiots feel like they accomplished something.
All of this is nothing more than a circle jerk. They don't care about preventing real violence. Like bureaucrats, they want to pretend they are solving the problem but are actually doing nothing.
You do not understand. They are pursuing a long term goal of banning firearms from private ownership. A little bit here, a little bit there, and a couple of decades later you can only own pea-shooters. And so on. Also, banning certain weapons means that if a crime is done with them, additional charges are forthcomming, which mean longer prison terms for people with assault weapons.
So, it's not solving the problem (which would be banning firearms, which won't fly), but moving a little bit in that direction. All of this, is, IMO, a good thing.
Well, I for one look forward to the mess these methods will cause in academia, where it is likely that they can be used to identify the authors of referee reports.
Slashdot Mirror
The fact is that what you suggest is literally impossible.
No, but that of the friend, and that of lax gun regulation that allows him to have guns in the first place.
If you are writing stuff for a spacecraft, why not spend some cash in a decent computer? You are spending a megabuck on hardware, but have to live with 1k of stack? Sounds like bad engineering to me.
In a world without wind - perhaps. Not in this one, though.
That quote you show is a bit like a sign reading "when smoking at a gas station, make sure no hot ashes touch the ground".
What I find most "interesting" is that these are guidelines for C, a language known for having many features that make it unsafe. Heck, it is less safe than many dynamically typed languages out there.
IMO, good coding guidelines for mission-critical code in C shold be a lot shorter. Basically consisting in the text "C is unsafe. Please go program in something else, like Ada, OCaml, even Pascal. Avoid C++ like the plague though, its worse".
Firstly, they are killing each other in rather large numbers.
Secondly, what Atilla's post was getting at is that yes, it was progress to get rid of Saddam. I don't understand how you can debate that point.
Bush and Cheney were morons, otherwise they would never have been so gung-ho over the Irak thing. Everyone who knew a bit of history knew that once Saddam was gone, Irak was going to go down in civil war. But arguably, the Americans have actually made a very good job of keeping the thing from melting down. And gave the country a chance that would not be there if Saddam or his crazy son were still in power. All of this has cost the US a lot of lives and money. For very little return.
While speed for single and double floats is all well and good, I wonder - when will there finally be hardware support for 128 bit (quadruple precission) floats?
That's a fairly naive point of view. I mean - why do you trust them?
They could have called it Cali Linux, which would have been a little more original and also fitting.
As much as you, tantrum throwing AC, may want it, it is not at all meaningless. There is a difference between the rule of law as imposed by a nation, and whatever the crooks and rats that end up in jail are doing.
For example, If you use bitcoins for laundering money you deserve jail and will most likely get it. If BCs get used regularly for money laundering, they will be outlawed. And it will be good that way.
I foresee that here will be quite some trouble when they finally release the Nexus-6...
Ok, but the first sentence in the article reads:
and the rest is also misleading. So, basically, the original headline ammounts to a halfway acceptable honest mistake.
There are a lot of scientists in the world, and some of them are quite cynical and needy of recognition - and money, anyway. I don't think they'll have trouble getting rid of that money.
For Common Lisp there is the "infix" package, which you can just load as part of your program. You can write infix using a #i() reader macro. Thus, #i(1+1) is equivalent to (+ 1 1), etc.
Programmers that use Lisp or Scheme for a while end up using plain prefix. The percieved inconvenience of prefix notation is due to not being used to it. After a while you realize that prefix notation is a lot more readable and less error-prone than infix.
No, because it was a purely commericial issue.
The clarification of the court concerns things like leaked documents that trigger a political scandal, which in the past have been successfully taken down on copyright grounds. The court has made it clear that it intends to stop this practice.
It is interesting that the court felt the need to clarify this issue even though it had no bearing on the case at hand.
No Blaupunkt Dolby Supermega Stereo thing? LAME!
True, although many sites, especially fash-heavy ones are only bearable when broken.
The web music player issue can be solved in firefox with flashblock by right-clicking on the icon, and unblocking all flash content from that site.
Lisp 1.5 was the first widely distributed Lisp sytem (and it includied an interpreter AND a compiler). Many people have completely forgotten about it, but among its contributions were to pioneer dynamic programming languages (as are ruby, python, etc, etc) AND garbage collecting. And many other things. It was staggeringly innovative.
From a human point of view, his complaint has merit. I do not see why he should have to live with this just because it is an algorithm - whatever the legal terms.
Very little of this happens in maths journals, and when it happens, it is usually the editor that does it, and he does it for free. Or rather, payed by his employing institution, not by the publisher.
When the plots look ugly, it's usually the author who gets to fix them.
I don't think any of that has happened in ages in maths. Perhaps the publishers pay for the cover illustrations, and a secreatary for handling correspondence, but everything else is done by people who are not paid by the publisher.
Well, if you carry a hunting rifle in NYC, that's pretty scary. I'd say ban them too.
You do not understand. They are pursuing a long term goal of banning firearms from private ownership. A little bit here, a little bit there, and a couple of decades later you can only own pea-shooters. And so on. Also, banning certain weapons means that if a crime is done with them, additional charges are forthcomming, which mean longer prison terms for people with assault weapons.
So, it's not solving the problem (which would be banning firearms, which won't fly), but moving a little bit in that direction. All of this, is, IMO, a good thing.
That - and a significant portion of those slaves stand behind this slavery and call it "freedom".
Well, I for one look forward to the mess these methods will cause in academia, where it is likely that they can be used to identify the authors of referee reports.
Because that isn't reality?
Define 'have'. Please read something about about the monetary system first.
Because it is a nation, with a banking system, an army, etc.
It's something totally different than a family with an income. Just like an nuclear airplane carrier is something completely different from a bicycle.
Why can't you just get some clue?
Then it wouldn't be possible to patent that. I wouldn't mind.