Too true. I think that 50% of Americans beleive that 'little green men' exist, in France when we get hired we are usually tested with a 'graphological analysis' which is as much scientific as atrology, etc.
But it gets really interesting when you think about religions: having blind faith in unprovable stories.. Religions are really the total opposite of scepticisms.
Well the solution to stupid order of arguments issue is to use languages where you call function with the name of the argument instead of the position: while it makes function call a bit longer to write, it's far more readable and you have much less risk of making a mistake (and it's far easier to debug if you still make a mistake).
IMHO every function call where the function takes more than one parameter should be done by name, not position.
Because BeOS is mostly dead (yes I know there is Zeta but how long will it live?) and that Linux failed to provide the same speed/responsiveness as BeOS did? On much slower hardware, BeOS felt much faster and responsive than 10 times more powerful hardware under Windows or Linux.. That's quite normal that BeOS users want to reproduce the experience!
Unfortunately I think that it is a huge undertaking: I don't think that Mozilla ported on BeOS/Haiku would feel more responsive than it is under Windows/Linux (bleach).. so the apps will be a problem.
As those two opinion were so wildly different, I had a look at their CVS archive: to summarize: jlarocco is right, please mod him up (or mod the GP down as troll as he deserves it, lying).
mplayer.c is quite readable with good names for variables,I didn't notice abuse of void* nor unreadable code.
The only bad parts is that the main function is huge and the file itself is big, but this is not the disaster the GP said. Diclaimer: I've only looked to mplayer.c not the other files.
Sure but it's also highly visible: if you're allergic to something, would you like to have to trust that the helper will have a reader-gizmo which can read your medical history? What happens if you're travelling?
A chain is *much* more visible, plus it could also contain your medical history in a chip, which is much easier to update.
OK so you don't need keys, what happens when their is a power failure? You're locked out. To prevent this, you have to have keys stored somewhere to avoid the problem, the same thing you do when you use keys to avoid being stuck when you loose your keys, so there is no safety advantage.
For me this looks like a stupid thing to do, the only "real" advantage is the 15min of fame of having implants, it would be much more intelligent to use watch or mobile phones to do the same thing..
That said, even currently even normal SW projects are difficult, concurrent projects are harder to make, much harder to debug, plus exploiting efficiently concurrency needs to be aware of the number of core: now your software must run efficiently on both single core and bi-core CPUs, which is of course harder, and when they will be 4-way cores..
You're playing on words: to have a functionnal computer with WindowsXP, you *have* to enable the firewall at the installation, otherwise you'll get infected, have a slow computer, crashes, etc.. So installing XP is not simple as many users understand don't understand firewalls, installing XPSP2 is simple yes (remember a majority of users have XP CDs not XP-SP2).
If you have to reinstall twice your computer because you forgot to activate the firewall before connecting to the Internet, I cannot call this an "easy installation", tricky yes.
Bah restricting in software is just plain stupid: if you put restriction in the driver, how can you prevent the user using a driver for a different country where say the output power or the channel he wants is allowed?
I bet that 4% is the number of chips sold to Apple not 4% of the revenue: IBM is making also micro-controllers PPC which are much cheaper than PPC used by Apple so they bring less revenue by chip.
Of course IBM people use the figure which advantaged them more, but you're not obliged to be naive..
As for the NVidia guy, GPU are great for some usage, they *suck* mighty balls for other usage: they don't even have a 64-bit FPUs (in some case this might be worked around to compute a full precision result but it's not simple), GPUs are awful for single-threaded or branchy codes, etc.. Sure an Nvidia guy would like to have everything running on GPUs, but what do you expect?
As for the PhysX boards, yes specialised solution works better for specialised needs than general purpose solution, so what? You're comparing apples and oranges.
It's not so simple to install WindowsXP. You're forgetting that WindowsXP straight out of the box is quite insecure: many people will install XP, configure their internet access, download additionnal drivers and service pack and... get owned because they forgot to activate the firewall before going online!
If memory serves, an unpatched Windows XP will be owned in less than 10 minutes. Of course if you have an XPSP2 CD then the situation is better, but most people have only an XP CD..
Yes, concurrency isn't a new problem, but saying that it has 'plenty of solution' is going way overboard IMHO. There are many ways to attack the problem true, but it remains a very difficult thing to do.. Especially for 'normal' programs say a game engine which must be changed quickly because of a new idea, that is to say not 'multiplying two matrices' types of programs.
I think that the author should have added that the freedom to run doesn't work for those who don't have a computer, so free software programmers should provide free computer and free electricity to everybody! *Sigh*
FOSS developpers are free to develop software on whatever OS they want, sure they would have more users by going to windows but so what? That's not the point! Given the amount of free-software for Unix system apparently developpers prefer programming for Unix than for Windows and it's not even sure that they would get more contributors by using Windows instead of alternative OS..
You're right about the price of a computer includes the energy made to use it (and in Europe it also include the price to recycle it as this is rquired by the law). But it's still very hard to do some evaluation: if you keep your old computer, when you have to buy a new one (because the old one doesn't work anymore), the new computer will be cheaper and use less energy than if you buy a computer now, your formula doesn't take this into account..
So it's quite difficult to compute, plus you don't know when your computer is going to die, and if it's the HDD you can exchange it..
I don't know sure, the old computer is less efficient than a new one, but once you take into account the energy used to *make* the new computer, I doubt that you saved energy, more likely you wasted energy.
>SIZE is not the determining factor. TECHNIQUE is.
Well, in this case why does judo use weight category? It's because japanese masters lost to a huge guy (from netherland I think), I doubt that his technique was as good as their was, but he was good enough that this weight/size made a difference.
So in reality both matters very much! Same thing for 'ultimate fighting' the winners are always very huge guys..
As an aside: demonstration of aikido have always made me laugh, usually opponents run towards the aikido master and make big movements, whereas a smart opponent against an aikido guy who go close slowly and use his knee and elbows to attack. Making it much more difficult the aikido guy to defend himself.
>* How does a paint-on "laser" supercede a regular junction laser? Nobody said that it was superior, just easier to make.
>* Usually the denser a chip, the less need for wide paths (to cache, RAM). You're awfully wrong here: if you look at the history of x86 CPU, the chip density has increased a lot and at the same time, the datapath have been improved (increased frequency) *and* widened. The increased number of transistor and increased frequency allow the CPU to do more things, that's why it needs better datapath: better ALU, 32->64, vector units, dual channel RAM, etc all this needs wider datapath.
The thing is: even with 1 GB memory Firefox is quite often slow.. OK, it's a memory hungry program but using 150-200 Mo in a computer with 1 GB shouldn't be a problem, I think that Windows memory management has a problem too. Or it may be another FF flaw..
Slashdot Mirror
Too true.
I think that 50% of Americans beleive that 'little green men' exist, in France when we get hired we are usually tested with a 'graphological analysis' which is as much scientific as atrology, etc.
But it gets really interesting when you think about religions: having blind faith in unprovable stories.. Religions are really the total opposite of scepticisms.
And BeOS is called a "Modular Hybrid Kernel" by wikipedia: hybrid implies that you don't get the full protection..
Well the solution to stupid order of arguments issue is to use languages where you call function with the name of the argument instead of the position: while it makes function call a bit longer to write, it's far more readable and you have much less risk of making a mistake (and it's far easier to debug if you still make a mistake).
IMHO every function call where the function takes more than one parameter should be done by name, not position.
> Why sponsor reinvention of the wheel?
Because BeOS is mostly dead (yes I know there is Zeta but how long will it live?) and that Linux failed to provide the same speed/responsiveness as BeOS did?
On much slower hardware, BeOS felt much faster and responsive than 10 times more powerful hardware under Windows or Linux..
That's quite normal that BeOS users want to reproduce the experience!
Unfortunately I think that it is a huge undertaking: I don't think that Mozilla ported on BeOS/Haiku would feel more responsive than it is under Windows/Linux (bleach).. so the apps will be a problem.
As those two opinion were so wildly different, I had a look at their CVS archive: to summarize: jlarocco is right, please mod him up (or mod the GP down as troll as he deserves it, lying).
mplayer.c is quite readable with good names for variables,I didn't notice abuse of void* nor unreadable code.
The only bad parts is that the main function is huge and the file itself is big, but this is not the disaster the GP said.
Diclaimer: I've only looked to mplayer.c not the other files.
>Right. As long as it stay attached.
Sure but it's also highly visible: if you're allergic to something, would you like to have to trust that the helper will have a reader-gizmo which can read your medical history? What happens if you're travelling?
A chain is *much* more visible, plus it could also contain your medical history in a chip, which is much easier to update.
OK so you don't need keys, what happens when their is a power failure?
You're locked out.
To prevent this, you have to have keys stored somewhere to avoid the problem, the same thing you do when you use keys to avoid being stuck when you loose your keys, so there is no safety advantage.
For me this looks like a stupid thing to do, the only "real" advantage is the 15min of fame of having implants, it would be much more intelligent to use watch or mobile phones to do the same thing..
>More elegant and sophisticated ideas will always be searched for.
a l_memory ), it remains to be seen if it will be really useful..
Currently it is Software transactional memory (STM), the hot topic (see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_transaction
That said, even currently even normal SW projects are difficult, concurrent projects are harder to make, much harder to debug, plus exploiting efficiently concurrency needs to be aware of the number of core: now your software must run efficiently on both single core and bi-core CPUs, which is of course harder, and when they will be 4-way cores..
You're playing on words: to have a functionnal computer with WindowsXP, you *have* to enable the firewall at the installation, otherwise you'll get infected, have a slow computer, crashes, etc..
So installing XP is not simple as many users understand don't understand firewalls, installing XPSP2 is simple yes (remember a majority of users have XP CDs not XP-SP2).
If you have to reinstall twice your computer because you forgot to activate the firewall before connecting to the Internet, I cannot call this an "easy installation", tricky yes.
Bah restricting in software is just plain stupid: if you put restriction in the driver, how can you prevent the user using a driver for a different country where say the output power or the channel he wants is allowed?
I bet that 4% is the number of chips sold to Apple not 4% of the revenue: IBM is making also micro-controllers PPC which are much cheaper than PPC used by Apple so they bring less revenue by chip.
Of course IBM people use the figure which advantaged them more, but you're not obliged to be naive..
As for the NVidia guy, GPU are great for some usage, they *suck* mighty balls for other usage: they don't even have a 64-bit FPUs (in some case this might be worked around to compute a full precision result but it's not simple), GPUs are awful for single-threaded or branchy codes, etc.. Sure an Nvidia guy would like to have everything running on GPUs, but what do you expect?
As for the PhysX boards, yes specialised solution works better for specialised needs than general purpose solution, so what?
You're comparing apples and oranges.
It's not so simple to install WindowsXP. ... get owned because they forgot to activate the firewall before going online!
You're forgetting that WindowsXP straight out of the box is quite insecure: many people will install XP, configure their internet access, download additionnal drivers and service pack and
If memory serves, an unpatched Windows XP will be owned in less than 10 minutes.
Of course if you have an XPSP2 CD then the situation is better, but most people have only an XP CD..
Yes, concurrency isn't a new problem, but saying that it has 'plenty of solution' is going way overboard IMHO.
There are many ways to attack the problem true, but it remains a very difficult thing to do..
Especially for 'normal' programs say a game engine which must be changed quickly because of a new idea, that is to say not 'multiplying two matrices' types of programs.
I think that the author should have added that the freedom to run doesn't work for those who don't have a computer, so free software programmers should provide free computer and free electricity to everybody! *Sigh*
FOSS developpers are free to develop software on whatever OS they want, sure they would have more users by going to windows but so what? That's not the point!
Given the amount of free-software for Unix system apparently developpers prefer programming for Unix than for Windows and it's not even sure that they would get more contributors by using Windows instead of alternative OS..
You're right about the price of a computer includes the energy made to use it (and in Europe it also include the price to recycle it as this is rquired by the law).
But it's still very hard to do some evaluation: if you keep your old computer, when you have to buy a new one (because the old one doesn't work anymore), the new computer will be cheaper and use less energy than if you buy a computer now, your formula doesn't take this into account..
So it's quite difficult to compute, plus you don't know when your computer is going to die, and if it's the HDD you can exchange it..
I don't know sure, the old computer is less efficient than a new one, but once you take into account the energy used to *make* the new computer, I doubt that you saved energy, more likely you wasted energy.
>SIZE is not the determining factor. TECHNIQUE is.
Well, in this case why does judo use weight category?
It's because japanese masters lost to a huge guy (from netherland I think), I doubt that his technique was as good as their was, but he was good enough that this weight/size made a difference.
So in reality both matters very much! Same thing for 'ultimate fighting' the winners are always very huge guys..
As an aside: demonstration of aikido have always made me laugh, usually opponents run towards the aikido master and make big movements, whereas a smart opponent against an aikido guy who go close slowly and use his knee and elbows to attack. Making it much more difficult the aikido guy to defend himself.
I think that it is LDAP which frustrated them, I understand that: this thing is a *mess*!!
dn,cn, etc...
Uh, I bet it was designed by commity, I have yet to find one clear explanation of this thing.
OTOH, Active Directory is easy to understand and use..
>* How does a paint-on "laser" supercede a regular junction laser?
Nobody said that it was superior, just easier to make.
>* Usually the denser a chip, the less need for wide paths (to cache, RAM).
You're awfully wrong here: if you look at the history of x86 CPU, the chip density has increased a lot and at the same time, the datapath have been improved (increased frequency) *and* widened.
The increased number of transistor and increased frequency allow the CPU to do more things, that's why it needs better datapath: better ALU, 32->64, vector units, dual channel RAM, etc all this needs wider datapath.
Statements of the obvious, I agree: it's obvious that Microsoft bundling of IE with Windows killed Netscape once MS got IE 'good enough'.
About the falsehoods, could you be more specific?
> you have to give them the source, but it's useless to them.
Only in countries which recognize software patents and this is not the case for Europe..
The thing is: even with 1 GB memory Firefox is quite often slow..
OK, it's a memory hungry program but using 150-200 Mo in a computer with 1 GB shouldn't be a problem, I think that Windows memory management has a problem too.
Or it may be another FF flaw..
Well one example doesn't mean that every entry are like this.
I know that when I was a student, the quality of my code wasn't good..
I doubt it, it happen to me also and I'm not using Find or history.
I'm not sure about nsInternetSearchService though..
As the proverb said: consistency for the sake of consistency without any reason is foolish or at least boring.
As I've said Xena is quite a famous name (with positive association), the names which were suggested are totally unknown..
If you really wanted to use a God name, use at least some well known name not unknown minor deities.