It is not really a simple experiment but it shows that while information can not go faster the speed of light, a measurement at one site CAN have an "instant effect" at another location.
Very strange stuff, I went to a conference made by Alain Aspect, a French guy who managed to "implement" what was only a "thought experience"..
Serge Tchuruk, Alcatel's president has received a 20% raise of his salary, which makes a decent total of 20 millions Euros, the year Alcatel has scored the worst ever LOSS for a French company (4 billions of loss if I recall correctly).
I think that he will be fired or will leave soon, but not without a diamond parachute severance pay.
I have no problems dealing with semantics, thank you.
> It basically means that if someone talks like an idiot, it can be assumed that they might well be an idiot, and if someone is an idiot, you can assume that they will in turn speak like one.
eloquence from the webster: 1 : discourse marked by force and persuasiveness; also : the art or power of using such discourse 2 : the quality of forceful or persuasive expressiveness
So eloquence is a quality that politicians and religious people have, scientists are not very eloquent usually. That's why when there is a debate with scientists, politicians and religious people, the scientist usually fails to convince..
Having no eloquence is not equal to "speaking like an idiot".
Oh BTW, being able to react calmly to a criticism is also associated with intelligence.
64-bit on the desktop is next to useless IMHO, but the Hammer brings also many goodies: - it's fast - there are additional registers available which should help compilers quite a lot (avoiding false dependencies: more opportunities for executing more instructions at the same time) - it's fast.
Ok maybe you could say that you don't need such speed, but the games you play don't look like Final Fantasy (the movie) and your opponents could really be smarter and I suspect that a good AI is very,very CPU-consuming.
Disclaimer: please language zealots avoid this thread, it's about choosing the best tool for having secure programs not about religions.
I've read many good things about O'Caml (nearly as fast as C!), so I tryed to read an online book to learn the language, but I've failed:-( (even though the paper was in French and I'm French)..
Why? Too different from a "normal" C-like language: I find functionnal-type programs unreadable..
I know with O'Caml you're not really restricted to functionnal style programs, but the paper was pushing this style quite strongly.
I like using C, C++, Java (well I don't like Java but I have no problem using it), Perl, Ruby, Python.. But I can't grasp O'Caml..
So I'm not really sure that O'Caml (and the other functionnal language) would have a great success replacing the C-like language, maybe Ada or Modula would be easier "replacement languages".
Soft-update and journalling both do the same thing: preserve filesystem consistency in case of an unexpected shudtown.
AFAIK there isn't a real performance advantage for one or the other.
I think that soft-update needs more memory but that it use does fewer IO (no need to maitain the journal on the disk), so I expect that eventually soft-update will have a bigger advantage over journaling (memory will increase rapidly in size but disks won't become much faster in the near future)..
Actually it depends how the exceptions are implemented.
I remember an article from Borland where they said that one of the difficulties of the porting of Kilyx from Windows to Linux is the exceptions.
On Windows, they are "easy to use" for the compiler's developer because they are a part of the OS but they have a cost even if they are not thowed on Linux they're difficult to use but they have no cost when they are not thrown.
Would you care to read the article at http://www.javalobby.org/clr.html and say what you think about it?
As it written in the article:
- It isn't only "exotic features" that would have to be removed from the language to make it work, but also things like multiple implementation inheritance, etc..
Eiffel was severely castrated to make it work on the so-called "Common Language Specification"...
- Then there is the efficency issue, I suspect very much, that any other language than C# or Java will run much more slowly..
Mmm, you have to be very careful when you code in shell otherwise you have a portability mess, and I don't find shell scripts very readable when they become large..
> Java, on the other hand, is a GENERAL PURPOSE PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE.
> You could use it to write ANY of the above kind of games, or a client-server application, or a spreadsheet, or pretty much anything else.
You could, you could..
Do you know the differences between theory and pratice?
In theory you're right, in pratice do you know a Java compiler which produce native code which is as fast as C++, without any memory increase?
I wouldn't use C# right now because it is too new.
On one hand I understand the appeal of using the latest and greatest language: I fell into the same trap with Java in 1997, and this was a wrong choice: the library was full of bugs and I spent half of my time working around bugs..
C# is very new, so I wouldn't bet on it.
Oh BTW don't believe the press, at the same time I was badly hurt by the bugs in Java, I kept reading reviews which were swearing that Java was the greatest things since sliced bread (in Byte or Doctor's Dobbs)..
If Microsoft has an open bug report process, first check the "level of bugs" before..
I should have looked at Sun's bug parade before choosing Java, it shows the true state of Java (a looooonnnnnng time to correct the bugs.).
> Also, it is easy to change the resolution in X;
> once it is set up, it is as simple as
>CNTL+ALT+'+' or CNTL+ALT+'-
Bah, and how do you disable that stupid "virtual desktop" ??
It is a nice option but it shouldn't be mandatory.
I think that the "graphic part" of the OS, is really behind Windows..
KDE feels too slow, Radeon's driver is quite limited and slower than the Windows version (if memory serves me well).
I've never been able to see "correctly" my TV on my computer on Linux (full-screen, with the correct resolution, with no virtual screen).
Is-it important? Well if you want mass-adoption things like this should work "out-of-the-box"..
I hope that Linux will have those capabilities in the future, but I believe that it will take quite a few years..
An interesting reply, but now the question is:
I know how much costs a Microsoft license but how much does it cost to release a commercial software on QNX?
I fear that it must be much more expensive than a Microsoft license:-(
OTOH a company needs many Microsoft licenses to be able to work..
Have you made performance mesurement ?
How did you came with those number?
I always thought that 4 was really the culprit having seen the *huge* amount of communications needed between the toolkit and the X server (used to do some Xlib programing).
So I was thinking that Berlin was really the way to go..
I'd really like to see numbers.
It really points out the difference between the Unix philosophy and the Apple philosophy.
(As an aside, I'm quite happy that email addresses are case-insensitive:-))
My only grip with this is : where do you stop?
Everybody will recognize that "John Doe", "John_Doe", "John-Doe" or "JohnDoe" is the same person, should the filesystem be insensitive to underscore, white-space, etc ?
If we have "John Doe" and "Jon Doe", is-it the same person?
Same with "Jhon Doe" and "John Doe"...
>[] Dmitry Sklyarov has returned home to Russia, and has already raised a toast with his wife and children.
> I hope Dmitry's treated a little differently on his next visit to the U.S.
Frankly if I were him, I would be totally disgusted by the US and would never ever want to go again to the US?
Think of it, as if you were going to a foreign country and has been treated the way he was..
Would you want to go again to this foreign country?
I doubt it, and first you would have to convince your wife to let you go there:-).
He didn't ask who is going to develop it, but who is going to use it.
I'm sure there are still some people that prefer building an OS "from scratch", so there will be developers for The Hurd..
But if we look at the speed of development of The Hurd, there may not be that many developers interested by The Hurd.. (not a flame, just an observation)
From the user POV, the situation is a bit different, when Linux was started:
- Minix users were frustrated because they couldn't do what they want with the OS..
- BSD future was uncertain because of the lawsuit (I think that it was at the same time).
So the free OS choice was limited, which is not the case now..
Slashdot Mirror
It is not really a simple experiment but it shows that while information can not go faster the speed of light, a measurement at one site CAN have an "instant effect" at another location.
Very strange stuff, I went to a conference made by Alain Aspect, a French guy who managed to "implement" what was only a "thought experience"..
Really shows the weird nature of our reality..
Serge Tchuruk, Alcatel's president has received a 20% raise of his salary, which makes a decent total of 20 millions Euros, the year Alcatel has scored the worst ever LOSS for a French company (4 billions of loss if I recall correctly).
I think that he will be fired or will leave soon, but not without a diamond parachute severance pay.
I have no problems dealing with semantics, thank you.
> It basically means that if someone talks like an idiot, it can be assumed that they might well be an idiot, and if someone is an idiot, you can assume that they will in turn speak like one.
eloquence from the webster:
1 : discourse marked by force and persuasiveness; also : the art or power of using such discourse
2 : the quality of forceful or persuasive expressiveness
So eloquence is a quality that politicians and religious people have, scientists are not very eloquent usually.
That's why when there is a debate with scientists, politicians and religious people, the scientist usually fails to convince..
Having no eloquence is not equal to "speaking like an idiot".
Oh BTW, being able to react calmly to a criticism is also associated with intelligence.
About your sig
> Lack of eloquence does not denote lack of intelligence, though they often coincide.
Wrong. Einstein wasn't especially well-known for its eloquence..
Eloquence is only related to "some kind" of intelligence..
Plllleeeeaaasssee!
There has been already reports of bugfix in one BSD distribution which hasn't been reported in another distribution.
So the "this would never happen in *BSD" is just wrong, and presumptuous.
64-bit on the desktop is next to useless IMHO, but the Hammer brings also many goodies:
- it's fast
- there are additional registers available which should help compilers quite a lot (avoiding false dependencies: more opportunities for executing more instructions at the same time)
- it's fast.
Ok maybe you could say that you don't need such speed, but the games you play don't look like Final Fantasy (the movie) and your opponents could really be smarter and I suspect that a good AI is very,very CPU-consuming.
I have no problem using functionnal style in Python or Ruby because the "environement" is declarative.
So using functionnal style here and there is not difficult, and it is used even more in Ruby than it is in Python.
But it's reading "pure functionnal programs" that I find very, very hard.
Unfortunately whereas O'Caml is nearly as performant as C (compiled O'Caml of course), Ruby is much slower..
I tend to prefer Ruby to Python but both are really equivalent.
Disclaimer: please language zealots avoid this thread, it's about choosing the best tool for having secure programs not about religions.
:-( (even though the paper was in French and I'm French)..
I've read many good things about O'Caml (nearly as fast as C!), so I tryed to read an online book to learn the language, but I've failed
Why? Too different from a "normal" C-like language: I find functionnal-type programs unreadable..
I know with O'Caml you're not really restricted to functionnal style programs, but the paper was pushing this style quite strongly.
I like using C, C++, Java (well I don't like Java but I have no problem using it), Perl, Ruby, Python..
But I can't grasp O'Caml..
So I'm not really sure that O'Caml (and the other functionnal language) would have a great success replacing the C-like language, maybe Ada or Modula would be easier "replacement languages".
He meant C is inappropriate for SECURE network daemon.
If you look at the number of security bugs in each software, he's probably right..
Ada or Modula3 would be interesting I think..
But overcoming the "network effect" to choose a language will be very hard..
Your test is interesting, but it miss one major component: $$!
How much does each configuration cost?
No, I'm not trolling I'm just curious..
If memory serves, Parrot a VM which is developed for Perl (and maybe Python and Ruby) is using the "infinite number of register" scheme.
Maybe you should have a look.
For me the device that they build is a way to have multiple lasers in the same packaging, each with a slightly different wavelength.
Each of the individual emmiting layer is monochromatic and coherent, but the resulting beam isn't, you're right.
What would be interesting is to see a diagram which would give the intensity of the light for each wavelength.
I suspect that it isn't totally flat, but more something like this:
/\/\/\/\
Soft-update and journalling both do the same thing: preserve filesystem consistency in case of an unexpected shudtown.
AFAIK there isn't a real performance advantage for one or the other.
I think that soft-update needs more memory but that it use does fewer IO (no need to maitain the journal on the disk), so I expect that eventually soft-update will have a bigger advantage over journaling (memory will increase rapidly in size but disks won't become much faster in the near future)..
Actually it depends how the exceptions are implemented.
I remember an article from Borland where they said that one of the difficulties of the porting of Kilyx from Windows to Linux is the exceptions.
On Windows, they are "easy to use" for the compiler's developer because they are a part of the OS but they have a cost even if they are not thowed on Linux they're difficult to use but they have no cost when they are not thrown.
Would you care to read the article at http://www.javalobby.org/clr.html and say what you think about it?
As it written in the article:
- It isn't only "exotic features" that would have to be removed from the language to make it work, but also things like multiple implementation inheritance, etc..
Eiffel was severely castrated to make it work on the so-called "Common Language Specification"...
- Then there is the efficency issue, I suspect very much, that any other language than C# or Java will run much more slowly..
Hmm quite of lot of different languages..
OK, I'm curious why lisp??
Mmm, you have to be very careful when you code in shell otherwise you have a portability mess, and I don't find shell scripts very readable when they become large..
> Java, on the other hand, is a GENERAL PURPOSE PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE.
> You could use it to write ANY of the above kind of games, or a client-server application, or a spreadsheet, or pretty much anything else.
You could, you could..
Do you know the differences between theory and pratice?
In theory you're right, in pratice do you know a Java compiler which produce native code which is as fast as C++, without any memory increase?
No? Then your point means nothing.
I wouldn't use C# right now because it is too new.
On one hand I understand the appeal of using the latest and greatest language: I fell into the same trap with Java in 1997, and this was a wrong choice: the library was full of bugs and I spent half of my time working around bugs..
C# is very new, so I wouldn't bet on it.
Oh BTW don't believe the press, at the same time I was badly hurt by the bugs in Java, I kept reading reviews which were swearing that Java was the greatest things since sliced bread (in Byte or Doctor's Dobbs)..
If Microsoft has an open bug report process, first check the "level of bugs" before..
I should have looked at Sun's bug parade before choosing Java, it shows the true state of Java (a looooonnnnnng time to correct the bugs.).
> Also, it is easy to change the resolution in X;
> once it is set up, it is as simple as
>CNTL+ALT+'+' or CNTL+ALT+'-
Bah, and how do you disable that stupid "virtual desktop" ??
It is a nice option but it shouldn't be mandatory.
I think that the "graphic part" of the OS, is really behind Windows..
KDE feels too slow, Radeon's driver is quite limited and slower than the Windows version (if memory serves me well).
I've never been able to see "correctly" my TV on my computer on Linux (full-screen, with the correct resolution, with no virtual screen).
Is-it important? Well if you want mass-adoption things like this should work "out-of-the-box"..
I hope that Linux will have those capabilities in the future, but I believe that it will take quite a few years..
An interesting reply, but now the question is:
:-(
I know how much costs a Microsoft license but how much does it cost to release a commercial software on QNX?
I fear that it must be much more expensive than a Microsoft license
OTOH a company needs many Microsoft licenses to be able to work..
Have you made performance mesurement ?
How did you came with those number?
I always thought that 4 was really the culprit having seen the *huge* amount of communications needed between the toolkit and the X server (used to do some Xlib programing).
So I was thinking that Berlin was really the way to go..
I'd really like to see numbers.
This guy is complaining that he had troubles on a production server with Mandrake8.1 and its kernel 2.4.
But Mandrake 8.1 ships with both kernel 2.4 and 2.2.
The idea behind it is: if you need all the fancy stuff use 2.4 but if you want stability use 2.2.
So using 2.4 on a server and then complaining that it isn't stable enough is silly IMHO.
That said I agree that 2.4 has been slow to stabilize (VM mess apparently caused by communications problems between Linus and Rick Van Riel).
It really points out the difference between the Unix philosophy and the Apple philosophy.
:-))
...
(As an aside, I'm quite happy that email addresses are case-insensitive
My only grip with this is : where do you stop?
Everybody will recognize that "John Doe", "John_Doe", "John-Doe" or "JohnDoe" is the same person, should the filesystem be insensitive to underscore, white-space, etc ?
If we have "John Doe" and "Jon Doe", is-it the same person?
Same with "Jhon Doe" and "John Doe"
>[] Dmitry Sklyarov has returned home to Russia, and has already raised a toast with his wife and children.
:-).
> I hope Dmitry's treated a little differently on his next visit to the U.S.
Frankly if I were him, I would be totally disgusted by the US and would never ever want to go again to the US?
Think of it, as if you were going to a foreign country and has been treated the way he was..
Would you want to go again to this foreign country?
I doubt it, and first you would have to convince your wife to let you go there
Your answer is a bit off the mark.
He didn't ask who is going to develop it, but who is going to use it.
I'm sure there are still some people that prefer building an OS "from scratch", so there will be developers for The Hurd..
But if we look at the speed of development of The Hurd, there may not be that many developers interested by The Hurd.. (not a flame, just an observation)
From the user POV, the situation is a bit different, when Linux was started:
- Minix users were frustrated because they couldn't do what they want with the OS..
- BSD future was uncertain because of the lawsuit (I think that it was at the same time).
So the free OS choice was limited, which is not the case now..