If you want to do games programming then large chunks of CS are irrelevant. Large chunks of CS are also relevant and I'm sure you'll do a lot of work on them - probably more than a more generic CS course.
Hannity and Colmes isn't balance though. It's a huge rightward slant. Since the "left" person is significantly more "center" than the "right" person. Hence it isn't balanced. There's also the issue of the oratory/debating/voice level skills of each side...
Everyone else knows what "Fair and Balanced" is supposed to suggest, and what it does in fact suggest. You can live in your fantasy world.
The obvious point is that Fox is claiming fairness and balance, whereas the other group was not.
So I can charge Westinghouse for the electricity used by the TV they made, since when I press the "off" button on the remote is goes into a standby mode?
I mean who would have thunk that the button the iphone manual labels "Sleep/Wake button" would actually put the device in "sleep" mode and not turn it off?
Except of course that sending a person up there to rework the plumbing will cost about a trillion dollars, whereas given the that the hardware is already up there, already has a ridiculous four fuel tanks and when one is empty we fail design, and (I assume) already has the hardware to do the fuel balancing the complicated heating way it seems a cheap way to get an extra 6 months of service from an expensive asset.
In my *long* stay at Sydney University the only time Honi Soit could be called vaguely readable was when they were running it. That's fame enough in my book. Though I doubt most people in Australia have heard of them. Then again most Australians don't know who Arch Bevis is either.
Media Matters for America is a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media. -- http://mediamatters.org/about_us/
Fair and Balanced - trademarked slogan of Fox News.
Bias is not bad in and of itself, as long as it is prominently disclosed.
What about drugs that cure diseases in countries that can't afford to pay? Do they get the same amount of research as erectile disfunction and mood disorder research?
That's pretty much irrelevant. Do they get the less research than they would under some alternative system is what matters?
You could just ban all medical research tomorrow, and bingo those diseases now get the same amount of research as erectile disfunction and mood disorders. That's a good thing, right?
Because no country has ever tried spying before in all of history.
Life would have been so much better if any spying attempt by the USSR/USA on the USA/USSR had resulted in the nukes being launched. Would have made the cold war a lot shorter anyway...
Streamlined controls make things a little too easy and a little less adventurous
What was that? BETTER controls makes the game too easy? Wait, roll that back again. They are saying that because the controls are so good and intuitive, the game is easier to play. I never knew that if you made the most convoluted controls and user interface that make the game impossible to play would result in a "PRO" as opposed to a "CON". But since they are saying that good, intuitive controls is a "CON", I guess that the contrapositive is also the case.
streamlined != better
streamlined != good and intuitive
In fact the review text says: "Its core control scheme is a revelation, but the resulting tempo adjustment and streamlining is missing some of the careful pacing that made Metroid Prime and Metroid Prime 2 so superb" which is where I would expect the CON point was extracted from.
In other words the control scheme is very good but it seems to have made some other aspects of the game less good.
An aimbot in quake is an intuitive control which makes the game easier, a lot of people would say it also makes the game less fun.
Note I know nothing about the Metroid Prime games (The "6th generation" is the one I skipped (OK I missed the 1st too))
They have to include a written offer to supply the source, they just can't just not include it and hope no one notices and then send a copy of someone does.
I don't see any problem at all with requiring that the ESRB give details about what it objects to in games to those that request it.
Seems a bizarre requirement designed to increase the ESRB workload and allow Jack Thomspon to bury them under a mountain of requests.
They should give details *to the submitter* of the game as to what it objects to, etc, etc. Otherwise how do you know what to change to get a different rating, and whether they are being fair or if you should go public with why they are giving it the rating they are if it seems unfair/political/etc.
I think they all skip the "requiring assistance from a human operator" classification in the patent. Which is where it matters since there's obvious prior art for a purely automated system - once that interprets the mail and forwards it to a human operator with a prioritised list of potential replies seems less likely to have such obvious prior art. Though it seems likely someone did this earlier, it's an obvious way to use a imperfect classification system after all.
There's the potential run off the buffer in read-only mode, which certainly isn't got to get you "pwned" and isn't what is normally referred to b the term "buffer overflow" which implies writing beyond the buffer.
"pwning" your own account isn't all that useful anyway, I don't see any network listening in that code after all.
Alternatively you can realise that it's a miracle it actually compiled at all considering it was typed into a c textbox on a web page.
But anyway:
It's impossible to say because your seven line program contains at least one bug. (I'm assuming that the presented program is C and not some imaginary language).
If you can't determine intent from those seven lines (and hence the answer to the question) you truly are retarded. Must be wonderful to actually be dumber than the average C compiler.
Firstly, although you've correctly specified that main() should return an "int" you are actually returning a value of "size_t" which may or may not be defined as "int", depending on the platform
Please to be looking up "automatic type conversion".
Secondly, you haven't checked the return value of fgets(). On error, fgets() returns NULL. This isn't necessarily the same as the nul character so depending on the platform, strlen() may fail (possibly even catastrophically on certain machines, such as the DeathStation 5000).
strlen never sees the return value of fgets so the fact that NULL and nul are different is completely irrelevent. I guess you think the return value magically ends up in buf because you are a moron or something?
If fgets fails the program crashes after printing out random crap, which is perfectly reasonable behaviour - why try to hide that something is wrong?
You've used the strlen() function without including its proper header.
If you assume that snippet is the entire program yes. And if you assume it's compiled independantly of other files and compiler/etc options. Both those assumptions are wrong of course, but don't let that slow you down.
Lastly, although this isn't really an error but it does demonstrate your inexperience, you have enclosed "buf" in parenthesis in the sizeof expression. Remember, sizeof is an operator not a function. The only reason you would ever use parenthesis in conjunction with sizeof is if you were asking for the size of a datatype. For example "sizeof(int)" or "sizeof(*char)". Using parenthesis any other time would be equivalent to expressing a simple sum as "(1) + (2) == (3)". Not incorrect, but pointless.
There's also the point that it the parenthesis make for more readable code in the case of sizeof. And every style I've ever been cursed enough to have to write C in has included always using the parens.
Remember, C isn't for amateurs. That's why high-level languages were invented. To demonstrate how difficult it is to effectively program in C, I've deliberately left a bug in of my own as well as a potentially confusing design issue. See if you can find them.
"a bug", there's more there one.
1. You missed a ; 2. If fgets returns NULL, NULL == n can still return false. 3. You return something other than EXIT_SUCCESS or EXIT_FAILURE from main.
There are more issues with using an int instead of a char* for storing that return value, but they really all boil down to the same thing. I can't be bothered looking further 3>1 already.
We manage just fine. If it's too complicated for you to understand then just pretend the magic file fairies do the work. Of course there are times different people change the same section of a file in which case whomever was last gets to play the part of magic file fairy.
Person A is prevented from dicking around at random because they'd like to stay employed.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, I didn't say it was a bad thing.
CS isn't programming and programming isn't CS.
If you want to do games programming then large chunks of CS are irrelevant. Large chunks of CS are also relevant and I'm sure you'll do a lot of work on them - probably more than a more generic CS course.
Since programming is such a minor part of CS that's not surprising.
The battery sucking full colour LCD display being turned off, maybe?
Hannity and Colmes isn't balance though. It's a huge rightward slant. Since the "left" person is significantly more "center" than the "right" person. Hence it isn't balanced. There's also the issue of the oratory/debating/voice level skills of each side...
Everyone else knows what "Fair and Balanced" is supposed to suggest, and what it does in fact suggest. You can live in your fantasy world.
The obvious point is that Fox is claiming fairness and balance, whereas the other group was not.
My wii does.
You can do some stats on the output, for example: http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/maurer92universal.html
It should be safe to assume that pressing the "sleep" doesn't turn it off, but puts it in whatever sleep mode is.
So I can charge Westinghouse for the electricity used by the TV they made, since when I press the "off" button on the remote is goes into a standby mode?
I mean who would have thunk that the button the iphone manual labels "Sleep/Wake button" would actually put the device in "sleep" mode and not turn it off?
News at 11.
Except of course that sending a person up there to rework the plumbing will cost about a trillion dollars, whereas given the that the hardware is already up there, already has a ridiculous four fuel tanks and when one is empty we fail design, and (I assume) already has the hardware to do the fuel balancing the complicated heating way it seems a cheap way to get an extra 6 months of service from an expensive asset.
No.
In my *long* stay at Sydney University the only time Honi Soit could be called vaguely readable was when they were running it. That's fame enough in my book. Though I doubt most people in Australia have heard of them. Then again most Australians don't know who Arch Bevis is either.
If the first thing that pops into your head when you read "have two sets of jaws" isn't Alien then you need to watch more movies.
Can you not see the difference between:
Media Matters for America is a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media. -- http://mediamatters.org/about_us/
Fair and Balanced - trademarked slogan of Fox News.
Bias is not bad in and of itself, as long as it is prominently disclosed.
What about drugs that cure diseases in countries that can't afford to pay? Do they get the same amount of research as erectile disfunction and mood disorder research?
That's pretty much irrelevant. Do they get the less research than they would under some alternative system is what matters?
You could just ban all medical research tomorrow, and bingo those diseases now get the same amount of research as erectile disfunction and mood disorders. That's a good thing, right?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Referer sums it up completely, even in a formal system you get spelling errors.
Because no country has ever tried spying before in all of history.
Life would have been so much better if any spying attempt by the USSR/USA on the USA/USSR had resulted in the nukes being launched. Would have made the cold war a lot shorter anyway...
Streamlined controls make things a little too easy and a little less adventurous
What was that? BETTER controls makes the game too easy? Wait, roll that back again. They are saying that because the controls are so good and intuitive, the game is easier to play. I never knew that if you made the most convoluted controls and user interface that make the game impossible to play would result in a "PRO" as opposed to a "CON". But since they are saying that good, intuitive controls is a "CON", I guess that the contrapositive is also the case.
streamlined != better
streamlined != good and intuitive
In fact the review text says: "Its core control scheme is a revelation, but the resulting tempo adjustment and streamlining is missing some of the careful pacing that made Metroid Prime and Metroid Prime 2 so superb" which is where I would expect the CON point was extracted from.
In other words the control scheme is very good but it seems to have made some other aspects of the game less good.
An aimbot in quake is an intuitive control which makes the game easier, a lot of people would say it also makes the game less fun.
Note I know nothing about the Metroid Prime games (The "6th generation" is the one I skipped (OK I missed the 1st too))
They have to include a written offer to supply the source, they just can't just not include it and hope no one notices and then send a copy of someone does.
I don't see any problem at all with requiring that the ESRB give details about what it objects to in games to those that request it.
Seems a bizarre requirement designed to increase the ESRB workload and allow Jack Thomspon to bury them under a mountain of requests.
They should give details *to the submitter* of the game as to what it objects to, etc, etc. Otherwise how do you know what to change to get a different rating, and whether they are being fair or if you should go public with why they are giving it the rating they are if it seems unfair/political/etc.
I think they all skip the "requiring assistance from a human operator" classification in the patent. Which is where it matters since there's obvious prior art for a purely automated system - once that interprets the mail and forwards it to a human operator with a prioritised list of potential replies seems less likely to have such obvious prior art. Though it seems likely someone did this earlier, it's an obvious way to use a imperfect classification system after all.
Please point it out, since I sure can't see it.
There's the potential run off the buffer in read-only mode, which certainly isn't got to get you "pwned" and isn't what is normally referred to b the term "buffer overflow" which implies writing beyond the buffer.
"pwning" your own account isn't all that useful anyway, I don't see any network listening in that code after all.
Alternatively you can realise that it's a miracle it actually compiled at all considering it was typed into a c textbox on a web page.
But anyway:
It's impossible to say because your seven line program contains at least one bug. (I'm assuming that the presented program is C and not some imaginary language).
If you can't determine intent from those seven lines (and hence the answer to the question) you truly are retarded. Must be wonderful to actually be dumber than the average C compiler.
Firstly, although you've correctly specified that main() should return an "int" you are actually returning a value of "size_t" which may or may not be defined as "int", depending on the platform
Please to be looking up "automatic type conversion".
Secondly, you haven't checked the return value of fgets(). On error, fgets() returns NULL. This isn't necessarily the same as the nul character so depending on the platform, strlen() may fail (possibly even catastrophically on certain machines, such as the DeathStation 5000).
strlen never sees the return value of fgets so the fact that NULL and nul are different is completely irrelevent. I guess you think the return value magically ends up in buf because you are a moron or something?
If fgets fails the program crashes after printing out random crap, which is perfectly reasonable behaviour - why try to hide that something is wrong?
You've used the strlen() function without including its proper header.
If you assume that snippet is the entire program yes. And if you assume it's compiled independantly of other files and compiler/etc options. Both those assumptions are wrong of course, but don't let that slow you down.
Lastly, although this isn't really an error but it does demonstrate your inexperience, you have enclosed "buf" in parenthesis in the sizeof expression. Remember, sizeof is an operator not a function. The only reason you would ever use parenthesis in conjunction with sizeof is if you were asking for the size of a datatype. For example "sizeof(int)" or "sizeof(*char)". Using parenthesis any other time would be equivalent to expressing a simple sum as "(1) + (2) == (3)". Not incorrect, but pointless.
There's also the point that it the parenthesis make for more readable code in the case of sizeof. And every style I've ever been cursed enough to have to write C in has included always using the parens.
Remember, C isn't for amateurs. That's why high-level languages were invented. To demonstrate how difficult it is to effectively program in C, I've deliberately left a bug in of my own as well as a potentially confusing design issue. See if you can find them.
"a bug", there's more there one.
1. You missed a ;
2. If fgets returns NULL, NULL == n can still return false.
3. You return something other than EXIT_SUCCESS or EXIT_FAILURE from main.
There are more issues with using an int instead of a char* for storing that return value, but they really all boil down to the same thing. I can't be bothered looking further 3>1 already.
#include
int main() {
char buf[255];
puts("Enter something:");
fgets(buf, sizeof(buf), stdin);
return strlen(buf);
}
where on the disk did the contents of buf get stored (assuming we have no virtual memory)?
We manage just fine. If it's too complicated for you to understand then just pretend the magic file fairies do the work. Of course there are times different people change the same section of a file in which case whomever was last gets to play the part of magic file fairy.
- trustworthy-3%11way-merge.html (warning: advertisement disguised as article)
Person A is prevented from dicking around at random because they'd like to stay employed.
The merging is done with something along the lines of: http://www.cmcrossroads.com/articles/cm-journal/a