There is a JVM targeted for research named Maxine that is written in—you guessed it—Java. It needs to be bootstrapped by another JVM in order to compile itself with its JIT compiler and after that it runs by itself. I recently attended a talk by one of its developers and it looks very interesting.
Good job. Posting obvious shit and getting on the main of Slashdot. I hope I'm not the only one who thinks this sort of comparison is absolutely pointless. Why are we even comparing executables to web pages or images?
The page summary doesn't include some of the words, and worse is that when you go to the page, and hit ctrl-f, you can't even find one of the omitted keyword! Frustrating as hell.
I think this has been around for a while. I usually went to the cached version which highlights the searched terms in different colors. At the top, the omitted terms are listed and described as appearing only in sites linking to the current site. This may even be very helpful in finding sites. However when you specifically search for one of those words (say, a configuration parameter) it just sucks.
A little while ago we had something similar: fluorescent dogs. The interesting thing with the dogs is that you can turn the effect on and off depending on what drugs you mix into their food...
I agree that it's stupid they got got even the name wrong in the summary. But I do not agree with such a project being "pointless in the first place". How often do we embrace stuff like that on slashdot? Doing things for the sake of doing. Hand in your Geek Card.
The interesting thing is what Packt achieves with these reviews. I'm stating this as if they were buying the reviewers (which is a likely possibility) and this is exactly the problem. Whenever I'll see two books on the same topic - one from Packt and one from another publisher - I'll pick the other one. Because somewhere in the back of my head I'll always think "Yeah, that's Packt. They need to buy all those reviews; therefore their books must be crap."
For a while I don't open links to *world sites like Computerworld, PCWorld or Infoworld anymore. Keeps the blood pressure low. Too often they have horribly bad researched articles spread over as much pages as possible. It's unbearable how little content they provide with so many words. Comments on slashdot seem to confirm this more often than not.
I think Opera got better. I once opened Google in private mode and was still logged in. Now this isn't the case anymore, even when opening them right after each other. But what is really great is that it also won't save or read Flash cookies in private mode. I recently read that some browsers have or had problems with it but can't remember where. I think they'll all figure it out eventually. (well, it might be useful for those who use Flash.../. seems to be populated only by people who despise it.) Of course this doesn't say if it leaks encryption keys or whatever.
Non-techies want to do things like scripting and web design without paying a professional, the same way they want to fix things around the house or fix the car.
I really doubt that. And from what I hear you can't easily fix most issues with cars anymore.
However, this self-documentation addresses only "how the code works". The programmer must still write comments explaining "why the code is used".
This should be rare. Ideally you document the API both internal and external. Actually some people think internal functions need not be documented but it might depend on the context. Anyway this documentation defines the contract a certain function fulfills. Now somebody calls this function. What should be the "why"? Well, because I want the result of that function, duh.
The "why" is only necessary if you write something that seems at first glance counterintuitive, superfluous, wrong, illogical etc. Maybe it wasn't even easy to figure out because it just seems not right. So you write a comment why you did it in order to avoid someone "correcting" it.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, not if you scope the timer to the IP address the failed login comes from. Obviously this doesn't really work either because of bot nets.
But shouldn't this work both ways?
There is a JVM targeted for research named Maxine that is written in—you guessed it—Java. It needs to be bootstrapped by another JVM in order to compile itself with its JIT compiler and after that it runs by itself. I recently attended a talk by one of its developers and it looks very interesting.
Good job. Posting obvious shit and getting on the main of Slashdot. I hope I'm not the only one who thinks this sort of comparison is absolutely pointless. Why are we even comparing executables to web pages or images?
The page summary doesn't include some of the words, and worse is that when you go to the page, and hit ctrl-f, you can't even find one of the omitted keyword! Frustrating as hell.
I think this has been around for a while. I usually went to the cached version which highlights the searched terms in different colors. At the top, the omitted terms are listed and described as appearing only in sites linking to the current site. This may even be very helpful in finding sites. However when you specifically search for one of those words (say, a configuration parameter) it just sucks.
Yep. Slashdot covered it in March.
A little while ago we had something similar: fluorescent dogs. The interesting thing with the dogs is that you can turn the effect on and off depending on what drugs you mix into their food...
I agree that it's stupid they got got even the name wrong in the summary. But I do not agree with such a project being "pointless in the first place". How often do we embrace stuff like that on slashdot? Doing things for the sake of doing. Hand in your Geek Card.
The interesting thing is what Packt achieves with these reviews. I'm stating this as if they were buying the reviewers (which is a likely possibility) and this is exactly the problem. Whenever I'll see two books on the same topic - one from Packt and one from another publisher - I'll pick the other one. Because somewhere in the back of my head I'll always think "Yeah, that's Packt. They need to buy all those reviews; therefore their books must be crap."
Here and here.
DEFENDER played in the favicon.
http://www.p01.org/releases/DEFENDER_of_the_favicon/
Why the main article this summary is about is not linked is beyond me...
http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/iPad-2-Wi-Fi-Teardown/5071/1
For a while I don't open links to *world sites like Computerworld, PCWorld or Infoworld anymore. Keeps the blood pressure low. Too often they have horribly bad researched articles spread over as much pages as possible. It's unbearable how little content they provide with so many words. Comments on slashdot seem to confirm this more often than not.
The Angry Video Game Nerd had two pieces on them; iirc it's these two: Angry Video Game Nerd: CDi Part 2 and Angry Video Game Nerd: CDi Part 3.
I think Opera got better. I once opened Google in private mode and was still logged in. Now this isn't the case anymore, even when opening them right after each other. But what is really great is that it also won't save or read Flash cookies in private mode. I recently read that some browsers have or had problems with it but can't remember where. I think they'll all figure it out eventually. (well, it might be useful for those who use Flash... /. seems to be populated only by people who despise it.) Of course this doesn't say if it leaks encryption keys or whatever.
but PLEASE don't spread bullshit you know isn't true.
That's why I only spread bullshit on things I know nothing about. That way I don't even know I'm wrong.
hey /. I need your help
I accidentally 93MB of Wi-Fi data
what should I do...is this dangerous ?
Nope, still funny.
Dude, you mean Heiner Goebbels. Heinrich Goebbels is the nazi child of Heinrich Himmler and Joseph Goebbels.
Non-techies want to do things like scripting and web design without paying a professional, the same way they want to fix things around the house or fix the car.
I really doubt that. And from what I hear you can't easily fix most issues with cars anymore.
What is step 3???????
Alternatively we come to a more honest world where everyone realises that pretty much everyone looks at porn.
Yeah. Reminds me of this story about a study of porn consumption. They couldn't find people that never looked at porn for the control group...
Come again when it's OVER 9000!!!
However, this self-documentation addresses only "how the code works". The programmer must still write comments explaining "why the code is used".
This should be rare. Ideally you document the API both internal and external. Actually some people think internal functions need not be documented but it might depend on the context. Anyway this documentation defines the contract a certain function fulfills. Now somebody calls this function. What should be the "why"? Well, because I want the result of that function, duh.
The "why" is only necessary if you write something that seems at first glance counterintuitive, superfluous, wrong, illogical etc. Maybe it wasn't even easy to figure out because it just seems not right. So you write a comment why you did it in order to avoid someone "correcting" it.
They have been to Canada too.