As far as I can see, the only current distinction is that source code isn't implementation, but the compiled code is. What's magical about a compiler?
And then there are systems that can take source code and execute it more-or-less directly. These systems are called "interpreters." For example, Micro$oft released a lot of interpreters for the Basic language (though QBasic was its last decent Basic product; the rest are just virus programming languages:-). Even the veritable GNU Emacs contains an interpreter for Elisp.
Other messages in this discussion seem to imply that executable code is not speech. Does this mean I should go back to DOS Edit.com for coding?
Soon we'll crack the code of this seti@home thing.
I've written them and asked them to open-source their core like d.net did, claiming that this would cut down on illegal [cr|h]acking to make the client faster.
The kernel is the lowest level of an operating system. It interacts directly with the hardware. Be engineers could easily read the hardware specs off the Darwin source.
Where does it mention harware? Just because Darwin is open source doesn't mean Be can get techincal specifications on the hardware.
What better technical specification is there than the complete source code for a working operating system kernel?
Not necessarily a Napster alternative
on
Gnutella v.56 Out?
·
· Score: 2
According to the FAQ, this program is "a tool for general peer-to-peer file-sharing" that does not need the Wrapster archiver. "It can be used to share spreadsheets, source code, design documents, really any file on your computer," meaning it could provide a distributed system for sharing files, so that mirrors of popular free software projects don't get Slash-DoS'd as easily.
Apple has released the specs for the G3 hardware. Someone should tell J-L G to Read The Fsckin' Source.
Re:It's definitely not for PPC
on
BeOS For Linux!
·
· Score: 1
Apple refuses to give Be the specs for their machines since the Beige G3's.
The specs for the Apple G3 machines are available on the Apple web site. They're written in the C language, in a document called "Darwin kernel source code"; take a look if you have the time.
Clearly the biggest thing Playstation benefits from is the miniscule screen resolution of TVs (640x480, 24fps max)
A standard NTSC television has a resolution on the order of 320x240 (Sega Genesis ran at precisely the TV's native resolution). Extra horizontal resolution (640x) in the signal source makes near- vertical edges look better, while the TV fakes extra vertical resolution (x480) by drawing every other frame half a line down (two 60fps frames = one 30fps frame); Tobal No. 1 and Ehrgeiz (two PSX fighting games from Square/Dream Factory) take advantage of this and render only odd scanlines then even scanlines, whatever the electron guns aren't scanning.
I've actually seen one-key entry systems, for disabled people, that are like this. The row mouse lights up, runs along the side, and you hit space when the mouse gets to the row. Then the column mouse lights up and runs along the bottom. You hit space to stop the column mouse, and a letter appears. The user can also program row-col-row-col to produce whole words.
But no accessibility tool in the world will let people so disabled they can only press one key play
If your boss learns to recognize inverted-T logs as gaming, your pay may be docked for playing Quake 3 Arena on company time. Better make it a two-player-on-one-keyboard game such as freepuzzlearena; this will be more confusing.
PS2? This brings up my other concern. If they ever make a keyboard for Sony's PlayStation 2, and people go to a local Worst Buy, what keyboard will they get? An IBM Personal System/2 compatible board or one for Sony's console?
this keyboard could almost be used a simple transmission medium when inconspicuous movement of small amounts of data is needed...not that floppies aren't conspicuous, but some companies make sure floppy drives are not installed on workstations.
You mean iSore^H^H^H^HMac.
If only it had a flip-out screen. Then we could word process on it and upload next time we're at the box.
But while you're waiting for the screen, check out
would it be feasble to have hardware to allow 50 keyboards, mice, monitors to be hooked into a Linux server, and have each one be running separately? So there could be 50 users with 50 different displays doing their office or school work.
If you're talking text (good enough for Emacs), simply attach a whole bunch of cheap DOS PCs and monitors to a multiport serial card on the server and use them as dumb terminals.
On the other hand, if you're talking about X, that's a completely different story. Each X display pretty much needs its own computer (however, there can be multiple monitors in one display). Otherwise, how are 50 PCI cards supposed to fit into one box? And think about the CPU power it would need, not to mention heat.
But a whole bunch of cheap X boxes (not the Microsoft X-Box console; I also object to "Mac OS X") just might work.
The only reason I use Windoze is because they pay me.
Slashdot Mirror
As far as I can see, the only current distinction is that source code isn't implementation, but the compiled code is. What's magical about a compiler?
And then there are systems that can take source code and execute it more-or-less directly. These systems are called "interpreters." For example, Micro$oft released a lot of interpreters for the Basic language (though QBasic was its last decent Basic product; the rest are just virus programming languages :-). Even the veritable GNU Emacs contains an interpreter for Elisp.
Other messages in this discussion seem to imply that executable code is not speech. Does this mean I should go back to DOS Edit.com for coding?
Slashdot strips tags, and <headers> look like tags, don't they?
Soon we'll crack the code of this seti@home thing.
I've written them and asked them to open-source their core like d.net did, claiming that this would cut down on illegal [cr|h]acking to make the client faster.
You can DL an X server that runs on MacOS X Server
No such file or directory (ENOENT)
Where's the free X11 server for Mac OS 10?
where does it say anything about hardware?
The kernel is the lowest level of an operating system. It interacts directly with the hardware. Be engineers could easily read the hardware specs off the Darwin source.
Where does it mention harware? Just because Darwin is open source doesn't mean Be can get techincal specifications on the hardware.
What better technical specification is there than the complete source code for a working operating system kernel?
According to the FAQ, this program is "a tool for general peer-to-peer file-sharing" that does not need the Wrapster archiver. "It can be used to share spreadsheets, source code, design documents, really any file on your computer," meaning it could provide a distributed system for sharing files, so that mirrors of popular free software projects don't get Slash-DoS'd as easily.
Apple refused to release the necessary specs
So what's Darwin?
Apple has released the specs for the G3 hardware. Someone should tell J-L G to Read The Fsckin' Source.
Apple refuses to give Be the specs for their machines since the Beige G3's.
The specs for the Apple G3 machines are available on the Apple web site. They're written in the C language, in a document called "Darwin kernel source code"; take a look if you have the time.
I could just see it: Microsoft forks off a kernel and runs VMWare on it.
Clearly the biggest thing Playstation benefits from is the miniscule screen resolution of TVs (640x480, 24fps max)
A standard NTSC television has a resolution on the order of 320x240 (Sega Genesis ran at precisely the TV's native resolution). Extra horizontal resolution (640x) in the signal source makes near- vertical edges look better, while the TV fakes extra vertical resolution (x480) by drawing every other frame half a line down (two 60fps frames = one 30fps frame); Tobal No. 1 and Ehrgeiz (two PSX fighting games from Square/Dream Factory) take advantage of this and render only odd scanlines then even scanlines, whatever the electron guns aren't scanning.
I've actually seen one-key entry systems, for disabled people, that are like this. The row mouse lights up, runs along the side, and you hit space when the mouse gets to the row. Then the column mouse lights up and runs along the bottom. You hit space to stop the column mouse, and a letter appears. The user can also program row-col-row-col to produce whole words.
But no accessibility tool in the world will let people so disabled they can only press one key playIf your boss learns to recognize inverted-T logs as gaming, your pay may be docked for playing Quake 3 Arena on company time. Better make it a two-player-on-one-keyboard game such as freepuzzlearena; this will be more confusing.
Gotta confuse 'em all!So you want to fill up the keyboard? Try a typing trainer such as abkey or a falling blocks game such as Tetanus. Both are part of freepuzzlearena.
I have web sites where you can find freepuzzlearena, crypto,That would be trademark infringement, right?
PS2? This brings up my other concern. If they ever make a keyboard for Sony's PlayStation 2, and people go to a local Worst Buy, what keyboard will they get? An IBM Personal System/2 compatible board or one for Sony's console?
Considering it's 500,000 character limit
Wouldn't it be nice if it also took flash cards?
this keyboard could almost be used a simple transmission medium when inconspicuous movement of small amounts of data is needed...not that floppies aren't conspicuous, but some companies make sure floppy drives are not installed on workstations.
You mean iSore^H^H^H^HMac.
If only it had a flip-out screen. Then we could word process on it and upload next time we're at the box.
But while you're waiting for the screen, check outAsk Slashdot:
Why exactly do they call it "adult" language?
It take advantage of some of the great work underway in the NetBSD, FreeBSD, and Linux communities
Who is this fellow kidding? Linux is under GNU GPL, and APSL is incompatible with GPL.
Many are skeptical of Apple's Public Source License, because it requires developers to submit modifications to Apple.
If FooSoft creates and releases diffs that make something in Darwin faster, who pays for space to make them public? Apple or FooSoft?
Why is it "Mac OS X Server" if it doesn't have an X server?If my buddies a floor down want to let me on their hub, they're pooling network access with me. How is pooling illegal?
Pool your net access and go towould it be feasble to have hardware to allow 50 keyboards, mice, monitors to be hooked into a Linux server, and have each one be running separately? So there could be 50 users with 50 different displays doing their office or school work.
If you're talking text (good enough for Emacs), simply attach a whole bunch of cheap DOS PCs and monitors to a multiport serial card on the server and use them as dumb terminals.
On the other hand, if you're talking about X, that's a completely different story. Each X display pretty much needs its own computer (however, there can be multiple monitors in one display). Otherwise, how are 50 PCI cards supposed to fit into one box? And think about the CPU power it would need, not to mention heat.
But a whole bunch of cheap X boxes (not the Microsoft X-Box console; I also object to "Mac OS X") just might work.
The only reason I use Windoze is because they pay me.On the other hand, etoy.com runs Apache on Solaris, according to Netcraft.
The other way around perhaps?