A gas tax (I know taboo) or a coal tax (another taboo) directly taxes the resource that is already scarce and allows the consumer to feel its actual long term costs.
You seem to have gotten the idea that we shouldnt use this stuff, that we should in fact instill financial penalties for using it.
Nothing has benefited mankind more than fossil fuels, and nothing has hurt mankind more than poverty. You don't (or at least didn't) know it, but you are an evil person. You recommend that we harm mankind, and for what?
I thought compilers would chop the incoming text up into lots of little strings
Thats the abstraction. You know that this can be done in many ways, right?
It *could* use your sloppy and memory-hungry std:string crap...
...or it could use a hash table to associate the token with a number assigned to it, and pair that with an auxiliary array (indexed by that number) that stores information about the token.
In short, you are basically educated in step one of abstraction, but not the implementation.
The expression evaluator will need a stack along with typed data items (int, float, double, etc). C++ can make that sort of thing much neater.
First, regular old C was designed to make implementing stacks simple. Pre-and-Post increment-and-decrement is absolutely all you need.. in short, the damn thing has operators specifically for stacks and queues. I will repeat the assertion that the only thing STL brings to the table is generic containers. The key word is generic and you havent justified a need for them.
Your datatype argument is not well educated, I am afraid, since STL containers are only generic prior to compile-time. In short, they are not run time generics so STL doesn't add anything for a compiler in that regard. The compile needs to treat things as arbitrary datatypes at runtime, and in that vein OO in general is no better than flag/feature bits and function pointers. Either way it needs to perform tests, branch to specific processing or output routines, etc..
If you dig into it, I'm sure there's many places where C++ would remove a lot of lines of code from a compiler.
Why don't you think that its just as likely that it will require more lines of code? You need to think this through, because OO is most certainly not heralded for enabling shorter program sources.
Templates - how will they do STL without templates??? Seems like a big fail to me.
The only thing STL adds over traditional container libraries is generics. Why does a compiler need generic containers? The only container that isnt easy to implement-as-needed in the STL that I see a compiler needing (and only for efficiency reasons) is an associative array, and that doesnt actually have to be generic at all.
I would think that it would be far more preferable to (continue to) implement these things specifically for the compiler, and further that people who think that its hard probably shouldn't be involved in the GCC mainline. Perhaps a nice fork for the algorithmically-impaired is in order.
As such, your response is very educational. You are stupid. Very stupid. And emotional. Stupid and emotional. A great combination for those that want to lead you around like a sheep.
I 100% agree. A compiler would benefit very little by being moved to C++. Any "OO" use would be almost exactly single instance, and templates wouldnt be part of the subset they would allow. So what, the stream operators? sigh.
You could have just said that you were wrong, that the government does indeed spend money in ways that do not benefit me. I gave only a single example.
Still, that doesn't mean I shouldn't pay my taxes. It means I should become and active participant in our democracy and the public discourse and work to have unjust laws corrected.
People that are not paying their taxes are actively not paying them. Are you suggesting that you have a monopoly on the right way to protest?
Even those that don't benefit you directly, do so indirectly by keeping a functioning society in which you can earn a living and have some ability at peace and happiness.
Please explain how the drug war is benefiting me indirectly (or directly.)
"Some of these sellers may unwittingly be operating businesses, which could trigger tax consequences."
Unwittingly operating a business! For christ sakes, how is that even possible?
Unless the phrase "Ooops! I didn't know that I was operating a business!" jives with your world view, you cannot buy into the 'we just want to catch tax evaders' bullshit.
as much as you may not like having had your tax dollars spent on something as monumental as the internet
He didnt say that he didnt like it. He said that the infrastructure is already paid for by an entity other than the ISP, and as such the "infrastructure costs money" excuse isnt a justification for the ISP to charge a high monthly fee, or to limit service to something unusable.
In the case of cable internet, the coax has been there for over 40 years and right now today that same coax can carry 60+ megabits. Yet here we are with most of us at less about 10% of that or less, and the ISP's are crying poverty all-the-while taking in money like it grew on trees.
The company in TFA is Comcast, who in 2009 handled over 35 billion dollars in revenue while profits were over 20 billion dollars. These guys are profiting 57% of revenue for fuck sakes, and are doing so while leveraging an infrastructure paid for not out of their own pocket, but instead paid for by the government... and on top of it all, they enjoy regulatory protections against competition. Its fucking criminal.
You dont need a $150 motherboard for that setup. An $80 one would do just fine (still offering sata3.0, usb3.0, and ddr3/1333.) Save $70 here.
You don't need to spend $115 for a case and power supply, either. You can literally save 50% here without even trying.
For that video card you can get equal performance for $120, saving $40.
Whats the deal with spending $110 on a 1TB plater these days? $85 at most. 6GB sata doesnt help these drives, either. These drives cant even saturate 1.5GB sata.
I'm already at ~$200 savings, and thats using equal-feature parts. The system doesnt actually need equal feature parts tho, since hes gone overboard on some of the features: he doesn't need a 500W PSU, he doesn't need sata3.0, he doesn't need a pair of PCI x16 slots, he doesn't need to support DDR3-2000 since hes slotting DDR3-1333's, the motherboard doesnt need integrated graphics,...
Where do you draw that conclusion? From the statute, 512(g)(4): "A service provider's compliance with [the counter-notification procedure] shall not subject the service provider to liability for copyright infringement with respect to the material identified in the [original takedown] notice."
Ok, so sneak scenic-vistas picture-app onto iStore which downloads pictures from your own web site, immediately file a DMCA as a pretend 3rd entity, then file a counter-claim and Apple *has* to allow users to download it.. meanwhile you start putting kiddy porn or other shit up which the app now downloads and shows users?
In the end tho, its your memory over-clocking thats most important in gaming. Even the 4-core systems are often fighting for bandwidth at 3ghz+. Thats one of the reasons that Intel is so far ahead on the high end. Their smaller process allows for a much bigger cache. Once AMD moves to the next process size, its going to be a very interesting fight because Intel is nowhere near a drop in process size at this point in time.
If I was doing any sort of heavy calculation type stuff, there is absolutely no way that I wouldn't go with the 1090T. For gaming I would go with the 955 or an i5.
Slashdot Mirror
Might as well add God and the Loch Ness Monster to the list.
No fair counting them twice.
A gas tax (I know taboo) or a coal tax (another taboo) directly taxes the resource that is already scarce and allows the consumer to feel its actual long term costs.
You seem to have gotten the idea that we shouldnt use this stuff, that we should in fact instill financial penalties for using it.
Nothing has benefited mankind more than fossil fuels, and nothing has hurt mankind more than poverty. You don't (or at least didn't) know it, but you are an evil person. You recommend that we harm mankind, and for what?
And by what mechanism do you intend to enforce that?
Personally, I suggest plagues for any and all regions (including my own) where the birth rate is higher than the death rate.
That instills enforcement right into the community, which of course does not want a plague.
4) All box-recipients get double speed broadband, to the detriment of everyone else.
Then I write FakeBox and foil their plans.
Extremely-High-Def-Mohamed-Picture--you-can-see-his-hair-follicles!!!11!.iso
I thought compilers would chop the incoming text up into lots of little strings
Thats the abstraction. You know that this can be done in many ways, right?
...or it could use a hash table to associate the token with a number assigned to it, and pair that with an auxiliary array (indexed by that number) that stores information about the token.
It *could* use your sloppy and memory-hungry std:string crap...
In short, you are basically educated in step one of abstraction, but not the implementation.
The expression evaluator will need a stack along with typed data items (int, float, double, etc). C++ can make that sort of thing much neater.
First, regular old C was designed to make implementing stacks simple. Pre-and-Post increment-and-decrement is absolutely all you need .. in short, the damn thing has operators specifically for stacks and queues. I will repeat the assertion that the only thing STL brings to the table is generic containers. The key word is generic and you havent justified a need for them.
Your datatype argument is not well educated, I am afraid, since STL containers are only generic prior to compile-time. In short, they are not run time generics so STL doesn't add anything for a compiler in that regard. The compile needs to treat things as arbitrary datatypes at runtime, and in that vein OO in general is no better than flag/feature bits and function pointers. Either way it needs to perform tests, branch to specific processing or output routines, etc..
If you dig into it, I'm sure there's many places where C++ would remove a lot of lines of code from a compiler.
Why don't you think that its just as likely that it will require more lines of code? You need to think this through, because OO is most certainly not heralded for enabling shorter program sources.
Does Linden Labs pitch SL as a platform for for-pay items and scripts?
umm.. yes. as in, big-time yes. Its the entire purpose of the site.
Templates - how will they do STL without templates??? Seems like a big fail to me.
The only thing STL adds over traditional container libraries is generics. Why does a compiler need generic containers? The only container that isnt easy to implement-as-needed in the STL that I see a compiler needing (and only for efficiency reasons) is an associative array, and that doesnt actually have to be generic at all.
I would think that it would be far more preferable to (continue to) implement these things specifically for the compiler, and further that people who think that its hard probably shouldn't be involved in the GCC mainline. Perhaps a nice fork for the algorithmically-impaired is in order.
Nobody here said that they dont pay their taxes.
As such, your response is very educational. You are stupid. Very stupid. And emotional. Stupid and emotional. A great combination for those that want to lead you around like a sheep.
So, a library? Really? Think about it.
I 100% agree. A compiler would benefit very little by being moved to C++. Any "OO" use would be almost exactly single instance, and templates wouldnt be part of the subset they would allow. So what, the stream operators? sigh.
Still, that doesn't mean I shouldn't pay my taxes. It means I should become and active participant in our democracy and the public discourse and work to have unjust laws corrected.
People that are not paying their taxes are actively not paying them. Are you suggesting that you have a monopoly on the right way to protest?
Even those that don't benefit you directly, do so indirectly by keeping a functioning society in which you can earn a living and have some ability at peace and happiness.
Please explain how the drug war is benefiting me indirectly (or directly.)
I would correct you but I just dont give a damn about people that are so obviously brainwashed.
You have a receipt for that 40 year old classic Rolls Royce you picked up in college?
"Some of these sellers may unwittingly be operating businesses, which could trigger tax consequences."
Unwittingly operating a business! For christ sakes, how is that even possible?
Unless the phrase "Ooops! I didn't know that I was operating a business!" jives with your world view, you cannot buy into the 'we just want to catch tax evaders' bullshit.
This.
Any competent attorney will tell you to ALWAYS invoke the 5th when you are being COMPELLED to testify about ANYTHING.
You can tell that you have a high quality warez copy of the dvd when it also contains the FBI warning (they didn't leave anything out.)
as much as you may not like having had your tax dollars spent on something as monumental as the internet
He didnt say that he didnt like it. He said that the infrastructure is already paid for by an entity other than the ISP, and as such the "infrastructure costs money" excuse isnt a justification for the ISP to charge a high monthly fee, or to limit service to something unusable.
In the case of cable internet, the coax has been there for over 40 years and right now today that same coax can carry 60+ megabits. Yet here we are with most of us at less about 10% of that or less, and the ISP's are crying poverty all-the-while taking in money like it grew on trees.
The company in TFA is Comcast, who in 2009 handled over 35 billion dollars in revenue while profits were over 20 billion dollars. These guys are profiting 57% of revenue for fuck sakes, and are doing so while leveraging an infrastructure paid for not out of their own pocket, but instead paid for by the government... and on top of it all, they enjoy regulatory protections against competition. Its fucking criminal.
You dont need a $150 motherboard for that setup. An $80 one would do just fine (still offering sata3.0, usb3.0, and ddr3/1333.) Save $70 here.
...
You don't need to spend $115 for a case and power supply, either. You can literally save 50% here without even trying.
For that video card you can get equal performance for $120, saving $40.
Whats the deal with spending $110 on a 1TB plater these days? $85 at most. 6GB sata doesnt help these drives, either. These drives cant even saturate 1.5GB sata.
I'm already at ~$200 savings, and thats using equal-feature parts. The system doesnt actually need equal feature parts tho, since hes gone overboard on some of the features: he doesn't need a 500W PSU, he doesn't need sata3.0, he doesn't need a pair of PCI x16 slots, he doesn't need to support DDR3-2000 since hes slotting DDR3-1333's, the motherboard doesnt need integrated graphics,
Even after the notice, removal, counter-notice, delay, and restoration, Apple or Google can still remove the app for reasons other than copyright.
Not your original claim.
Where do you draw that conclusion? From the statute, 512(g)(4): "A service provider's compliance with [the counter-notification procedure] shall not subject the service provider to liability for copyright infringement with respect to the material identified in the [original takedown] notice."
Ok, so sneak scenic-vistas picture-app onto iStore which downloads pictures from your own web site, immediately file a DMCA as a pretend 3rd entity, then file a counter-claim and Apple *has* to allow users to download it.. meanwhile you start putting kiddy porn or other shit up which the app now downloads and shows users?
Nice try. Your claim fails a simple logic test.
Those hexa-core systems are reported to be very over-clockable. The 1090T is observed to be stable at 4.1ghz on stock cooling and the 1055T up to 3.9ghz.
In the end tho, its your memory over-clocking thats most important in gaming. Even the 4-core systems are often fighting for bandwidth at 3ghz+. Thats one of the reasons that Intel is so far ahead on the high end. Their smaller process allows for a much bigger cache. Once AMD moves to the next process size, its going to be a very interesting fight because Intel is nowhere near a drop in process size at this point in time.
If I was doing any sort of heavy calculation type stuff, there is absolutely no way that I wouldn't go with the 1090T. For gaming I would go with the 955 or an i5.
Anyone who can build comparable systems for significantly less than those bozos, raise your hand.
Shift the second scatter graph to the left from anywhere between $200 to $400, and then draw a new conclusion.
Unless explicitly stated otherwise, yes, it does.
I just copied 100% of your copyrighted post. Right there! Above this text!
It wasnt explicitly stated that I have the right to do so, however that right is implicit in this case.
In other words, you are wrong.