I think as most have pointed out, table maximum is your major adversary, it doesn't take long to exceed it.
Another problem is that most roulette wheels have 0 and sometimes a 00 which in which case you will always lose betting on a color, which is what tips the odds in the houses favor.
Finally, if you L, L, L, L, W, you haven't made anything at this point you've just broken even. The other pain in the ass is the casino's power to chuck you out or shut down the wheel. If they see you betting this way and they don't like it, they can and likely will remove you from the premises.
labor may go down in value, but the costs of everything labor produces will fall to
Eventually. Initially, my hunch is that prices will be the same unless competing products get into a price war (say McDonalds starts charging a buck a Big Mac or something and Burger King needs to step up).
Corporations are going to try to milk as much profit from the new and improved systems as possible, that is after all the point of business. If this generates unemployment or lowers the average household income to the point that people are no longer paying the 5+ bucks for a value meal, they start to drop the price so they can still move product.
Also, robots need maintenance, parts, you have to initially purchase them, and probably (at least initially) you'll need a human operator or a bunch to oversee the operation to ensure that nothings going awry. As a result:
there will still be jobs, they'll just be different
Two, cost of labor will go down, but these other costs will still keep the cost of labor up a bit.
You are correct sir. Don't know where I've heard it, since I'm not a medical authority, but I've heard basically the same thing.
It will build muscle, however, because the contraction of the muscle tears the fibers which is what muscle growth is all about. But the calories would be expended by the machine not your body.
what was Sun's complaint about Microsoft's
implementation of the JVM then?
IIRC, the complaint was not that MS built there own JVM or optimized it for windows (again IIRC, MS's optimizations have since made there way into Sun's JDK distro for Win32). There complaint was that Microsoft took core classes in the language (i.e. stuff like java.lang.* and java.awt.*) and/or the JVM and modified the actual behavior of these classes which goes beyond simple optimization. The result was a program that ran on Microsoft's JVM could potentially run much differently on a standard JVM. Also, the whole lawsuit was heavily politically motivated. Sadly on a somewhat related note, the corp I work for purchased a product that runs only on MS's JVM. Its pretty stupid that I need to have a Windows instance around now just to run this app.
I don't think its helpful or 'sensible' to
characterize open source people as fanatics
who get their "panties in a bunch".
O.k. maybe too harsh of words. More of a jumping on the defensive before an onslaught of comments comes forth. Really, my only point here is there are some folks out there who feel that if a piece of software is not completely open in free, it must be bad, no scratch that, more evil than evil, bad-wrong even. Anyway, this is the argument I hear many times when Java comes up and why its bad. Its just rubbish to me. Would it be nice if it was a little more open, sure, but at the same time I'm not worried that its so proprietary that if Sun goes belly up, or if Sun goes crazy and pulls the plug on Java or something like that, that my clients/customers and I are gonna be fubar'd because we chose to use Java.
Java GUI apps run great on a box like you have. I personally develop on a dual-PIII 800 with 768MB of RAM and it works great, but honestly, the workstations we're developing on are just not necessarilly on everybody's desk (or at least from what I've seen from the corporations I've worked for). Most boxes don't have more the 256MB of ram, and are typically no faster than 1GHz.
Java GUI applications are typicallly sluggish from what I've seen. Usually, a bit more memory is whats needed to make them run better, or such has been my experience. I once debated this with somebody saying well memory's pretty damn cheap, but they spun around with, "cheap on PC's, how bout for that Sun workstation". Damn good point in my opinion.
Will a Java GUI ever perform better than C/C++? I doubt it, but I think it can get kinda close if they keep hacking away and improving the GUI optimizations, etc. To those folks, I'd like to challenge you to port your application though from Windows, UNIX, Mac and tell me how you do. And before somebody steps up and says, "Hey, Java's not as portable as you state", I'll respond with yes I know, but I usually only have to tweak a line or two to get it to work somewhere else, and what I've seen is by doing that it will run anywhere a lot better.
Aside from that, though, Java is rock solid on the server side. Servlet/JSP/J2EE, properly impelmented (unfortunately, its so broad of a subject I don't think this happens most of the time) is quick and maintaining complex business logic is relatively easy.
I'm personally a little tired of the argument that Java is bad because its not open source. While Sun's implementation of the JVM is closed, Java as a language is light years from being a closed source, completely under Sun's control kind of thing.
1) JVM is an open specification (how you implement it and whether that is open or closed is up to you) There are many JDK's/JVM's that you can use to run Java programs other than Sun's (IBM, Kaffe, or whatever the open source one is (and I'm sure there are more than just that, etc)
2) You get the source code for all of the classes/libraries that come with java when you download Sun's JDK. These include the core classes like java.lang.String, etc, etc. The only thing missing, as stated above is the source code for the compiler/interpreter and other tools.
3) There are open source JVM's (i.e. kaffe, etc) although I've found them to be lacking, but they'll get there
So the argument that Sun has control of Java is moot, you can build/run/install and entire Java application without ever touching Sun tools.
Is Java/JVM totally free? Depends who you ask. Its free/open enough for me, personally, but I can see how some open source fanatics can get their panties in a bunch over this.
Also, unlike M$ products, I think the design of Java's classes shows insight, and well thought out design, so in a way I for one am for Sun keeping a bit of control over the language and "core" classes, but thats my opinion of course.
I don't see whats so hard about all this and/or visionary on Honda's part. Crash detection is very easy. Set some sensors up around the car, when they crumple, you crashed.
This is certainly an interesting idea/feature and I'd really have to try it out before passing judgement. However, my concern is what about those times when braking is not the ideal solution, gas is. Granted in many situations braking can help, but I'd be worried about the others as well...
You've clearly never worked for/with a tech support group. No lie, where I work "Please pass me through to your supervisor, etc., etc." results in: call rep passes call to another call rep sitting next to them, who answers, "I'm a supervisor how can I help".
The other one they use is, "I am the supervisor". Funny sh*t. And yes, our customer service (contrary to what the call rep organization thinks) sucks, and sucks royally.
Technically, as we know, you can sign your own certificates for free. Only problem is those who visit your site will get all those wonderful warnings and popups, etc.
Why not have a self-regulating authority? Well, let me submit a request to sign my certificate saying I'm Amazon.com, hijack the domain and steal credit cards. The point of CA's is to do some background checking to verify you are who you say you are. Debatable, agreed, but is you're average script kiddie, cracker, etc. gonna shell out bucks to get a fake cert? Probably not. Not to mention once money is involved, there is an audit trail of some sort.
As for whether the prices are gouged a bit, I won't argue with you there. Seems that it shouldn't cost as much as it does, but at the same time I'd think most companies rack it up as a cost of doing business (just like rent, equipment leases, etc)
On his suggestion of removing AWT, you can't, at least completely. Swing is built on AWT. On another note, anybody ever try to do multithreading with a Swing app, you get some interesting results and Sun doesn't recommend doing it. So really you could remove it from the public API docs, but it'd still be under the hood (like many com.sun classes)
On his suggestion about modifying the I/O classes, true buffering is important for performance reasons on most applications. However, to me the way the Java crew implemented I/O is genius and its patterns based. You construct the exact tool you want by stringing together lots of simpler tools together. Yes it would make life easier for those who aren't comfortable with this approach, but at that point why not bastardize it completely and go back to a C style fopen() function.
Incidentally, I wouldn't mind seeing a revision to the RandomAccessFile class in that it does behave a bit like the C-style fopen(). I don't know how you'd improve it, but it would be nice if it was consistant with the rest of the I/O classes.
Finally, on file access, while I haven't done a whole lot of Java development on Windows or Mac, I've got to believe that a tree based file system can address all of your file access needs. Granted you might not be able to do something like new File("C:\\WINDOWS\\"), but why couldn't that be represented and accessed by "/C/WINDOWS/" or use URL style syntax. Perhaps it already does and this is his gripe. This sort of reminds me of my experience of using Perl on VMS. You could access the VMS filesystem using either the native syntax or a UNIX equivalent.
Have you ever used the Outlook web based client? It sucks (at least on Exchange 5.5). Using it for an hour to try it out or even to access e-mail remotely once or twice a day isn't a good way to experience it.
I've recently had to start using this regularly as the corporate security goons closed down the IMAP and POP connectivity to our exchange box. I miss "important" e-mails because I have to manually push the refresh button every few minutes or so, there's some goofy requirement that body of my message has to be less than 100k, or else you need to send it as an attachment (this is REALLY annoying when replying to an already replied to a couple times e-mail), and looking up my coworkers with brutal names in the global address book is close to impossible (after composing a message). This is just a start to my long list of complaints.
If you can use it, great, but I and several other Linux and Mac users where I work all seem to have similar feelings about the interface. I'm looking forward to trying it out, but as I said, we're on Exchange 5.5 so I guess I'll be waiting a few months still.
Also, if you note some of the other posts and read Ximian's site (although its not totally obvious) they don't parse the web client (that would suck), they use web DAV which only gets turned on by enabling the web client. As for breaking this with a disService pack, I suppose its possible, but in talking to the Ximian folks at LinuxWorld earlier in the year, they said doing so would break lots of stuff even on Microsoft's end... Anybody else know how true or false that statement is since I'm not all that familiar with webdav?
The group I'm in actually have a lot of these practices in place, and life is beautiful for us geeks...
Re:Free ideas and free code development for Google
on
Google Programming Contest
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
For once, I just might agree with a binary only submission.
Ahh, but if you read the submission requirements, you have to submit your source, a Makefile, and use only GPL or other open source libraries, so they've covered their butt there.
I hope anybody who does decide to participate in this contest realizes the implications of it. $10K is nothing for Google to pay to get ideas, source code, etc. Also note, in the submission requirements, any entry made to Google becomes their sole property. Christ, I can afford $10K, a tour of my house, allow somebody to run their prize winning code on the data on my computers if somebody's going to give me this kind of intellectual property. I really think that its a pretty raw deal for the developer.
I didn't believe you at first, (because I could have sworn I've done this before, and because I hate language nazi's:-) but upon testing it again, it has proven to be true. I took a class A, defined a constant and a class B which referenced the constant compiled both. I then changed the constant in A to a new value, recompiled just class A, moved all source code away from my class directories (in case Java might attempt to recompile B) and voila, I got the old value back when I ran B.
Its good to have a language nazi around every now and again, but damn do I hate being wrong.
Java is bloated. I have experienced this just as you have. However, take a step back and use the old throw hardware at it philosophy. I have a half a gigabyte of memory in my machine. Guess, what, all these really supposed slow, bloated apps (Forte/Netbeans, OpenOffice, JBuilder), perform reasonably on my box now.
So yes, java is a memory pig, much more than a C or C++ app. Lets face it though, a half gig of RAM isn't that much anymore (hence why I have it) and once you have the memory to avoid swapping it actually runs pretty well. Its not the most desireable solution, but its is a very attainable solution. I guess it boils down to how badly do you want to get Java applications up and running in your environment. I personally find the payoff of running Java appliations far outweighs a $150 worth of memory, if that.
Closed, no, but controlled by one corporate entity, yes.
The JVM is an open specification. It very rigidly defines how your underlying system should behave when it encounters said bytecode. The Java language, at its core, is also openly defined tying it back to the bytecode.
However, Sun has the final say as to what can happen to these specifications. If something does not map to these specifications, it cannot claim to be Java. As a result Sun, controls the destiny of the language. I for one, don't think this is a bad thing.
First off, Sun really knew what they were doing when they came up with the language. For example, when trying to do something in Java, if I find myself fighting the language or doing something that doesn't feel right, I can usually go and find a better way of doing it in Java. I don't ever recall doing this and finding the "Sun" way to be a worse implementation than what I had originally proposed. I feel that a standards commitee would not have the insight that Sun would have into enhancing and evolving the language. The other thing is that standards commitees have this terrible habit of slowing time-to-market considerably. Frankly, Sun has shown they can do the job of controlling the language's evolution without pissing off developers and they can do it faster than a standards body. This works for me.
That's because javac will translate the Direction.NORTH into a static constant 1 during compilation. The only problem that
causes is it means you have to recompile everything that uses Direction's constants if the enumeration changes.
Javac will not do that... Remember java has dynamic binding. You could just recompile the Direction class and rerun your programs and the change would automagically take effect. (which contrasts the last part of your statement)
However, at runtime compilation the JIT compiler might take advantage of this once it calculates the static initialization blocks of that class and all the classes it inherits from are. Again, since static initialization blocks can be any code you'd like, my guess is this might be a difficult task for optimization and hence a constant is not used.
By immaculate conception via miticlorians of course. She never actually gets stuck. She just gets knocked up standing next to Anakin. The two of them getting it on would be way too graphic for the kiddie viewers.
Re:A PS2 with different games
on
XBox Released
·
· Score: 1
Check out Netscape 6.2, especially if you are on Linux.
Its not nearly as bloated as previous 6.x versions, it renders fast, it renders well, and I feel that it is yet again competition for IE (with the exception on pages that stupid web developers created that use MS proprietary stuff) I also feel it kicks the crap out of Mozilla.
In reading his answers, I have to agree that he is extremely biased towards LISP. I personally was not that impressed with the language at all. However, for writing some AI projects it made for much easier work handling dynamic lists of items which was the only benefit I saw of it.
As I mention in another post in this discussion, I've often wondered if Perl could be used just as easily gaining the benefit and familiarity of writing in a C-like language along with using things like splice/push/pop and other array based notation to handle the lists aspect that LISP does so well.
Books, I can't really help you. I learned Lisp out of some book that I'm sure is now out of print , but was titled something like Common Lisp: Programmers Guide or something. It was good, but ancient in computer book years now. (then again I don't think LISP has changed all that much). As for your other questions...
Lisp is used for AI because it makes easy work of slashing through lists of items, etc. (I can't go further since its been a while since I've done AI and LISP) It can also be used for all sorts of other programming tasks, etc. I've often wondered after learning Perl soon after, if Perl could actually accomplish all the great stuff LISP is used for just as easily. Anybody know the answer?
As for Prolog its also used for AI, but I'm pretty sure its a AI specific language (I'm sure it can be twisted to do other things though).
One of the main differences between the two, if memory serves correct, is that LISP is ones a forward chaining language whereas the other is backward chaining (or vice-versa). Again if memory serves me correctly these have to do with deduction and learning. So as far as I know, no they aren't that related.
Slashdot Mirror
Another problem is that most roulette wheels have 0 and sometimes a 00 which in which case you will always lose betting on a color, which is what tips the odds in the houses favor.
Finally, if you L, L, L, L, W, you haven't made anything at this point you've just broken even. The other pain in the ass is the casino's power to chuck you out or shut down the wheel. If they see you betting this way and they don't like it, they can and likely will remove you from the premises.
Eventually. Initially, my hunch is that prices will be the same unless competing products get into a price war (say McDonalds starts charging a buck a Big Mac or something and Burger King needs to step up).
Corporations are going to try to milk as much profit from the new and improved systems as possible, that is after all the point of business. If this generates unemployment or lowers the average household income to the point that people are no longer paying the 5+ bucks for a value meal, they start to drop the price so they can still move product.
Also, robots need maintenance, parts, you have to initially purchase them, and probably (at least initially) you'll need a human operator or a bunch to oversee the operation to ensure that nothings going awry. As a result:
You are correct sir. Don't know where I've heard it, since I'm not a medical authority, but I've heard basically the same thing.
It will build muscle, however, because the contraction of the muscle tears the fibers which is what muscle growth is all about. But the calories would be expended by the machine not your body.
IIRC, the complaint was not that MS built there own JVM or optimized it for windows (again IIRC, MS's optimizations have since made there way into Sun's JDK distro for Win32). There complaint was that Microsoft took core classes in the language (i.e. stuff like java.lang.* and java.awt.*) and/or the JVM and modified the actual behavior of these classes which goes beyond simple optimization. The result was a program that ran on Microsoft's JVM could potentially run much differently on a standard JVM. Also, the whole lawsuit was heavily politically motivated. Sadly on a somewhat related note, the corp I work for purchased a product that runs only on MS's JVM. Its pretty stupid that I need to have a Windows instance around now just to run this app.
I don't think its helpful or 'sensible' to characterize open source people as fanatics who get their "panties in a bunch".
O.k. maybe too harsh of words. More of a jumping on the defensive before an onslaught of comments comes forth. Really, my only point here is there are some folks out there who feel that if a piece of software is not completely open in free, it must be bad, no scratch that, more evil than evil, bad-wrong even. Anyway, this is the argument I hear many times when Java comes up and why its bad. Its just rubbish to me. Would it be nice if it was a little more open, sure, but at the same time I'm not worried that its so proprietary that if Sun goes belly up, or if Sun goes crazy and pulls the plug on Java or something like that, that my clients/customers and I are gonna be fubar'd because we chose to use Java.
Java GUI apps run great on a box like you have. I personally develop on a dual-PIII 800 with 768MB of RAM and it works great, but honestly, the workstations we're developing on are just not necessarilly on everybody's desk (or at least from what I've seen from the corporations I've worked for). Most boxes don't have more the 256MB of ram, and are typically no faster than 1GHz.
Java GUI applications are typicallly sluggish from what I've seen. Usually, a bit more memory is whats needed to make them run better, or such has been my experience. I once debated this with somebody saying well memory's pretty damn cheap, but they spun around with, "cheap on PC's, how bout for that Sun workstation". Damn good point in my opinion.
Will a Java GUI ever perform better than C/C++? I doubt it, but I think it can get kinda close if they keep hacking away and improving the GUI optimizations, etc. To those folks, I'd like to challenge you to port your application though from Windows, UNIX, Mac and tell me how you do. And before somebody steps up and says, "Hey, Java's not as portable as you state", I'll respond with yes I know, but I usually only have to tweak a line or two to get it to work somewhere else, and what I've seen is by doing that it will run anywhere a lot better.
Aside from that, though, Java is rock solid on the server side. Servlet/JSP/J2EE, properly impelmented (unfortunately, its so broad of a subject I don't think this happens most of the time) is quick and maintaining complex business logic is relatively easy.
I'm personally a little tired of the argument that Java is bad because its not open source. While Sun's implementation of the JVM is closed, Java as a language is light years from being a closed source, completely under Sun's control kind of thing.
1) JVM is an open specification (how you implement it and whether that is open or closed is up to you) There are many JDK's/JVM's that you can use to run Java programs other than Sun's (IBM, Kaffe, or whatever the open source one is (and I'm sure there are more than just that, etc)
2) You get the source code for all of the classes/libraries that come with java when you download Sun's JDK. These include the core classes like java.lang.String, etc, etc. The only thing missing, as stated above is the source code for the compiler/interpreter and other tools.
3) There are open source JVM's (i.e. kaffe, etc) although I've found them to be lacking, but they'll get there
So the argument that Sun has control of Java is moot, you can build/run/install and entire Java application without ever touching Sun tools.
Is Java/JVM totally free? Depends who you ask. Its free/open enough for me, personally, but I can see how some open source fanatics can get their panties in a bunch over this.
Also, unlike M$ products, I think the design of Java's classes shows insight, and well thought out design, so in a way I for one am for Sun keeping a bit of control over the language and "core" classes, but thats my opinion of course.
I don't see whats so hard about all this and/or visionary on Honda's part. Crash detection is very easy. Set some sensors up around the car, when they crumple, you crashed.
Crash avoidance...thats another problem entirely.
Sorry, couldn't resist...
This is certainly an interesting idea/feature and I'd really have to try it out before passing judgement. However, my concern is what about those times when braking is not the ideal solution, gas is. Granted in many situations braking can help, but I'd be worried about the others as well...
If they don't like it, grab a GPS and collect the things in the park and toss them.
Also, it will create jobs for many of the laid of IT folks, so geocaching will be good for the economy.
Its actually all to help the economy.
1) Make example of guy who donates to charity
2) Scare people into holding onto income
3) Tax people on said income
4) Profit.
The other one they use is, "I am the supervisor". Funny sh*t. And yes, our customer service (contrary to what the call rep organization thinks) sucks, and sucks royally.
Take everything you got and bet on Buster Douglas when he fights Tyson.
Why not have a self-regulating authority? Well, let me submit a request to sign my certificate saying I'm Amazon.com, hijack the domain and steal credit cards. The point of CA's is to do some background checking to verify you are who you say you are. Debatable, agreed, but is you're average script kiddie, cracker, etc. gonna shell out bucks to get a fake cert? Probably not. Not to mention once money is involved, there is an audit trail of some sort.
As for whether the prices are gouged a bit, I won't argue with you there. Seems that it shouldn't cost as much as it does, but at the same time I'd think most companies rack it up as a cost of doing business (just like rent, equipment leases, etc)
On his suggestion of removing AWT, you can't, at least completely. Swing is built on AWT. On another note, anybody ever try to do multithreading with a Swing app, you get some interesting results and Sun doesn't recommend doing it. So really you could remove it from the public API docs, but it'd still be under the hood (like many com.sun classes)
On his suggestion about modifying the I/O classes, true buffering is important for performance reasons on most applications. However, to me the way the Java crew implemented I/O is genius and its patterns based. You construct the exact tool you want by stringing together lots of simpler tools together. Yes it would make life easier for those who aren't comfortable with this approach, but at that point why not bastardize it completely and go back to a C style fopen() function.
Incidentally, I wouldn't mind seeing a revision to the RandomAccessFile class in that it does behave a bit like the C-style fopen(). I don't know how you'd improve it, but it would be nice if it was consistant with the rest of the I/O classes.
Finally, on file access, while I haven't done a whole lot of Java development on Windows or Mac, I've got to believe that a tree based file system can address all of your file access needs. Granted you might not be able to do something like new File("C:\\WINDOWS\\"), but why couldn't that be represented and accessed by "/C/WINDOWS/" or use URL style syntax. Perhaps it already does and this is his gripe. This sort of reminds me of my experience of using Perl on VMS. You could access the VMS filesystem using either the native syntax or a UNIX equivalent.
I've recently had to start using this regularly as the corporate security goons closed down the IMAP and POP connectivity to our exchange box. I miss "important" e-mails because I have to manually push the refresh button every few minutes or so, there's some goofy requirement that body of my message has to be less than 100k, or else you need to send it as an attachment (this is REALLY annoying when replying to an already replied to a couple times e-mail), and looking up my coworkers with brutal names in the global address book is close to impossible (after composing a message). This is just a start to my long list of complaints.
If you can use it, great, but I and several other Linux and Mac users where I work all seem to have similar feelings about the interface. I'm looking forward to trying it out, but as I said, we're on Exchange 5.5 so I guess I'll be waiting a few months still.
Also, if you note some of the other posts and read Ximian's site (although its not totally obvious) they don't parse the web client (that would suck), they use web DAV which only gets turned on by enabling the web client. As for breaking this with a disService pack, I suppose its possible, but in talking to the Ximian folks at LinuxWorld earlier in the year, they said doing so would break lots of stuff even on Microsoft's end... Anybody else know how true or false that statement is since I'm not all that familiar with webdav?
http://freshmeat.net/articles/view/157
The group I'm in actually have a lot of these practices in place, and life is beautiful for us geeks...
Ahh, but if you read the submission requirements, you have to submit your source, a Makefile, and use only GPL or other open source libraries, so they've covered their butt there.
I hope anybody who does decide to participate in this contest realizes the implications of it. $10K is nothing for Google to pay to get ideas, source code, etc. Also note, in the submission requirements, any entry made to Google becomes their sole property. Christ, I can afford $10K, a tour of my house, allow somebody to run their prize winning code on the data on my computers if somebody's going to give me this kind of intellectual property. I really think that its a pretty raw deal for the developer.
I didn't believe you at first, (because I could have sworn I've done this before, and because I hate language nazi's :-) but upon testing it again, it has proven to be true. I took a class A, defined a constant and a class B which referenced the constant compiled both. I then changed the constant in A to a new value, recompiled just class A, moved all source code away from my class directories (in case Java might attempt to recompile B) and voila, I got the old value back when I ran B.
Its good to have a language nazi around every now and again, but damn do I hate being wrong.
So yes, java is a memory pig, much more than a C or C++ app. Lets face it though, a half gig of RAM isn't that much anymore (hence why I have it) and once you have the memory to avoid swapping it actually runs pretty well. Its not the most desireable solution, but its is a very attainable solution. I guess it boils down to how badly do you want to get Java applications up and running in your environment. I personally find the payoff of running Java appliations far outweighs a $150 worth of memory, if that.
The JVM is an open specification. It very rigidly defines how your underlying system should behave when it encounters said bytecode. The Java language, at its core, is also openly defined tying it back to the bytecode.
However, Sun has the final say as to what can happen to these specifications. If something does not map to these specifications, it cannot claim to be Java. As a result Sun, controls the destiny of the language. I for one, don't think this is a bad thing.
First off, Sun really knew what they were doing when they came up with the language. For example, when trying to do something in Java, if I find myself fighting the language or doing something that doesn't feel right, I can usually go and find a better way of doing it in Java. I don't ever recall doing this and finding the "Sun" way to be a worse implementation than what I had originally proposed. I feel that a standards commitee would not have the insight that Sun would have into enhancing and evolving the language. The other thing is that standards commitees have this terrible habit of slowing time-to-market considerably. Frankly, Sun has shown they can do the job of controlling the language's evolution without pissing off developers and they can do it faster than a standards body. This works for me.
Javac will not do that... Remember java has dynamic binding. You could just recompile the Direction class and rerun your programs and the change would automagically take effect. (which contrasts the last part of your statement)
However, at runtime compilation the JIT compiler might take advantage of this once it calculates the static initialization blocks of that class and all the classes it inherits from are. Again, since static initialization blocks can be any code you'd like, my guess is this might be a difficult task for optimization and hence a constant is not used.
Anyway, as I digress...
By immaculate conception via miticlorians of course. She never actually gets stuck. She just gets knocked up standing next to Anakin. The two of them getting it on would be way too graphic for the kiddie viewers.
Its not nearly as bloated as previous 6.x versions, it renders fast, it renders well, and I feel that it is yet again competition for IE (with the exception on pages that stupid web developers created that use MS proprietary stuff) I also feel it kicks the crap out of Mozilla.
As I mention in another post in this discussion, I've often wondered if Perl could be used just as easily gaining the benefit and familiarity of writing in a C-like language along with using things like splice/push/pop and other array based notation to handle the lists aspect that LISP does so well.
Lisp is used for AI because it makes easy work of slashing through lists of items, etc. (I can't go further since its been a while since I've done AI and LISP) It can also be used for all sorts of other programming tasks, etc. I've often wondered after learning Perl soon after, if Perl could actually accomplish all the great stuff LISP is used for just as easily. Anybody know the answer?
As for Prolog its also used for AI, but I'm pretty sure its a AI specific language (I'm sure it can be twisted to do other things though).
One of the main differences between the two, if memory serves correct, is that LISP is ones a forward chaining language whereas the other is backward chaining (or vice-versa). Again if memory serves me correctly these have to do with deduction and learning. So as far as I know, no they aren't that related.