Do you seriously think gcc will ever get totally outclassed so long as they can borrow from LLVM as freely as the corporations driving it forward?
Yes because some of the features in LLVM/CLANG are in direct conflict with design decisions made by RMS about GCC with regards to integration into other tools. This isn't a lack of ability option on the part of the GCC team, it is a lack of intent, or rather deliberate intent to NOT implement for religious reasons.
Exactly - allowing BSD software to be used in commercial products is a DELIBERATE FEATURE, not a bug. Not all software in the world is ever going to be open source. For that software that can't or won't be open source, i'd much rather have the boilerplate/glue code be well tested, than have the programmers wasting their time reinventing the wheel because the open source options had restrictions. This benefits everybody - the resultant commercial software has less bugs, takes less time to develop and maintain, and is cheaper.
Problem is, LLVM/CLANG was designed to be easily integrated into other products, including commercial ones like XCODE. This is against the Stallman dogma, and GPLing a copy of it won't prevent that from happening.
Stallman is free to "get it" and dictate to his own little following what they may or may not do with software under his license. Not everyone agrees, hence we have other (less restrictive, both user and commercial friendly) licenses such as Apache and BSD.
Uh... what? Still using my iPhone 4-S from 2011 here. Still using my early 2011 MBP 15" and battery capacity is still 91%. If/when the battery dies, I'll replace it. Until 1-2 more generations of CPU come out from intel, there's probably not much point upgrading, the machine still smokes (2.2Ghz sandy bridge quad), and it can handle 16 GB of RAM which is plenty.
Neither do I. I have one because it does things and doesn't piss me off. I tried an HTC One recently, and in those 2 weeks I had it, dealt with more bugs and annoying shit like apps that didn't scale to the screen than I have dealt with in the rest of my Apple and Microsoft software combined since 2008.
This is one of those things that some people just don't get. A lot of people don't care about making choices if they're fairly irrelevant in the scheme of things. I'm in the same boat. If it actually makes any real difference to the things I can do, sure, I'll gladly make a choice - but if it is philosophical stuff I really don't care about, I'm really not interested.
I'd wager that Blu-Ray won purely because of the PS3 and Sony's media empire. Heaps of people bought PS3s, and Sony owns a number of media publishing companies who could be told to release on (guess what) Blu-Ray and not HD-DVD. the actual technical specification as far as success/failure went in that particular race was entirely irrelevant.
I'm not sure why we're discussing Apple in this context at all. I guess we just like also-rans here...
Because apple actually have a fairly unified platform, and a userbase that for the most part, actually makes use of many of the features of said platform.
It's a trade-off - you decide what your requirements are and you make your choice.
For me, FreeBSD is "good enough" in terms of security (track record is pretty good), and has functionality that I require on some machines, that OpenBSD does not. Your mileage may vary. For me, shared knowledge across all my *NIX systems is a big plus, so I've standardized on FreeBSD unless there are vendor support requirements that dictate Linux.
VMware tools give you the balloon driver in the guest, which massively improves memory utilisation between guests. It also enables VMware to tell a VM that it's host is under pressure, and essentially "asks" the VM to start paging stuff out that is not active(via the balloon driver consuming memory on the guest, forcing it to swap. The memory "used" by the balloon is memory VMware knows it can re-allocated).
If you do not have the VM tools installed, VMware has no way of telling its guest it is under memory pressure, and the hypervisor will start swapping memory out itself - memory which the guest may be actively using.
It also gives you better driver support.
TLDR version: install the tools unless you are unable to.
Because doing JIT compilation of the configuration file when loaded would be too fucking difficult? Config file format and internal memory structure doesn't/shouldn't have anything to do with each other.
It's a no brainer. You'll want a development environment, and ideally a replica of the environment your app will be running on in production. You'll want to keep these environments clean of other crap that is not related to avoid introducing dependencies on stuff not in your production environment and to simplify troubleshooting.
VMs also give you all the benefits of being able to roll back to prior snapshots to help develop/test an upgrade procedure for new versions of your software.
Slashdot Mirror
I can take GPL software, compile it to binary and distribute and charge 1 million dollars per megabyte of source. The license permits me to do that.
Yes because some of the features in LLVM/CLANG are in direct conflict with design decisions made by RMS about GCC with regards to integration into other tools. This isn't a lack of ability option on the part of the GCC team, it is a lack of intent, or rather deliberate intent to NOT implement for religious reasons.
Exactly - allowing BSD software to be used in commercial products is a DELIBERATE FEATURE, not a bug. Not all software in the world is ever going to be open source. For that software that can't or won't be open source, i'd much rather have the boilerplate/glue code be well tested, than have the programmers wasting their time reinventing the wheel because the open source options had restrictions. This benefits everybody - the resultant commercial software has less bugs, takes less time to develop and maintain, and is cheaper.
Problem is, LLVM/CLANG was designed to be easily integrated into other products, including commercial ones like XCODE. This is against the Stallman dogma, and GPLing a copy of it won't prevent that from happening.
Stallman is free to "get it" and dictate to his own little following what they may or may not do with software under his license. Not everyone agrees, hence we have other (less restrictive, both user and commercial friendly) licenses such as Apache and BSD.
Uh... what? Still using my iPhone 4-S from 2011 here. Still using my early 2011 MBP 15" and battery capacity is still 91%. If/when the battery dies, I'll replace it. Until 1-2 more generations of CPU come out from intel, there's probably not much point upgrading, the machine still smokes (2.2Ghz sandy bridge quad), and it can handle 16 GB of RAM which is plenty.
Does it not play music any more?
So if their kids are using it, the device is considered "dead"?
Neither do I. I have one because it does things and doesn't piss me off. I tried an HTC One recently, and in those 2 weeks I had it, dealt with more bugs and annoying shit like apps that didn't scale to the screen than I have dealt with in the rest of my Apple and Microsoft software combined since 2008.
This is one of those things that some people just don't get. A lot of people don't care about making choices if they're fairly irrelevant in the scheme of things. I'm in the same boat. If it actually makes any real difference to the things I can do, sure, I'll gladly make a choice - but if it is philosophical stuff I really don't care about, I'm really not interested.
I'd wager that Blu-Ray won purely because of the PS3 and Sony's media empire. Heaps of people bought PS3s, and Sony owns a number of media publishing companies who could be told to release on (guess what) Blu-Ray and not HD-DVD. the actual technical specification as far as success/failure went in that particular race was entirely irrelevant.
Because apple actually have a fairly unified platform, and a userbase that for the most part, actually makes use of many of the features of said platform.
Poster: Penny wins. If we are taking things other than looks into it, sorry but I couldn't live with the noise.
btw, I don't give a fuck about my home page.
plus, penny is hot
it's funny, laugh. not everything is a fucking science contest
So RMS writes his own hard drive firmware, yeah?
For the vast majority of FreeBSD installations, USB3 is entirely irrelevant.
OpenBSD also has a lot less functionality.
It's a trade-off - you decide what your requirements are and you make your choice.
For me, FreeBSD is "good enough" in terms of security (track record is pretty good), and has functionality that I require on some machines, that OpenBSD does not. Your mileage may vary. For me, shared knowledge across all my *NIX systems is a big plus, so I've standardized on FreeBSD unless there are vendor support requirements that dictate Linux.
UFS, ext2, NTFS and FAT have been dangerous for me on many occasions. FYI
VMware tools give you the balloon driver in the guest, which massively improves memory utilisation between guests. It also enables VMware to tell a VM that it's host is under pressure, and essentially "asks" the VM to start paging stuff out that is not active(via the balloon driver consuming memory on the guest, forcing it to swap. The memory "used" by the balloon is memory VMware knows it can re-allocated).
If you do not have the VM tools installed, VMware has no way of telling its guest it is under memory pressure, and the hypervisor will start swapping memory out itself - memory which the guest may be actively using.
It also gives you better driver support.
TLDR version: install the tools unless you are unable to.
So, just how long have you been running 10.0 RELEASE?
#justusepfinstead
Seriously.
Because doing JIT compilation of the configuration file when loaded would be too fucking difficult? Config file format and internal memory structure doesn't/shouldn't have anything to do with each other.
It's a no brainer. You'll want a development environment, and ideally a replica of the environment your app will be running on in production. You'll want to keep these environments clean of other crap that is not related to avoid introducing dependencies on stuff not in your production environment and to simplify troubleshooting.
VMs also give you all the benefits of being able to roll back to prior snapshots to help develop/test an upgrade procedure for new versions of your software.