They see things as a triangle: developers, Q&A and IT, and in the middle DevOps.
That's not at all how it works from my experience. While developers and Q&A are very close, developers are not particularly close to IT at all, while Q&A is.
Testing is what requires large infrastructure set-ups. Development doesn't really: the Q&A guy directly gives you access to a working configuration that demonstrates the problem. As a software developer I never have to interact with IT.
Like I said, it's no worse than inclusion polymorphism. In practice it is worse though, because much more serious work has been done on optimizing Java and C# than on optimizing Python.
(Duck typing is essentially the same thing as dynamic typing, the only difference is that duck typing is an orthogonal concept that can also be applied to static typing, but clearly you were not referring to that, and all forms of dynamically typed languages I know of are duck typing)
That's plainly false. Dynamic dispatch based on type of the receiver is present in all OOP languages - it's what OO polymorphism is, and it is the fundamental trait of OOP. But in statically typed languages that is normally implemented using vtables - and neither Java nor C# (when JIT-compiling to native code) are any different from C++ in that respect. This can be trivially demonstrated in case of C# by writing a simple program that makes a virtual call, and then running it under debugger that can dump raw assembly output from JIT - then it's easy to see that the call really is just loading a pointer from vtable and jumping to it.
How does that make what I said false? It's exactly what I said.
In contrast, dynamically typed languages like Python or JS do dynamic dispatch based not only on the type of receiver, but also on the identifier (i.e. a string lookup). This can be optimized to avoid direct string comparisons for most common branches, but it's not trivial and not foolproof.
It's exactly the same in dynamically typed languages. The only difference is that all operations are allowed on all types, but the default implementation of each operation is to raise an exception.
Never heard of anyone having patent issues for C, C++, Python, Ruby, ML or Haskell.
Java/C# are just as bad as dynamic languages. What's static in those languages is just the things that you're allowed to do with them (it only affects type checking), but actually running those functions requires a dynamic dispatch that depends on the type that is in the variable at runtime.
Both languages are heavily patent encumbered (especially C#). Java is also already present on the web, but never took off. They're not even very good languages, Java in particular is very limited and mono-paradigm.
The only MMORPGs that run in the browser that I know of are in Flash... (Dofus for example, 11 million players) Unless you count any online game with a bit of a RPG side a MMORPG.
We use blend (or bitwise tricks before that) and vectors full of 0's or 1's for pseudo-branching, not those instructions. The test/mask instructions are only used to return whether a vector contains at least a non-zero element or stuff like that, which is rarely useful.
Some image processing algorithms I've worked with only work with integers because of numerical stability issues with floats (but then, with work, it would probably be possible to adapt them)
A recent nonsense I ran into is also _mm256_testz_ps. It's not consistent with _mm256_testz_si256, and doesn't even behave like the Intel documentation says (it only checks the high bit, not the whole value)
A lot of instructions on SSE are not really natural element-wise or reduction operations, but often affect only the low/high elements, or the low/high bits. The operations on integers are not consistent: sometimes they're only available for 8-bit, sometimes only for 16-bit or only for 32-bit. 16-bit multiplication is in SSE2 for example, but 32-bit multiplication is only in SSE4.1 and 8-bit and 64-bit multiplication still aren't available. Altivec is more consistent: operations on integers are typically available for all integer sizes.
The only use I have for lightning is keeping up with the lousy Outlook things that management sends. For real calendar management, I use google calendar, which integrates into Lightning very well.
I manage a high-performance library that contains, among others, a SIMD abstraction layer, not unlike Framewave or Accelerate (but better, of course;)) The SSE/AVX variants are clearly the most annoying to support, and are not really orthogonal at all. The PowerPC and NEON variants have much more straightforward implementations.
Slashdot Mirror
As a senior developer, shouldn't your salary be high enough that an additional 7k a year isn't all that much, just an extra month's worth?
Got an error 500 service unavailable
The javascript thingies hurt a lot on mobile phones in particular.
Virtualization only virtualizes the CPU and the RAM.
The rest of the hardware is still emulated, which is why it's so slow.
I've got a ridiculously powerful graphics card (Nvidia GTX 560 TI) and the "game" is hella slow.
Maybe it runs better on windows...
They see things as a triangle: developers, Q&A and IT, and in the middle DevOps.
That's not at all how it works from my experience.
While developers and Q&A are very close, developers are not particularly close to IT at all, while Q&A is.
Testing is what requires large infrastructure set-ups. Development doesn't really: the Q&A guy directly gives you access to a working configuration that demonstrates the problem. As a software developer I never have to interact with IT.
is pretty much all I have to say
Mac OS X has the most terrible UI in the world.
The GNOME 2.x UI is pretty decent though.
GNOME 3 looks like GNOME for tablets.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C_Sharp_(programming_language)#Standardization_and_licensing
Like I said, it's no worse than inclusion polymorphism. In practice it is worse though, because much more serious work has been done on optimizing Java and C# than on optimizing Python.
(Duck typing is essentially the same thing as dynamic typing, the only difference is that duck typing is an orthogonal concept that can also be applied to static typing, but clearly you were not referring to that, and all forms of dynamically typed languages I know of are duck typing)
How does that make what I said false? It's exactly what I said.
It's exactly the same in dynamically typed languages. The only difference is that all operations are allowed on all types, but the default implementation of each operation is to raise an exception.
Never heard of anyone having patent issues for C, C++, Python, Ruby, ML or Haskell.
Java/C# are just as bad as dynamic languages. What's static in those languages is just the things that you're allowed to do with them (it only affects type checking), but actually running those functions requires a dynamic dispatch that depends on the type that is in the variable at runtime.
Both languages are heavily patent encumbered (especially C#). Java is also already present on the web, but never took off.
They're not even very good languages, Java in particular is very limited and mono-paradigm.
Python might be a better idea.
I just bought 8 GB high-end (1600Mhz DDR3) RAM for 30 quid. That makes 240 for 64 GB.
The only MMORPGs that run in the browser that I know of are in Flash... (Dofus for example, 11 million players)
Unless you count any online game with a bit of a RPG side a MMORPG.
We use blend (or bitwise tricks before that) and vectors full of 0's or 1's for pseudo-branching, not those instructions. The test/mask instructions are only used to return whether a vector contains at least a non-zero element or stuff like that, which is rarely useful.
Some image processing algorithms I've worked with only work with integers because of numerical stability issues with floats (but then, with work, it would probably be possible to adapt them)
A recent nonsense I ran into is also _mm256_testz_ps. It's not consistent with _mm256_testz_si256, and doesn't even behave like the Intel documentation says (it only checks the high bit, not the whole value)
A lot of instructions on SSE are not really natural element-wise or reduction operations, but often affect only the low/high elements, or the low/high bits. The operations on integers are not consistent: sometimes they're only available for 8-bit, sometimes only for 16-bit or only for 32-bit. 16-bit multiplication is in SSE2 for example, but 32-bit multiplication is only in SSE4.1 and 8-bit and 64-bit multiplication still aren't available.
Altivec is more consistent: operations on integers are typically available for all integer sizes.
The only use I have for lightning is keeping up with the lousy Outlook things that management sends.
For real calendar management, I use google calendar, which integrates into Lightning very well.
a VLIW does multiple instructions in parallel, but each of these are usually pretty small and simple.
I manage a high-performance library that contains, among others, a SIMD abstraction layer, not unlike Framewave or Accelerate (but better, of course ;))
The SSE/AVX variants are clearly the most annoying to support, and are not really orthogonal at all.
The PowerPC and NEON variants have much more straightforward implementations.
*remote* cluster = cloud
I suggest you read the wikipedia articles, from which I gathered that information.
Clearly you don't understand the scale of the Chernobyl incident.
Fukushima was nothing like it.