As far as C# vs.Java. I am really impressed with the CLR/CLI stuff. Right now, as it stands, Java is a proprietary language. Unless we see SUN Open Source Java (or push it through a standards committee), we *may* see a JDK 1.5... but no one will use it.
I'm not sure how much C# coding you've done. In recent months I've written quite a bit of C# and.NET code. Let me enlighten you with regards to the implication that C# is either not proprietary or cross platform.
It may be true that C# - the language - is cross platform and may acheive recognition as a standard of some sort. However, the.NET framework (which almost every C# program written uses) is not cross platform nor will it be a standard.
Why? Because of small details in the API. Let me give an example. Let's say you want to find out what operating system your program is running on. In Java, you do this:
using System; ...
Console.Writeline( System.Environment.OSVersion.Platform );
Now this all looks very nice. The problem is that the Java version gives you a string, and the C# version gives you a... enum. That's right folks, to find out what operating system you are running, the.NET platform gives you an enumerated integral constant. This means that you have three choices for which operating systems you can discover you are running on, and which operating system the operating system can tell you it is.
Those three choices are:
Win32NT
Win32S
Win32Windows.
(If you want to verify this yourself, check out the System.PlatformID enumeration.)
Seriously, if you want to improve the quality of code on MS platforms, rewrite the platform. It's got very little to do with redneck Joe writing code.
Not to mention the terrible, terrible code that Microsoft provides in their documentation. Kids, if you ever want to write a quality program, don't EVER use Microsoft example code - they've got the most hideous bugs!
My office is also in shock. Nobody is doing any work, we are simply watching the news and listening to the radio. Several people in my office have friends or relatives in New York, and it appears that one of our clients has lost an employee on the flight from Boston to LA. Some of our employees are in the US right now. Our deepest sorrows and love go out to those affected.
Ha! I used to work in a copy place.. usually we would use that line to get out of copying something that would be a pain to do.
"We'd love to make a single copy of 'War and Peace' for you, but we can't because it is copyrighted. However, feel free to make use of our self server copiers.."
There are only a finite number of atoms in any given object that you can lathe away.
Your assertion that a computer cannot do inifinite things is quite wrong. A computer may have a finite instruction set, but has access to an infinite amount of memory via networking. A computer can, in fact, do an infinite number of things. Even if you try really hard, you cannot write all programs that can be written.
Running a devfs system without devfsd is almost impossible. Unless you like recompiling just about every program you have (especially the important ones like login and probably stuff like glibc), and re-writing all your conf files. Besides, devfsd works really well.
It is really an unfortunate paradox that many of the most interesting ideas never see mass production because of entrenched methodology. The PCB industry is huge and established. Conventional PCB manufacturing is well understood and cheap.
To overhaul one of the most fundamental building blocks for modern technology would be an amazingly tough thing to do. For starters, the technology would have to be cheaper and integrate seamlessly with existing manufacturing processes.
If you want to recycle parts, why not just heat the parts to just past the melting point of solder, then suck the parts off the boards?
The IRC protocol is terrible. It lacks any reasonable guarantees about concurrency, and commands arrive and are sent in no particular order, so you can't synchronize commands and, say, the error the server sends back for it. Servers have broken the RFC so that is at least works (good thing, writing an IRC client would be a nightmare otherwise) but IRC is still a mess.
I am in the process of writing a framework for IRC in Java (Martyr) so believe me, I've seen my share of IRC. The project is aptly named.
Actually, Canada has had four major parties since the 70s at least, and there has been an explosion of small parties since then. I believe that the federal election held in the early 90's had no less than 14 parties. Since then there have been laws passes to reduce the number of parties (you have to have a candidate in at least 50 ridings, etc).
I prefer it this way actually. The big parties are mostly alike (they'll get in office, screw something up, get ousted, repeat) so you can vote on specific policies that are important to you and your opinion actually does get reflected in the election results rather than getting mixed up with the wide-pleasing policies of the large parties.
If configuring and installing IRC is some huge task that is beyond the average idiot - then I say keep it up!
I use IRC mostly to chat with my friends, most of whom live in another city. It is convenient that they are IRC junkies, but it is something that binds our group together. I also use IRC to check on the debian project.
I've found mailling lists are the source for my hobby info, not IRC.
Canada Trust and TD are merging, so perhaps you might get access to the excellent Canada Trust on-line banking. I've never had any compatibility problems, they do everything server-side (the way it ought to be). The only browser problem I've had was when they decided to go from 40 bit to 128 bit ssl, and I had to upgrade my browser (whoopee.)
Their on-line banking is also quite complete, I can pay all my bills, add companies (more companies than other banks), even do specialty stuff like change my address.
I've been generally quite happy with Canada Trust since I moved my bank account there after getting mad at CIBC at the tender age of 5. I hope the merger doesn't ruin Canada Trust.
Linux is nice and all.. but I don't really want it running my car.
The more complex an OS, the more likely bugs and security flaws will creep in (Linux hasn't shown itself to be an exception), so I'll take an OS that is proportional in size to the device it is controlling.
What is wrong with your approach? I can see your metaphore but..
Not scalable Your design implies that only one person can add data at a time. Which is fine for a small operation, but if you get a few additions per second then you either corrupt your file (two write handles open) or generate errors for the others. Allowing the others to be delayed is starting to write more backend stuff. In my opinion, not scalable is a big problem.
Not instant Using your method means that data inserted into the system won't show up in the application right away - they have to wait until you do it manually. This means either more work for you, or another weak link in the chain, such as a script run from cron.
Not universal You can only have one application writing to the file, otherwise you need some API or have multiple copies of the code (never a good idea.) SQL is universal across languages and platforms. SQL isn't quite, but pretty close to Java's Write Once Use Anywhere.
These days, using a database from any kind of application, especially form-handling web applications, is trivial.
It also means that if you want to do excessive string manipulation, and you don't want the overhead of reference-counted strings, or if you just want to mess around with it using pointers, you can do so.
It's the kind of thing that's especially handy where you have to interact with legacy code - and one thing Microsoft is all about is legacy support.
I don't think that there are *any* modern Java VMs that still use reference counting. Reference counting has two major problems:
Slow.
Wrong - it is easy to trick the system into locking objects together so they can't be collected.
And I'll bring out the badly beaten and bruised horse one more time for those fools who don't read things the first time: If you have to interact with the OS or 'legacy' code, you have JNI - the Java Native Interface - that lets you do that. JNI is nice, you get to use all the native functions you want *and* you can use all the Java classes.
If you want a flexible, tiny webserver that can communicate over ethernet, serial, and can attach stuff using the wonderful 1-wire technology, a TINI is what you need.
This is what I am doing with my TINI, for those who think such a thing is not useful.
Forget about PICs, they may be useful for charging your phone (there is one in my phone's charging base) but they don't run Java, and they don't talk ethernet.
First off, Java references are VERY different from C++ references.
In Java, you only get a reference to an object, *ever*. There is no 'real' or pointer objects. This makes the syntax much more managable. Java references are capable of representing a polymorphic object, can be assigned to new objects at will, and compared (as a memory location) with other references.
Thus, Java references are really more like C++ pointers, and not at all like C++ references, which are almost useless.
I must dissagree with your point #2.. this isn't a Java problem. If you put inexperienced people on a big system, it doesn't matter what language you are using, you will still end up with a mess.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not sure how much C# coding you've done. In recent months I've written quite a bit of C# and .NET code. Let me enlighten you with regards to the implication that C# is either not proprietary or cross platform.
It may be true that C# - the language - is cross platform and may acheive recognition as a standard of some sort. However, the .NET framework (which almost every C# program written uses) is not cross platform nor will it be a standard.
Why? Because of small details in the API. Let me give an example. Let's say you want to find out what operating system your program is running on. In Java, you do this:
System.out.println( System.getProperty( "os.name" ) +" " + System.getProperty( "os.version" ) );
Looks pretty straight forward. In C#:
using System;Console.Writeline( System.Environment.OSVersion.Platform );
Now this all looks very nice. The problem is that the Java version gives you a string, and the C# version gives you a... enum. That's right folks, to find out what operating system you are running, the .NET platform gives you an enumerated integral constant. This means that you have three choices for which operating systems you can discover you are running on, and which operating system the operating system can tell you it is.
Those three choices are:(If you want to verify this yourself, check out the System.PlatformID enumeration.)
Now, how do you make this cross platform?
Yeah! How are you going to write letters on a *package* that small! So funny..
;-)
Seriously, if you want to improve the quality of code on MS platforms, rewrite the platform. It's got very little to do with redneck Joe writing code.
Not to mention the terrible, terrible code that Microsoft provides in their documentation. Kids, if you ever want to write a quality program, don't EVER use Microsoft example code - they've got the most hideous bugs!
Hello, I'm from Vancouver, BC, Canada.
My office is also in shock. Nobody is doing any work, we are simply watching the news and listening to the radio. Several people in my office have friends or relatives in New York, and it appears that one of our clients has lost an employee on the flight from Boston to LA. Some of our employees are in the US right now. Our deepest sorrows and love go out to those affected.
Ha! I used to work in a copy place.. usually we would use that line to get out of copying something that would be a pain to do.
"We'd love to make a single copy of 'War and Peace' for you, but we can't because it is copyrighted. However, feel free to make use of our self server copiers.."
There are only a finite number of atoms in any given object that you can lathe away.
Your assertion that a computer cannot do inifinite things is quite wrong. A computer may have a finite instruction set, but has access to an infinite amount of memory via networking. A computer can, in fact, do an infinite number of things. Even if you try really hard, you cannot write all programs that can be written.
Running a devfs system without devfsd is almost impossible. Unless you like recompiling just about every program you have (especially the important ones like login and probably stuff like glibc), and re-writing all your conf files. Besides, devfsd works really well.
This stuff is quite innappropriate for this forum.
It is really an unfortunate paradox that many of the most interesting ideas never see mass production because of entrenched methodology. The PCB industry is huge and established. Conventional PCB manufacturing is well understood and cheap.
To overhaul one of the most fundamental building blocks for modern technology would be an amazingly tough thing to do. For starters, the technology would have to be cheaper and integrate seamlessly with existing manufacturing processes.
If you want to recycle parts, why not just heat the parts to just past the melting point of solder, then suck the parts off the boards?
The IRC protocol is terrible. It lacks any reasonable guarantees about concurrency, and commands arrive and are sent in no particular order, so you can't synchronize commands and, say, the error the server sends back for it. Servers have broken the RFC so that is at least works (good thing, writing an IRC client would be a nightmare otherwise) but IRC is still a mess.
I am in the process of writing a framework for IRC in Java (Martyr) so believe me, I've seen my share of IRC. The project is aptly named.
Actually, Canada has had four major parties since the 70s at least, and there has been an explosion of small parties since then. I believe that the federal election held in the early 90's had no less than 14 parties. Since then there have been laws passes to reduce the number of parties (you have to have a candidate in at least 50 ridings, etc).
I prefer it this way actually. The big parties are mostly alike (they'll get in office, screw something up, get ousted, repeat) so you can vote on specific policies that are important to you and your opinion actually does get reflected in the election results rather than getting mixed up with the wide-pleasing policies of the large parties.
He's out there somewhere, travelling in a faster-than-light spacecraft..
Then thank God.
If configuring and installing IRC is some huge task that is beyond the average idiot - then I say keep it up!
I use IRC mostly to chat with my friends, most of whom live in another city. It is convenient that they are IRC junkies, but it is something that binds our group together. I also use IRC to check on the debian project.
I've found mailling lists are the source for my hobby info, not IRC.
Canada Trust and TD are merging, so perhaps you might get access to the excellent Canada Trust on-line banking. I've never had any compatibility problems, they do everything server-side (the way it ought to be). The only browser problem I've had was when they decided to go from 40 bit to 128 bit ssl, and I had to upgrade my browser (whoopee.)
Their on-line banking is also quite complete, I can pay all my bills, add companies (more companies than other banks), even do specialty stuff like change my address.
I've been generally quite happy with Canada Trust since I moved my bank account there after getting mad at CIBC at the tender age of 5. I hope the merger doesn't ruin Canada Trust.
Maybe because your link is broken? *shrug*
O(n^log n) is still polynomial, I believe.
I think you mean O(n*log n)?
There does happen to be an MP3 player which is fully functional yet does not use skins.
Also, its playlist is extremely flexible.
find -name '*.mp3' | while read filename; do mpg123 -b 1024 $filename
Doesn't that just scream functionality!? Note the hyper-flexible playlist generator.
No frills at all.
Receiving emails from clients with broken dates screw up the sort order?
I used KMail in the office for some time, but it is ultimatly why I stopped using KMail. I wanted to fix it, but couldn't take the time out to do so.
Good for you for fixing it.. I wish I was still a KMail user so I could get your copy of the source.
... And just about everyone is, so what's your point?
Linux is nice and all.. but I don't really want it running my car.
The more complex an OS, the more likely bugs and security flaws will creep in (Linux hasn't shown itself to be an exception), so I'll take an OS that is proportional in size to the device it is controlling.
- Not scalable Your design implies that only one person can add data at a time. Which is fine for a small operation, but if you get a few additions per second then you either corrupt your file (two write handles open) or generate errors for the others. Allowing the others to be delayed is starting to write more backend stuff.
- Not instant Using your method means that data inserted into the system won't show up in the application right away - they have to wait until you do it manually. This means either more work for you, or another weak link in the chain, such as a script run from cron.
- Not universal You can only have one application writing to the file, otherwise you need some API or have multiple copies of the code (never a good idea.) SQL is universal across languages and platforms. SQL isn't quite, but pretty close to Java's Write Once Use Anywhere.
These days, using a database from any kind of application, especially form-handling web applications, is trivial.In my opinion, not scalable is a big problem.
It also means that if you want to do excessive string manipulation, and you don't want the overhead of reference-counted strings, or if you just want to mess around with it using pointers, you can do so.
It's the kind of thing that's especially handy where you have to interact with legacy code - and one thing Microsoft is all about is legacy support.
I don't think that there are *any* modern Java VMs that still use reference counting. Reference counting has two major problems:
And I'll bring out the badly beaten and bruised horse one more time for those fools who don't read things the first time: If you have to interact with the OS or 'legacy' code, you have JNI - the Java Native Interface - that lets you do that. JNI is nice, you get to use all the native functions you want *and* you can use all the Java classes.
If you want a flexible, tiny webserver that can communicate over ethernet, serial, and can attach stuff using the wonderful 1-wire technology, a TINI is what you need.
This is what I am doing with my TINI, for those who think such a thing is not useful.
Forget about PICs, they may be useful for charging your phone (there is one in my phone's charging base) but they don't run Java, and they don't talk ethernet.
First off, Java references are VERY different from C++ references.
In Java, you only get a reference to an object, *ever*. There is no 'real' or pointer objects. This makes the syntax much more managable. Java references are capable of representing a polymorphic object, can be assigned to new objects at will, and compared (as a memory location) with other references.
Thus, Java references are really more like C++ pointers, and not at all like C++ references, which are almost useless.
I must dissagree with your point #2.. this isn't a Java problem. If you put inexperienced people on a big system, it doesn't matter what language you are using, you will still end up with a mess.