> I don't have client-side rendering problems with ssh transparency. If anything, it helps that you don't have to install all the fonts an application needs on all the X-servers it might end up running on.
And then all your apps look different - and you have a desktop like a Christmas tree. Wow, how network transparent.
NFS is NOT transparent. Anywhere. sshfs would get a bit closer, but sshfs, plus gconf PATH-config to have it read one more directory, done automatically when you ssh somewhere with X-forwarding enabled, is rather a bit more clumsy than X-resoures, to say the least.
The problem is that nowdays, Linux-hackers live on their little home-gaming-machines and don't think further than their non-network enabled yousticks!
That attitude, my good man, is what kept Nazi Germany working.
Of course he should not give up his whole life, but most likely he's got a good education, and could easily find a new job. Maybe he even has one waiting for him right now? In that situation, showing people who thought they could do as they pleased, that no, not with you as their tool, can be worth it. It's not like he's risking his life or anything...
So, if turing completeness is not what makes it a _programming_ language, and describing algorithms to be executed on a turing complete machine is not the whole of programming, then what is? This is basicly straight out of my textbooks at uni so I am a bit bewildered... The interresting thing is that we only disagree on definitions - both of us agree about how an FPGA works (emulatong gates and interconnections described by its input), what it does. Only you don't want to call that "running programs", and I want to. Funny:P
Oh, btw, from the wikipedia article on "programming language":
A programming language is an artificial language that can be used to control the behavior of a machine, particularly a computer.... Programming languages are used to facilitate communication about the task of organizing and manipulating information, and to express algorithms precisely. Some authors restrict the term "programming language" to those languages that can express all possible algorithms;[2] sometimes the term "computer language" is used for more limited artificial languages.
So, by this definition, and restriction, verilog is indeed a ptogramming language (and since it can express all possible algorithms/is turing complete), it is not a mere "computer language".
What is a CPU and what is a programming language? From a comp.sci. point of view, the input language of anything that can execute any algorithm, that is, that is turing complete, is a programming language.
Proof that an FPGA is turing complete: An FPGA can emulate any set of gates and interconnections given a description of these as input. A normal processor, e.g. a Z80 is a set of gates and interconnections. Thus, an FPGA can emulate a Z80. The Z80 assembler is turing complete. Anything that can emulate something that is turing complete given the right input, is turing complete. Thus, and FPGA is a turing complete machine and its input a programming language.
I know all that, and had you actually read all of my post you'd realized that. I was only comparing them as opposed to logic programming, which is much more different.
And well, you can do functional programming in many structured languages (functiounction pointers in C, function objects, iterators and list comprehension in Python), as you can do imperative programming in many functional languages (E.g. Common LISP has many imperative constructs, and they are well-used in practice; even Haskell has those monads (which is basically just an embedded imperative language). The border isn't that clear cut. It's easier to talk about functional and procedural programming than of functional and procedural languages.
I usually dislike SQL for not being mind bogling enought. But that's just because I know Prolog, and secretly wishes that SQL was prolog... Anyway, there is one thing I tend to end up doing quite often, and that SQL engines should have been able to optimize, but never seems to manage: pairing every row in a table with the next or previous row. This operation should be O(n), but ends up being O(n), since it's a join... Typical example is a table of timestamps, and you want the deltas between each timestamp and the next (but there are numerous other examples).
Functional languages are just like procedural languages (Like C, Java etc), but with the important difference that everything is a function/works like a function, and returns a value. That is (in pseudo-code), you could write y = fie(if(x == 1, foo(), bar())) to assign either fie(foo()) or fie(bar()) to y depending on if x is equal to 1. You can usually create unnamed functions, assign functions to variables, returtn functions and pass functions as parameters to other functions too. It is also common for code to be a type of data structure (parse tree), which you can create programmatically if you want to and pass to an eval() function to get it run. In a procedural language you specify a function by describing what to do first, and then what after that and so on. In a functional language you specify a function by describing what other functions are taken together makes it up (the order is sort of implicit and not that important, only what is passed to what function).
Logic programming languages have no functions, or even a sense of time or order. The operate purely on truths/facts. In a way they are very similar to databases and database query languages, like SQL, but more powerfull. A program is a set of truths, e.g. facts like John is Adams father, Anna is Adams mother, Laura is Annas mother and rules like a is a mother of b and b is a mother of c implies a is a grandmother of c. You can then ask the program wether things are true, e.g. is Laura Adams grandmother? You can usually modify the fact database, have non-logic programming triggers fire when some things are asked for and generate queries on the fly from within a rule (code is data).
It's not. It's a programming language for programming a type of CPU called an FPGA. It is a programming language (that is, it is turing complete), but the programming paradigm is rather different from that of an ALGOL language like C, even if the syntax is similar. But the difference in paradigm is not greater than the difference between C and e.g. Prolog.
If you are to learn new languages, I would suggest the following ones to learn the biggest number of different paradigms and features a language can have:
Assembly language (Low level, manual everything) C (Low level, ALGOL-family structured programming, manual memmory management, pointers) Scheme (Declarative/functional, has continuations, lazy-evaluation extentions, lambdas, code is data, real macros) Smalltalk (Not just object oriented, but object centric) Prolog (Declarative/Logic programming, code is data) Verilog (No time-flow/full concurrency, emulates/describes hardware)
You could probably replace Scheme and Smalltalk with Erlang, but I don't know Erlang enough to be sure...
Interesting problem. But what if you where only providing your services to some company, to change some GPLed software, for a reasonable fee per hour and no rights in the software? That shouldn't be breaking your oath, even if said software is licensed and released under the GPL? Having sworn your oath, do you think free software is ultimately immoral, or that that part of your oath is unfair, or is the GPL a problem area where you do not know what to think?
One more way for the rich western countries to make poor countries depend on them. I can see the security concern in teaching physics to poor people, they have a legit reason to want to blow you up, but not doing so gives them an even bigger reason to do so in the long run. Basicly, this is like using MS licensed software - the poor country has to continually pay the rich for the tech to continue to work. Yak!
I owe my career, and that includes my current salary, to Free Software. Thank you very much. And I don't work for RedHat.
I got my current job, and one previous one, by one of my projects being found on freshmeat.
I write Free Software and customize existing Free Software for clients at work. Our company could never have existed if we couldn't build our work on top of the enormous pool of pre-existing solutions.
My company isn't alone - here in Norway, there is one more company doing exactly the same as us, and countless with different markets/products.
Well, the cable to the disk is still digital, and addresses sent over that cable are also still digital. That disks seldom (never, although there is a reason for LBA addressing...) use the full width of the address is another thing.
No, not RAM. Anything you _address_. You don't address the 412th cycle in the CPU frequence, you don't address the 1201st byte in transmission speed, etc. You address RAM content, and disk content and ports and hosts on the internet. All such addresses are stored as binary numbers inside the computer, and can thus address two to the power of number of bits in the address numbers of positions (bytes, hosts, bits, whatever).
Slashdot Mirror
> I don't have client-side rendering problems with ssh transparency. If anything, it helps that you don't have to install all the fonts an application needs on all the X-servers it might end up running on.
And then all your apps look different - and you have a desktop like a Christmas tree. Wow, how network transparent.
NFS is NOT transparent. Anywhere. sshfs would get a bit closer, but sshfs, plus gconf PATH-config to have it read one more directory, done automatically when you ssh somewhere with X-forwarding enabled, is rather a bit more clumsy than X-resoures, to say the least.
The problem is that nowdays, Linux-hackers live on their little home-gaming-machines and don't think further than their non-network enabled yousticks!
And client side (font) rendering is good exactly _how_? That, and gconf instead of xres fucks up ssh-transparency!
My employer found me through Freshmeat :P So yes, some do...
Remember the bloody French Revolution. That's what changed it all. That's what gave birth to our "western freedom".
That attitude, my good man, is what kept Nazi Germany working.
Of course he should not give up his whole life, but most likely he's got a good education, and could easily find a new job. Maybe he even has one waiting for him right now? In that situation, showing people who thought they could do as they pleased, that no, not with you as their tool, can be worth it. It's not like he's risking his life or anything...
I've heard that bittorrent using Pirate Bay as indexer is pretty immune both to slashdotting, yahoos bandwidth limits and the copyright police...
To bad they guy didn't think as much of distribution as of the qualities of the music :( He's already slashdotted to death :(
New RFC: Ip-over-ten-allowed-words:
Only the first eight words are used, the last two are used as out-of-bound signaling.
Data is sent three bits at a time, each bit-pattern denoted by one of the remaining eight words as described in the table below:
000 word1
001 word2
010 word3
011 word4
100 word5
101 word6
110 word7
111 word8
As long as there are any bits flowing, _any_ bit can be transmitted.
It's called "links" :)
Turing completeness does not require a machine to be a von Neuman machine.
Oh, btw, from the wikipedia article on "programming language":
So, by this definition, and restriction, verilog is indeed a ptogramming language (and since it can express all possible algorithms/is turing complete), it is not a mere "computer language".
> that's fine but I don't believe they have the right to dictate what anyone else does with it later
That sounds like you do not believe in copyright? Or maybe only copyright for professionals who ask for a payment for their services?
What is a CPU and what is a programming language? From a comp.sci. point of view, the input language of anything that can execute any algorithm, that is, that is turing complete, is a programming language.
Proof that an FPGA is turing complete:
An FPGA can emulate any set of gates and interconnections given a description of these as input.
A normal processor, e.g. a Z80 is a set of gates and interconnections.
Thus, an FPGA can emulate a Z80.
The Z80 assembler is turing complete.
Anything that can emulate something that is turing complete given the right input, is turing complete.
Thus, and FPGA is a turing complete machine and its input a programming language.
I know all that, and had you actually read all of my post you'd realized that. I was only comparing them as opposed to logic programming, which is much more different.
And well, you can do functional programming in many structured languages (functiounction pointers in C, function objects, iterators and list comprehension in Python), as you can do imperative programming in many functional languages (E.g. Common LISP has many imperative constructs, and they are well-used in practice; even Haskell has those monads (which is basically just an embedded imperative language). The border isn't that clear cut. It's easier to talk about functional and procedural programming than of functional and procedural languages.
I usually dislike SQL for not being mind bogling enought. But that's just because I know Prolog, and secretly wishes that SQL was prolog...
Anyway, there is one thing I tend to end up doing quite often, and that SQL engines should have been able to optimize, but never seems to manage: pairing every row in a table with the next or previous row. This operation should be O(n), but ends up being O(n), since it's a join... Typical example is a table of timestamps, and you want the deltas between each timestamp and the next (but there are numerous other examples).
Functional languages are just like procedural languages (Like C, Java etc), but with the important difference that everything is a function/works like a function, and returns a value. That is (in pseudo-code), you could write y = fie(if(x == 1, foo(), bar())) to assign either fie(foo()) or fie(bar()) to y depending on if x is equal to 1. You can usually create unnamed functions, assign functions to variables, returtn functions and pass functions as parameters to other functions too. It is also common for code to be a type of data structure (parse tree), which you can create programmatically if you want to and pass to an eval() function to get it run. In a procedural language you specify a function by describing what to do first, and then what after that and so on. In a functional language you specify a function by describing what other functions are taken together makes it up (the order is sort of implicit and not that important, only what is passed to what function).
Logic programming languages have no functions, or even a sense of time or order. The operate purely on truths/facts. In a way they are very similar to databases and database query languages, like SQL, but more powerfull. A program is a set of truths, e.g. facts like John is Adams father, Anna is Adams mother, Laura is Annas mother and rules like a is a mother of b and b is a mother of c implies a is a grandmother of c. You can then ask the program wether things are true, e.g. is Laura Adams grandmother? You can usually modify the fact database, have non-logic programming triggers fire when some things are asked for and generate queries on the fly from within a rule (code is data).
It's not. It's a programming language for programming a type of CPU called an FPGA. It is a programming language (that is, it is turing complete), but the programming paradigm is rather different from that of an ALGOL language like C, even if the syntax is similar. But the difference in paradigm is not greater than the difference between C and e.g. Prolog.
If you are to learn new languages, I would suggest the following ones to learn the biggest number of different paradigms and features a language can have:
Assembly language (Low level, manual everything)
C (Low level, ALGOL-family structured programming, manual memmory management, pointers)
Scheme (Declarative/functional, has continuations, lazy-evaluation extentions, lambdas, code is data, real macros)
Smalltalk (Not just object oriented, but object centric)
Prolog (Declarative/Logic programming, code is data)
Verilog (No time-flow/full concurrency, emulates/describes hardware)
You could probably replace Scheme and Smalltalk with Erlang, but I don't know Erlang enough to be sure...
Interesting problem. But what if you where only providing your services to some company, to change some GPLed software, for a reasonable fee per hour and no rights in the software? That shouldn't be breaking your oath, even if said software is licensed and released under the GPL?
Having sworn your oath, do you think free software is ultimately immoral, or that that part of your oath is unfair, or is the GPL a problem area where you do not know what to think?
And I for one welcome our new Bolsjevik American overlords.
One more way for the rich western countries to make poor countries depend on them.
I can see the security concern in teaching physics to poor people, they have a legit reason to want to blow you up, but not doing so gives them an even bigger reason to do so in the long run.
Basicly, this is like using MS licensed software - the poor country has to continually pay the rich for the tech to continue to work. Yak!
I owe my career, and that includes my current salary, to Free Software. Thank you very much. And I don't work for RedHat.
I got my current job, and one previous one, by one of my projects being found on freshmeat.
I write Free Software and customize existing Free Software for clients at work. Our company could never have existed if we couldn't build our work on top of the enormous pool of pre-existing solutions.
My company isn't alone - here in Norway, there is one more company doing exactly the same as us, and countless with different markets/products.
I think this meme is very much to due to that being true in other jurisdictions, e.g. Europe.
Well, the cable to the disk is still digital, and addresses sent over that cable are also still digital. That disks seldom (never, although there is a reason for LBA addressing...) use the full width of the address is another thing.
No, not RAM. Anything you _address_. You don't address the 412th cycle in the CPU frequence, you don't address the 1201st byte in transmission speed, etc. You address RAM content, and disk content and ports and hosts on the internet. All such addresses are stored as binary numbers inside the computer, and can thus address two to the power of number of bits in the address numbers of positions (bytes, hosts, bits, whatever).
What was the title of that novel? It definitely sounds like something I'd like to read...