No, I would never make such an insane statement but it's extremely important that as a programmer you trust your own abilities over that of a compiler.
A great test to give any interviewer for a job is to give them a piece of C code which has had things like bounds checking removed, structure attributes removed, pointer checks removed and so on and see if they put them back in before they finish the task at hand. I can honestly say from experience and having to go through these type of interview submissions that 90%+ of the time, the programmers who don't put checks back into the code, write piss poor, frame work managed style code. What kind of confidence are you going to instill in me when you don't even take the time if wrap an array check with an if statement? Usually when I go back and ask the interviewer why it's left out I get the classic, "Well why doesn't the compiler make sure you don't write off the end of the buffer? That seems like a design issue and I shouldn't have to manually do it!"
It would be really hard to look a client in the face and tell them that there brand new million dollar embedded system failed because someone, an object oriented programmer, decided that the array or list would check itself before corrupting memory.
Any thing that makes a teacher look like the truly lazy and pathetic adult that most them are will anger them and cause a push back. I can honestly say that with over 20 years of schooling under my belt and more then 30 teachers, I honestly respected maybe 4 of them, the rest were lazy, non caring idiots who only became teachers to not give a damn and to get summers off. Of course teachers will push back against common core, any thing that exposes the true nature of the "common" teacher, that being laziness, will cause a push back.
Buffer overflows should always be managed by the programmer and never by the compiler. When the developer trusts the compiler over his own ability then he will always introduce security flaws. When the developer trusts himself over the compiler then he will most of the time write better and more secure code. The problem with object oriented languages and any language which attempts to bounds check for you is that it turns developers into lazy moneys and takes all the work away from programming.
It's simple, when ever you hear a developer pass up C for something stupidity overloaded and abstracted like Java, C++, C# or Python, you lose security. When ever you put an IT "professional" in place that doesn't understand how the operating systems work and thinks that Windows is the suitable for the server, you lose security. The fact is when ever you decide to take the easy road out of no-where, chances are you're introducing security flaws. This is a two step issue, first at the development level and second at the IT level.
I'm actually making my own. I don't see why I should spend ~$200 to just get a microcontroller with some circuitry on my wrist, not to mention it's really fun to design and build. My goal is to release my design as an open source alternative when it's done including both the hardware and software.
Simulators and emulators still aren't as good as the real device. You an argue all you want about why you need one over the other but at the end of the day you really just need to load the app on a device and test it in a working environment
however it's also incredibly unfriendly for the tasks that most people need to do
What do you find unfriendly about it? C gives you the power to destroy pretty much any party of a computer if you want to and doesn't say sorry, this doesn't mean it's unfriendly, it just means it's for skilled programmers who understand how a computer works. To be very clear, I'm NOT saying you aren't a good programmer, I'm just saying in general that would be a fair assessment to make.
I work in C every single day as well as generally bounce between a nice handful of other languages including PHP, C++, C#, Java, GTK#, Perl, Python and Ruby. ( Not including web based languages here ). If I was to draw a matrix of what each language offers as a set of pre-built features, overhead, ease of use, prototyping ability and architecture access, I think C would win. Generally when I hear people mention reason as to why they don't like C it's always something silly like "Pointers are dangerous" or "I can't use objects". The fact is C is a programming language for programmers who don't want to eat baby food and have someone wipe there ass. C will let you do anything you want and not hold you back, it only wants you to be skilled enough to use it correctly, unlike all of those mangled and gross object oriented piles that try ( and poorly) to do the work for you.
I'm an embedded system designer and honestly I find it horrible how no one can use or programming on Linux / Unix and how no one can program in C. C is a perfectly fine language for quick prototyping, you can design a reasonably large logging system with database integration in a hour or two, which is quicker then even PHP. If you use GTK, X or several of the other GUI toolkits, you can add a nice GUI to an application in a 1/2 hour. The fact is C is still quick and it can out preform the bulk of most language, don't give it up, stick with it! I might be 26 ( 4 days until 27 ) but honestly C and Linux or Unix is still the best way to go.
How is it possible that obesity has been declared a disease? Well I do support obesity as a disease when it's the cause of a medical issue, just has a blown thyroid gland, I don't support it when you just decided to yourself to a blimp. We need to stop creating this culture of "It's not your fault you have no control, it's a disease." Obesity just like alcoholism is NOT a disease, the only thing that could be called a disease is your lack of will power and control. Lets stop blaming the situation and blame the person. We can't move forwards when we never take responsibility for our problems.
Exactly, so if you're to absent minded to turn off your phone or to leave it at home or to make sure it won't be tracked then you deserve to be caught from your own stupidity.
You can put your phone in "airplane" mode and that will shut off all ability to track your phone. If your a "criminal mastermind" you would think that turning off your phones mobile access might be step #1.
Windows 7 is the only operating system I have ever used that has trouble deleting information from the Operating System. I just had to deal with being told that a file / folder didn't exist and couldn't be removed. This kind of issue, even though small, shows the lack of refinement and the false young nature of the Operating System. In contrast Linux is the adult in the Operating System war, I'm not saying that just to blow smoke or be a Linux fan boy, I'm saying that because when I run into issues in Windows, I don't run into them in Linux.
Bought Android by mistake? I would hardly say that is true, I'v used an iPhone and I couldn't give it up fast enough, it was by far the worst phone I've ever used.
It's hilariously funny how often I've heard, "Just put Java on it and you'll have memory management." Java is a good language for when you need portability and don't care about overhead and run time speeds, to be clear, I'm not saying Java is slow, but it's slow compared to C or ASM.
It's also funny how often that is included with the discussion about why I don't need more time because Java and languages like Java exist. The last time I had to sit in a board room and had to listen to a desktop developer tell me this, I just looked right back and said "Okay, prove I have execute your interrupt in under 1uS and I'll consider it." He just gave up and stopped talking.
The truth is that embedded development is not the same as the desktop, we generally don't get much memory, we don't have multiple cores to work with, we generally have a battery as power and we have insane run time requirements, the last one I had was 2 years on AA's ( just two ).
Well as an Embedded System Designer I have to speak up here, systems are usually not insecure because of lazy development, systems are insecure because clients, managers and stakeholders don't provide proper funding, deadlines or requirements. The number of times I've had to go to a manager or project manager and ask them to clarify a customers request is almost sad. The amount of times I've had to go to the same group and ask for twice or three times the amount of time to develop a solution is almost sad and the amount of times I've had to ask for much more funding to do a proper job is sad. For some unknown reason embedded designers aren't treated like normal software developers and the truth is we aren't. We don't rely on some insecure patched to hell OS to keep us safe and we don't trust laughable memory managers and kernels to keep us crash free and running smooth. We do the real work in the development world and generally it's the GUI designer who takes the credit.
We generally don't work in the world of garbage collected and managed languages, we don't work in the world where everything is already setup and ready to be called through some piss poor abstracted class implementation of system.IO and we don't get safety nets under us to catch what falls through in some kind of completely illogical and messed up exception error system ( C# ). To say embedded systems are insecure is really another way to say one of several things:
1. You didn't allocate enough time, money or proper requirements. 2. You didn't hire someone who is qualified to the job, such as putting a desktop developer onto an embedded project. 3. You didn't consider security when you dreamed up you're fragmented and broken project idea.
This is of course mitigated by a great developer who will go back to the table of executives and tell them they need what they need and won't start until it's delivered. You can't treat an embedded project like a normal software project, when you do you'll end up with systems that make Microsoft proud ( aka 0 security and patch opportunities to fly to the moon ), you need to treat an embedded project like an embedded project and give the embedded developer what he / she needs. Doing other wise will always end up you shit creek and generally the manager or stakeholder is left with the paddle looking like a fool.
1) How many African Americans apply every year?
2) How many women apply every year?
3) How well do either female or African Americans interview?
4) Can you demonstrate given this information that your ratio of females to males and Caucasians to African Americans makes sense?
That is a simple way to judge if the work place is being restrictive or fair, you can't hire more women or diversity if they don't apply and if they don't interview well.
Slashdot Mirror
No, I would never make such an insane statement but it's extremely important that as a programmer you trust your own abilities over that of a compiler.
A great test to give any interviewer for a job is to give them a piece of C code which has had things like bounds checking removed, structure attributes removed, pointer checks removed and so on and see if they put them back in before they finish the task at hand. I can honestly say from experience and having to go through these type of interview submissions that 90%+ of the time, the programmers who don't put checks back into the code, write piss poor, frame work managed style code. What kind of confidence are you going to instill in me when you don't even take the time if wrap an array check with an if statement? Usually when I go back and ask the interviewer why it's left out I get the classic, "Well why doesn't the compiler make sure you don't write off the end of the buffer? That seems like a design issue and I shouldn't have to manually do it!"
It would be really hard to look a client in the face and tell them that there brand new million dollar embedded system failed because someone, an object oriented programmer, decided that the array or list would check itself before corrupting memory.
Any thing that makes a teacher look like the truly lazy and pathetic adult that most them are will anger them and cause a push back. I can honestly say that with over 20 years of schooling under my belt and more then 30 teachers, I honestly respected maybe 4 of them, the rest were lazy, non caring idiots who only became teachers to not give a damn and to get summers off. Of course teachers will push back against common core, any thing that exposes the true nature of the "common" teacher, that being laziness, will cause a push back.
Just ask to see the law in writing, they have to show you to enforce it.
Buffer overflows should always be managed by the programmer and never by the compiler. When the developer trusts the compiler over his own ability then he will always introduce security flaws. When the developer trusts himself over the compiler then he will most of the time write better and more secure code. The problem with object oriented languages and any language which attempts to bounds check for you is that it turns developers into lazy moneys and takes all the work away from programming.
It's simple, when ever you hear a developer pass up C for something stupidity overloaded and abstracted like Java, C++, C# or Python, you lose security. When ever you put an IT "professional" in place that doesn't understand how the operating systems work and thinks that Windows is the suitable for the server, you lose security. The fact is when ever you decide to take the easy road out of no-where, chances are you're introducing security flaws. This is a two step issue, first at the development level and second at the IT level.
I'm actually making my own. I don't see why I should spend ~$200 to just get a microcontroller with some circuitry on my wrist, not to mention it's really fun to design and build. My goal is to release my design as an open source alternative when it's done including both the hardware and software.
A law needs to stand on it's own with out the need for external help, if Moores law break then it's not a law.
You didn't think a test run was a good idea?
Statistics is how you lie to yourself about understanding the world.
C# is one of the worst inventions in Computer Science history, you're better off using C and a graphics library.
This is a major step forwards in logical thought and scientific teaching, now if the US / Canada could follow.
Simulators and emulators still aren't as good as the real device. You an argue all you want about why you need one over the other but at the end of the day you really just need to load the app on a device and test it in a working environment
however it's also incredibly unfriendly for the tasks that most people need to do
What do you find unfriendly about it? C gives you the power to destroy pretty much any party of a computer if you want to and doesn't say sorry, this doesn't mean it's unfriendly, it just means it's for skilled programmers who understand how a computer works. To be very clear, I'm NOT saying you aren't a good programmer, I'm just saying in general that would be a fair assessment to make.
I work in C every single day as well as generally bounce between a nice handful of other languages including PHP, C++, C#, Java, GTK#, Perl, Python and Ruby. ( Not including web based languages here ). If I was to draw a matrix of what each language offers as a set of pre-built features, overhead, ease of use, prototyping ability and architecture access, I think C would win. Generally when I hear people mention reason as to why they don't like C it's always something silly like "Pointers are dangerous" or "I can't use objects". The fact is C is a programming language for programmers who don't want to eat baby food and have someone wipe there ass. C will let you do anything you want and not hold you back, it only wants you to be skilled enough to use it correctly, unlike all of those mangled and gross object oriented piles that try ( and poorly) to do the work for you.
I'm an embedded system designer and honestly I find it horrible how no one can use or programming on Linux / Unix and how no one can program in C. C is a perfectly fine language for quick prototyping, you can design a reasonably large logging system with database integration in a hour or two, which is quicker then even PHP. If you use GTK, X or several of the other GUI toolkits, you can add a nice GUI to an application in a 1/2 hour. The fact is C is still quick and it can out preform the bulk of most language, don't give it up, stick with it! I might be 26 ( 4 days until 27 ) but honestly C and Linux or Unix is still the best way to go.
How is it possible that obesity has been declared a disease? Well I do support obesity as a disease when it's the cause of a medical issue, just has a blown thyroid gland, I don't support it when you just decided to yourself to a blimp. We need to stop creating this culture of "It's not your fault you have no control, it's a disease." Obesity just like alcoholism is NOT a disease, the only thing that could be called a disease is your lack of will power and control. Lets stop blaming the situation and blame the person. We can't move forwards when we never take responsibility for our problems.
Exactly, so if you're to absent minded to turn off your phone or to leave it at home or to make sure it won't be tracked then you deserve to be caught from your own stupidity.
You could:
A) Shield your phone.
B) Leave your phone at home.
C) Used a hacked phone.
etc....
You can put your phone in "airplane" mode and that will shut off all ability to track your phone. If your a "criminal mastermind" you would think that turning off your phones mobile access might be step #1.
You didn't turn the location tracking off in your phone, what did you think was going to happen?
Windows 7 is the only operating system I have ever used that has trouble deleting information from the Operating System. I just had to deal with being told that a file / folder didn't exist and couldn't be removed. This kind of issue, even though small, shows the lack of refinement and the false young nature of the Operating System. In contrast Linux is the adult in the Operating System war, I'm not saying that just to blow smoke or be a Linux fan boy, I'm saying that because when I run into issues in Windows, I don't run into them in Linux.
Bought Android by mistake? I would hardly say that is true, I'v used an iPhone and I couldn't give it up fast enough, it was by far the worst phone I've ever used.
It's hilariously funny how often I've heard, "Just put Java on it and you'll have memory management." Java is a good language for when you need portability and don't care about overhead and run time speeds, to be clear, I'm not saying Java is slow, but it's slow compared to C or ASM.
It's also funny how often that is included with the discussion about why I don't need more time because Java and languages like Java exist. The last time I had to sit in a board room and had to listen to a desktop developer tell me this, I just looked right back and said "Okay, prove I have execute your interrupt in under 1uS and I'll consider it." He just gave up and stopped talking.
The truth is that embedded development is not the same as the desktop, we generally don't get much memory, we don't have multiple cores to work with, we generally have a battery as power and we have insane run time requirements, the last one I had was 2 years on AA's ( just two ).
Well as an Embedded System Designer I have to speak up here, systems are usually not insecure because of lazy development, systems are insecure because clients, managers and stakeholders don't provide proper funding, deadlines or requirements. The number of times I've had to go to a manager or project manager and ask them to clarify a customers request is almost sad. The amount of times I've had to go to the same group and ask for twice or three times the amount of time to develop a solution is almost sad and the amount of times I've had to ask for much more funding to do a proper job is sad. For some unknown reason embedded designers aren't treated like normal software developers and the truth is we aren't. We don't rely on some insecure patched to hell OS to keep us safe and we don't trust laughable memory managers and kernels to keep us crash free and running smooth. We do the real work in the development world and generally it's the GUI designer who takes the credit.
We generally don't work in the world of garbage collected and managed languages, we don't work in the world where everything is already setup and ready to be called through some piss poor abstracted class implementation of system.IO and we don't get safety nets under us to catch what falls through in some kind of completely illogical and messed up exception error system ( C# ). To say embedded systems are insecure is really another way to say one of several things:
1. You didn't allocate enough time, money or proper requirements.
2. You didn't hire someone who is qualified to the job, such as putting a desktop developer onto an embedded project.
3. You didn't consider security when you dreamed up you're fragmented and broken project idea.
This is of course mitigated by a great developer who will go back to the table of executives and tell them they need what they need and won't start until it's delivered. You can't treat an embedded project like a normal software project, when you do you'll end up with systems that make Microsoft proud ( aka 0 security and patch opportunities to fly to the moon ), you need to treat an embedded project like an embedded project and give the embedded developer what he / she needs. Doing other wise will always end up you shit creek and generally the manager or stakeholder is left with the paddle looking like a fool.
1) How many African Americans apply every year?
2) How many women apply every year?
3) How well do either female or African Americans interview?
4) Can you demonstrate given this information that your ratio of females to males and Caucasians to African Americans makes sense?
That is a simple way to judge if the work place is being restrictive or fair, you can't hire more women or diversity if they don't apply and if they don't interview well.
However from my person experience, the computer can provide better answers, solutions and instruction then the teacher.