I wonder how long until they start telling clerks to press a button if someone is dispensing in to a container, so that it becomes more accurate. Or if they develop some other way to check (maybe just ask on that little electronic screen, and make it illegal to lie to them, even though they're allowed to lie to you.)
That is correct. Also one of the reasons Hybrid numbers are a bit skewed.. the test hasn't really been adjusted to accomodate them, so almost always (and yes, there are some exceptions), the numbers on hybrids are the maximum. Depends on the style (Toyota's hybrid method keeps the engine off longer and relies on the battery more than Honda's, I think, so their numbers are a bit more off than the Civic or Insight's).
Surprisingly, the Honda stick shifts don't shut the engine off at stop lights, yet still supposedly get 5 MPG better than the automatics that do. I can only assume this is because the EPA tests are unrealistic. If I were given the choice between stick and automatic in a regular car, I'd choose stick no question. But when I test drove the Civic hybrid, it just felt wrong to me that the engine stayed on in the stick version, and turned off in the auto. I'll prolly go with the automatic. *sigh*.
Some function calling itself, and returning data that the calling function needs to return its data. Hence loops are not recursive (they need some other storage mechanism to store the data, if it's being "built" in the loop). Often times recursive procedures are called with simpler parameters than the ones given to the 'parent', or with smaller arrays, etc. Not always though.
Again, hopefully there's some change in state to mark the 'end' of the recursion. Randomness, local static, global variable, member variable, or a parameter. Something. Or else you'll never quit:)
There's two types of recursion: tail end and the other one.:) But I forget the difference. I just know that tail end is easier to optimize. I think tail end would be a reverse function that worked like:
return last_element+reverse(beginning_elements)
I don't know what you mean by simpler terms, or why you would need to make the distinction. ?
I can have the good of humanity at heart and dump a million dollars in to research and testing and eventually bring the cure to cancer to market. Like other people said, there's two parts of patents: I can now keep this secret, and hope no one else figures out how I did this. In all likelihood, HOW I did it will have to be documented anyway (it has a health risk). I might, however, be able to patent it, and then license it out. This way, I make money, and hopefully recoup my losses.
People can break even on inventions and then donate the rest of the money. Or, they can keep some for themselves. Does it matter if people have the good of humanity at heart? no. Humanity will benefit by this invention, if patented, within 20 years. The ability to patent it made it feasible for someone to do this. They thought they'd make the money back, so they did it, patented it, put it on market for the 20 years, and then everyone else makes a generic ripoff. If they didn't patent it, they'd think to themselves "Well, we can do this, but we'll spend 10 million dollars on it. When we're done, anyone can recreate our work for about an hour spent in a lab reverse engineering it, for total cost of 1,000 dollars. We won't ever be able to sell for less than them, and make all our money back, so why bother?"
Corporations exist to make money. Patents help them do so. They also help everyone else, because after that 20 years, everyone has a chance at it.
Note, there's also restrictions like the generic drug laws (so my cure for cancer is a bit out there anyway), and if something like this could save lives, I'm not sure they'd let one company go out of control with it. Resonable cost, maybe, but they'd be regulated up the wazoo anyway.
So, let's go with a non-medical example: the automobile. GM makes a brand new car fuel system that takes in regular air, spits out regular air, but somehow generates power in doing so. Everyone would benefit from this immensely, but the process for doing it is extremely complicated, and they spent a billion dollars on inventing it. They now have the following options: a) Keep it secret and hope that no one else figures out how to do it. Two outcomes: No one else figures out how to do it (good for GM), or Honda buys a car, gets their smartest people on it, and within 1 year has it reverse engineered, for only $1 mil cost (bad for GM) b) Keep it secret, and not bring it to market. Well, congrats, that money's wasted. c) Patent it. No one else can make one for 20 years, so they have time to make their money back. after 20 years, everyone can make this car that doesn't need fuel. Everyone benefits. Some later than others, though.
Patents really do help -- IF APPLIED PROPERLY.
I don't think this one is proper, but.. oh well. It's rather obvious to me that putting someone on the door of a place will deter theft, that providing a play area for kids makes it easier for parents to come in, and that providing a locked money box, a computer, and a teller makes it easier to do your banking. This patent is stupid, in my opinion, but not all patents are.
Patents, by themselves, are a good concept. Just often abused.
Because theoretically they spent money/time/energy/[some consumable resource] developing it, and are due a reward. Granted, if it's easy to clone, then perhaps it shouldn't be granted patent anyway (since it would seem obvious). However, let's imagine a sample case:
Let's assume that after 10 years toiling away in your garage, you find out that sodium mixed with water is a good way to cure athlete's foot (hint: it's not). But somehow, you have made it so. Now, the actual process to make this miracle cure is rather easy, and thus easily cloneable. But, you spent 10 years of your life, several thousands of dollars buying pure sodium (And probably other false starts), etc.. Not to mention the personal danger you put yourself in by sticking pure sodium on your foot like an idiot. but in the end, you have managed to succeed, and you have your product.
Now, there are two possibilities. No patents: You announce your product. Some other BigNameCompany decides "Hey, we're bigger than him. We can get our sodium cheaper", and makes a competing product that sells for 50 cents less than yours. You promptly go out of business, in addition to having lost all that money spent DEVELOPING the product.
With patents: You announce your product. You have x number of years to recoup your losses before you get competition using the same process. Now, if some other company develops a process that achieves the same end result, but doesn't use what you patented, they're free to do so.
Patents have to be non-obvious. Sticking sodium on your foot isn't that obvious to me. So I'd grant you one for this.
Clicking your mouse on a button to buy something is rather obvious (to me at least), and probably didn't take much research to come up with. Doesn't matter how many clicks it takes, it's still clicking, and everyone's been doing that. It doesn't take much brain power to say "Hey, people will buy easier if we make it so they only have to click once instead of 5 times!"
But yes, that's why patents exist: so that people have a reason to invent something. If you don't have a reasonable expectation of return on investment in to creating something, the only inventions made would be ones that help your company, or done by people who have the good of humanity at heart. Not many of these people are willing to spend millions of dollars to develop something for the good of humanity though, if they aren't reasonably assured that there'll be a return on that investment.
I thought I sent this, but apparently never clicked submit. ignore my other comment, just make a label (see upper right of the inbox window), and call it spam. Doesn't need to be a filter, just to have something to associate spam with. GMail alaready assigns everything the spam label, you just don't have a way to view it yourself. I wonder if it works for the other ones? (Inbox, Starred are both just labels to GMail, I think). I'm going to go play:)
I specifically mentioned that major ones (or ones backed with money) would move faster than smaller, independent ones. I think they're related -- Get large, get important, get money. I also dont' think gaim developers are being paid, yet it releases often. And there are plenty of people being paid to work on the linux kernel, so to compare to other projects where people are being paid to work on it is also a valid comparison.
The article specifically mentioned Open Source. All of these are open source. Most of them are also being paid, but that wasn't a requirement, and the one that I was comparing to also has people being paid to develop it.
*shrug* I see both sides. Most projects get to a certain point where it's more tedious than interesting to develop, as it's bug fixes or edge cases. They stagnate then. Meanwhile, I'm often desiring these edge cases to be finished, and they never are.
Other projects get large, get popular, and then get even larger and/or get funding. They then go faster than anything else for improving themselves. Rather amazing work comes out of these..
I don't think it matters. Match on from: president@whitehouse.gov. Just so long as a label exists with that name, it'll show up in your 'Labels' category. The 'Spam' folder on the left is just a special label (just like Inbox, Starred, etc.). So, if it finds something as spam, it puts it under the 'Spam' label for you, automatically, even though you don't realize you HAVE a spam label. So make one, and bam, it works.
I never thought of doing this, but I DID notice the Spam label on all its false positives. grr.
Totally not trolling here, but I was under the impression that QT was nearly entirely C++? You imply 'not c++' as your prefered langauge, but then like qt?
I ask only for clarification, because I haven't coded any gui apps for linux. Windows (api, mfc, vb, foxpro) and generic (java/swing, wxwidgets) only.
In fact, I thought that was one of the big 'draws' of gtk, was that being written in C, it could export to everything. QT, being written in C++, was much harder to make work in other languages.
KDE releases with decent frequency. Gaim does too. There's eclipse, which has come quite a long way in a short amount of time. Mozilla/firefox.. yeah, real slow there. PHP, hasn't changed a single bit, nope nope.
Compare it to other projects in the same vein. Independent ones, there's not many developers, it moves slowly. Major ones, or ones with funding, there's motivation to work on it besides "Hey, I have a few minutes and wouldn't it be cool if...".
Where is this console pulling the textures from? I don't get what you're saying. If they aren't in any form of RAM, where can they come from?
No console released now would NOT take advantage of HDTV Resolutions. XBOX already does, though it's technically optional if the game maker wants to support it.
Will you shut up and listen to what everyone is trying to say? Here, it's not hard.
BANDWIDTH DOESN'T MATTER HERE. 256MB RAM IS NOT ENOUGH to "load game frm DVd" and just leave it there. Not on the PC, not on the XBOX. The PC is beter in this regard, actually: you're likely to have 64, 128, or 256MB of Video card ram, and 256MB, 512, or even 1GB of system ram. Here, bandwidth DOES matter. And the bandwidth to get it from the PC's SYSTEM ram to the PC's VIDEO ram is a lot better than the bandwidth from ANY storage media such as hard drive, DVd [sic], or whatever.
So, XBOX has 256MB ram to deal with EVERYTHING. Game. Textures. Models. Logic. Audio. Bandwidth DOES NOT MATTER because there's NOWHERE TO MOVE THE STUFF TO.
Spout off numbers all you want, if you can't fit all the stuff in ram, you're hitting that DVD. And guess what, You won't be getting 6.4GB/sec out of a 12x DVD drive.
I wonder how they reach those stats. Do only hits to the front page count? I never visit it. Do only searches count? I do that all the time. Are they only unique people, or just raw usage stats?
That graph made me sad, though.. I guess I didn't realize just how little hope there is, at the moment, of displacing IE. All my friends use it, so I figured there was more than just perhaps 5 out of 100. Oh well, too close to the issue I guess. Rather sobering experience.. However, it validates my designs in another way: I don't really need to care about IE4 when designing pages. IE5 and 5.5: yes, I guess. (what was with the spike for IE 5 over 5.5 there?) I'd still rather not. IE 6 and standards compliant (firefox. Yes, I know it has its issues as well, but its a lot better than IE6) is good enough for me:) I'm not developing business websites, just personal ones..
the point was that better dev tools = more software for windows = more people using windows = more monopoly for windows = $$
Crappy dev tools = less software for windows = more software for other platforms = less people using windows = no more monopoly = !$$
Please understand what other people are saying before you complain:)
I don't think they implied it was a questionable practice either. just a sensible one. They're competing with the other products. Competition doesn't mean sneaking in and sabotaging the ability for XCode to work (though, I guess if you read slashdot enough, you'd assume they did this with various other tools, this isn't one of them). They're tryign to make a good product. Both to please external developers (so there's more software), and themselves (since they have to use this every day). In the end, the developer's tools should probably be the best of all of Microsoft's products (and I dare say they are). They're the ones the developers themselves use all day, every day, and care most about. Office, etc. are used by other people: they just write it:)
Why would he be? I find kdevelop 3 buggy as hell (might just be this mandrake version of it), but still a better environment than all visual studios up until.NET. XCode I hear is quite nice, but I don't have a mac to test it. Eclipse is amazing, but limited to Java.
I don't know what I prefer: Visual Studio.NET or kdevelop, for C++ (SDL) development. I tend to switch between them, depending on whatever OS I have booted up at the time. If Visual Studio still sucked as much as it did with VS 4 or VS 5, then I'd not code for windows at all. (Note, I'm referring here to the entire visual C++ tookit: compiler, IDE, etc..) so yes, they need to continue to keep developers happy, or else developers will leave..NET is much more supportive of recent ISO standards for C/C++, and that makes my life a hell of a lot easier.
Because there's no such thing as 32-bit color? 32-bit, for all intents and purposes, when on a display.. is the exact same as 24. The only reason there's 32 bits is because 1) it's easy for computers to deal with (since we have 32 bit computers, not 24bit), and 2) to accomodate transparency. Why doesn't X have 32 bit color? Because there really isn't such a beast.
The only time more bits matters is for processing precision: 48 bit and 64 bit (integer or floating point) colors are good for intermediate work, where you want two pixels side by side to not be the same color, and not affected by rounding errors. To the display, it's 24 bit all the way (8 bits red, green, blue). To print and other devices it might be different, but no monitor that I know of supports more than 256 shades of color on the individual colors for each pixel. This is why internally, the more recent video cards use insane precision.. the effects of each successive pixel shader demands it for there to be perfect representation of the color desired, once they're flattened down to a 24bit colorspace. If everything was done in 24bits, you'd lose a few bits precision (probably per color) in rounding errors. I can certainly notice the difference between a one rgb value difference in certain colors (esp on LCDs towards the dark end). Attempting to force (let's say two bits rounding error) 4 values each of rgb to be 'good enough' to equal is horrible, to me. (this allows about 64 different color values, all slightly different, to be possible results from a set of shader operations). Not good enough for having a huge chain of effects streun together (the more you work on it, the more noticeable those rounding errors become).
Ya know, I'd agree with you. But the first time aim played one of those flash ads and I found out what the hell just made my speakers make noise without me requesting it, I fucking uninstalled it. That's just rude and retarded, and I'll never go back.
any cd burner over 8x is essentially guaranteed to have burnproof. No dvd burner made that I know of would risk NOT having it. 8x dvd burn is MUCH faster than an 8x cd burn, as other comments have shown.
The buffer is nice, but underflows aren't tragic anymore, and haven't been for years.
I realize that it's expensive and nearly impossible, but it seems to me that people that aren't challenged in school and find it boring, should be taught differently. Some people pick stuff up rather quicker than others, myself included. Do I think this is a good trait? yes. Did it lead me to being bored in high school (and college, since I couldn't afford a 'better' one) most of the time? yes.
It seems to me that were I to have been challenged, I might have developed a work ethic. I'm not saying I'm the smartest person ever. I'm not attempting to gloat. I'm just saying that the current educational system is trash. I was bored senseless in high school. I actually slept through most of my classes, and still got A's, because I did the minimum amount of effort required of me to do so, which wasn't much. Now I'm looking for life in the real world and I have no work ethic. Were I to be challenged, I'd probably just give up. I never learned to 'study' for the classes that I needed to, and just ignored them. I didn't fail them, and still graduated with honors, but it was annoying because I didn't get most of what I could from them.
Any time where I can attend, either physically or just mentally (i.e. not daydreaming), any class only 6 times and still get an A is poorly structured for someone such as myself. What do I recommend? Well, one on one education with someone I consider an intellectual and knowledgeable equal on the topic of discussion would have been amazing. But how many people can afford that?
I don't have a solution, but it seems to me that if any structure set up for education is boring to you, then you're either in the wrong field, or it's being taught wrong, at least for the way you learn/think.
Too many times I've sat in a class and not paid attention for 30+ minutes while the teacher/professor explained something that seemed easy enough (took about 5 minutes), then spent the next 25 re-explaining it to one or two people in the class who just didn't get it. No offense to them, but I'd prefer that clarification such as that should be done on their time, not everyone's time.
Mod me down for being a pretentious asshole now, it's rather hard to talk about how you're better in some way than the majority of the population (and frustrated by it) without sounding like one. I really don't think I'm better than anyone else for it, it's just one of my gifts. Others can sing, do artistic things, whatever. Mine was quick understanding of various logical topics/pursuits (math, computers, mechanical/technical drawing.. anything seemingly with set rules instead of arbitrary decisions, though admittedly programming is more of an art than anything else, it's a logical art. Though, most could say that art itself is better thought of in terms of rules and logic as well:))
This way if you tried the demo, and it doesn't work, well.. you'll be reasonably guaranteed that the retail won't work either. Less chance to 'steal' it that way (get it and return it). Though I doubt that's the real reason.
It was probably because they didn't want anything similar to a 'clean' exe out there in the wild, such that it might be easier to find in memory and debug that way in the retail version. That, and the game was probably written with a few things integral to the game such that the protection needed to be there (instead of just being a 'boot' protection like most were). So to remove it would have been a bit more difficult than just not linking -lshittycopyprotection.
One thing I miss from windows is drempels. It's not abstract art like this, but just weird swirly patterns and stuff. You can set it to handle any overlay color, so for a while I had the backgrounds of a lot of windows set to rgb(1,1,1), which I set drempels to overlay. This way black things didn't get messed up if they were meant to be black. A great majority of the time it didn't choose certain bright colors, so use those for text.
Anyone know of anything similar for my GNU/Linux/XFree86(Soon to be X.Org)/KDE machine?:)
What is considered the "right angle" for a forward raytracer? You can't do it based on the surface angle, unless the thing is absolutely reflective. If it's not, then there's a decent chance to not run in to any light source.
Imagine a piece of paper. Shine a laser (or any light) at it. Assume the light and your eyes are a 90 degree rotation about the center of the point apart, and both looking down at the paper at an angle of 45 degrees. If you raytrace the rays from your eyes, they hit the paper, bounce off along a line between your eyes and the light spot that's on the paper, and continue off in to the darkness. Now, in real life, that light does something.. but if I were to trace physically the light source, I'd not see that spot of light on the paper?
Perhaps I'm missing something, but it seems purely backward or purely forward raytracers couldn't work? You'd have to trace forward any light, to illuminate the surface, and trace backwards to see what ones are in view. If everything was perfectly reflective, however, the light wouldn't be absorbed/scatter in such a way that this would be a problem. But how often is everything in the room a perfect mirror?:)
God that was awful. But after doing that, I made my father use the computer. He realized how slow it was, and two weeks later I had a spiffy 133 w/ 32mb ram.:)
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder how long until they start telling clerks to press a button if someone is dispensing in to a container, so that it becomes more accurate. Or if they develop some other way to check (maybe just ask on that little electronic screen, and make it illegal to lie to them, even though they're allowed to lie to you.)
That is correct. Also one of the reasons Hybrid numbers are a bit skewed.. the test hasn't really been adjusted to accomodate them, so almost always (and yes, there are some exceptions), the numbers on hybrids are the maximum. Depends on the style (Toyota's hybrid method keeps the engine off longer and relies on the battery more than Honda's, I think, so their numbers are a bit more off than the Civic or Insight's).
Surprisingly, the Honda stick shifts don't shut the engine off at stop lights, yet still supposedly get 5 MPG better than the automatics that do. I can only assume this is because the EPA tests are unrealistic. If I were given the choice between stick and automatic in a regular car, I'd choose stick no question. But when I test drove the Civic hybrid, it just felt wrong to me that the engine stayed on in the stick version, and turned off in the auto. I'll prolly go with the automatic. *sigh*.
The way I understand recursion:
:)
:) But I forget the difference. I just know that tail end is easier to optimize. I think tail end would be a reverse function that worked like:
Some function calling itself, and returning data that the calling function needs to return its data. Hence loops are not recursive (they need some other storage mechanism to store the data, if it's being "built" in the loop). Often times recursive procedures are called with simpler parameters than the ones given to the 'parent', or with smaller arrays, etc. Not always though.
Again, hopefully there's some change in state to mark the 'end' of the recursion. Randomness, local static, global variable, member variable, or a parameter. Something. Or else you'll never quit
There's two types of recursion: tail end and the other one.
return last_element+reverse(beginning_elements)
I don't know what you mean by simpler terms, or why you would need to make the distinction. ?
I can have the good of humanity at heart and dump a million dollars in to research and testing and eventually bring the cure to cancer to market. Like other people said, there's two parts of patents: I can now keep this secret, and hope no one else figures out how I did this. In all likelihood, HOW I did it will have to be documented anyway (it has a health risk). I might, however, be able to patent it, and then license it out. This way, I make money, and hopefully recoup my losses.
.. oh well. It's rather obvious to me that putting someone on the door of a place will deter theft, that providing a play area for kids makes it easier for parents to come in, and that providing a locked money box, a computer, and a teller makes it easier to do your banking. This patent is stupid, in my opinion, but not all patents are.
People can break even on inventions and then donate the rest of the money. Or, they can keep some for themselves. Does it matter if people have the good of humanity at heart? no. Humanity will benefit by this invention, if patented, within 20 years. The ability to patent it made it feasible for someone to do this. They thought they'd make the money back, so they did it, patented it, put it on market for the 20 years, and then everyone else makes a generic ripoff. If they didn't patent it, they'd think to themselves "Well, we can do this, but we'll spend 10 million dollars on it. When we're done, anyone can recreate our work for about an hour spent in a lab reverse engineering it, for total cost of 1,000 dollars. We won't ever be able to sell for less than them, and make all our money back, so why bother?"
Corporations exist to make money. Patents help them do so. They also help everyone else, because after that 20 years, everyone has a chance at it.
Note, there's also restrictions like the generic drug laws (so my cure for cancer is a bit out there anyway), and if something like this could save lives, I'm not sure they'd let one company go out of control with it. Resonable cost, maybe, but they'd be regulated up the wazoo anyway.
So, let's go with a non-medical example: the automobile. GM makes a brand new car fuel system that takes in regular air, spits out regular air, but somehow generates power in doing so. Everyone would benefit from this immensely, but the process for doing it is extremely complicated, and they spent a billion dollars on inventing it. They now have the following options:
a) Keep it secret and hope that no one else figures out how to do it. Two outcomes: No one else figures out how to do it (good for GM), or Honda buys a car, gets their smartest people on it, and within 1 year has it reverse engineered, for only $1 mil cost (bad for GM)
b) Keep it secret, and not bring it to market. Well, congrats, that money's wasted.
c) Patent it. No one else can make one for 20 years, so they have time to make their money back. after 20 years, everyone can make this car that doesn't need fuel. Everyone benefits. Some later than others, though.
Patents really do help -- IF APPLIED PROPERLY.
I don't think this one is proper, but
Patents, by themselves, are a good concept. Just often abused.
Because theoretically they spent money/time/energy/[some consumable resource] developing it, and are due a reward. Granted, if it's easy to clone, then perhaps it shouldn't be granted patent anyway (since it would seem obvious). However, let's imagine a sample case:
Let's assume that after 10 years toiling away in your garage, you find out that sodium mixed with water is a good way to cure athlete's foot (hint: it's not). But somehow, you have made it so. Now, the actual process to make this miracle cure is rather easy, and thus easily cloneable. But, you spent 10 years of your life, several thousands of dollars buying pure sodium (And probably other false starts), etc.. Not to mention the personal danger you put yourself in by sticking pure sodium on your foot like an idiot. but in the end, you have managed to succeed, and you have your product.
Now, there are two possibilities.
No patents: You announce your product. Some other BigNameCompany decides "Hey, we're bigger than him. We can get our sodium cheaper", and makes a competing product that sells for 50 cents less than yours. You promptly go out of business, in addition to having lost all that money spent DEVELOPING the product.
With patents: You announce your product. You have x number of years to recoup your losses before you get competition using the same process. Now, if some other company develops a process that achieves the same end result, but doesn't use what you patented, they're free to do so.
Patents have to be non-obvious. Sticking sodium on your foot isn't that obvious to me. So I'd grant you one for this.
Clicking your mouse on a button to buy something is rather obvious (to me at least), and probably didn't take much research to come up with. Doesn't matter how many clicks it takes, it's still clicking, and everyone's been doing that. It doesn't take much brain power to say "Hey, people will buy easier if we make it so they only have to click once instead of 5 times!"
But yes, that's why patents exist: so that people have a reason to invent something. If you don't have a reasonable expectation of return on investment in to creating something, the only inventions made would be ones that help your company, or done by people who have the good of humanity at heart. Not many of these people are willing to spend millions of dollars to develop something for the good of humanity though, if they aren't reasonably assured that there'll be a return on that investment.
I thought I sent this, but apparently never clicked submit. ignore my other comment, just make a label (see upper right of the inbox window), and call it spam. Doesn't need to be a filter, just to have something to associate spam with. GMail alaready assigns everything the spam label, you just don't have a way to view it yourself. I wonder if it works for the other ones? (Inbox, Starred are both just labels to GMail, I think). I'm going to go play :)
I specifically mentioned that major ones (or ones backed with money) would move faster than smaller, independent ones. I think they're related -- Get large, get important, get money. I also dont' think gaim developers are being paid, yet it releases often. And there are plenty of people being paid to work on the linux kernel, so to compare to other projects where people are being paid to work on it is also a valid comparison.
:)
The article specifically mentioned Open Source. All of these are open source. Most of them are also being paid, but that wasn't a requirement, and the one that I was comparing to also has people being paid to develop it.
*shrug* I see both sides. Most projects get to a certain point where it's more tedious than interesting to develop, as it's bug fixes or edge cases. They stagnate then. Meanwhile, I'm often desiring these edge cases to be finished, and they never are.
Other projects get large, get popular, and then get even larger and/or get funding. They then go faster than anything else for improving themselves. Rather amazing work comes out of these..
*shrug*
I don't think it matters. Match on from: president@whitehouse.gov. Just so long as a label exists with that name, it'll show up in your 'Labels' category. The 'Spam' folder on the left is just a special label (just like Inbox, Starred, etc.). So, if it finds something as spam, it puts it under the 'Spam' label for you, automatically, even though you don't realize you HAVE a spam label. So make one, and bam, it works.
I never thought of doing this, but I DID notice the Spam label on all its false positives. grr.
Totally not trolling here, but I was under the impression that QT was nearly entirely C++? You imply 'not c++' as your prefered langauge, but then like qt?
I ask only for clarification, because I haven't coded any gui apps for linux. Windows (api, mfc, vb, foxpro) and generic (java/swing, wxwidgets) only.
In fact, I thought that was one of the big 'draws' of gtk, was that being written in C, it could export to everything. QT, being written in C++, was much harder to make work in other languages.
KDE releases with decent frequency. Gaim does too. There's eclipse, which has come quite a long way in a short amount of time. Mozilla/firefox.. yeah, real slow there. PHP, hasn't changed a single bit, nope nope.
Compare it to other projects in the same vein. Independent ones, there's not many developers, it moves slowly. Major ones, or ones with funding, there's motivation to work on it besides "Hey, I have a few minutes and wouldn't it be cool if...".
Where is this console pulling the textures from? I don't get what you're saying. If they aren't in any form of RAM, where can they come from?
No console released now would NOT take advantage of HDTV Resolutions. XBOX already does, though it's technically optional if the game maker wants to support it.
Will you shut up and listen to what everyone is trying to say? Here, it's not hard.
BANDWIDTH DOESN'T MATTER HERE. 256MB RAM IS NOT ENOUGH to "load game frm DVd" and just leave it there. Not on the PC, not on the XBOX. The PC is beter in this regard, actually: you're likely to have 64, 128, or 256MB of Video card ram, and 256MB, 512, or even 1GB of system ram. Here, bandwidth DOES matter. And the bandwidth to get it from the PC's SYSTEM ram to the PC's VIDEO ram is a lot better than the bandwidth from ANY storage media such as hard drive, DVd [sic], or whatever.
So, XBOX has 256MB ram to deal with EVERYTHING. Game. Textures. Models. Logic. Audio. Bandwidth DOES NOT MATTER because there's NOWHERE TO MOVE THE STUFF TO.
Spout off numbers all you want, if you can't fit all the stuff in ram, you're hitting that DVD. And guess what, You won't be getting 6.4GB/sec out of a 12x DVD drive.
I wonder how they reach those stats. Do only hits to the front page count? I never visit it. Do only searches count? I do that all the time. Are they only unique people, or just raw usage stats?
:) I'm not developing business websites, just personal ones..
That graph made me sad, though.. I guess I didn't realize just how little hope there is, at the moment, of displacing IE. All my friends use it, so I figured there was more than just perhaps 5 out of 100. Oh well, too close to the issue I guess. Rather sobering experience.. However, it validates my designs in another way: I don't really need to care about IE4 when designing pages. IE5 and 5.5: yes, I guess. (what was with the spike for IE 5 over 5.5 there?) I'd still rather not. IE 6 and standards compliant (firefox. Yes, I know it has its issues as well, but its a lot better than IE6) is good enough for me
the point was that better dev tools = more software for windows = more people using windows = more monopoly for windows = $$
:)
:)
Crappy dev tools = less software for windows = more software for other platforms = less people using windows = no more monopoly = !$$
Please understand what other people are saying before you complain
I don't think they implied it was a questionable practice either. just a sensible one. They're competing with the other products. Competition doesn't mean sneaking in and sabotaging the ability for XCode to work (though, I guess if you read slashdot enough, you'd assume they did this with various other tools, this isn't one of them). They're tryign to make a good product. Both to please external developers (so there's more software), and themselves (since they have to use this every day). In the end, the developer's tools should probably be the best of all of Microsoft's products (and I dare say they are). They're the ones the developers themselves use all day, every day, and care most about. Office, etc. are used by other people: they just write it
Why would he be? I find kdevelop 3 buggy as hell (might just be this mandrake version of it), but still a better environment than all visual studios up until .NET. XCode I hear is quite nice, but I don't have a mac to test it. Eclipse is amazing, but limited to Java.
.NET or kdevelop, for C++ (SDL) development. I tend to switch between them, depending on whatever OS I have booted up at the time. If Visual Studio still sucked as much as it did with VS 4 or VS 5, then I'd not code for windows at all. (Note, I'm referring here to the entire visual C++ tookit: compiler, IDE, etc..) so yes, they need to continue to keep developers happy, or else developers will leave. .NET is much more supportive of recent ISO standards for C/C++, and that makes my life a hell of a lot easier.
I don't know what I prefer: Visual Studio
Because there's no such thing as 32-bit color? 32-bit, for all intents and purposes, when on a display.. is the exact same as 24. The only reason there's 32 bits is because 1) it's easy for computers to deal with (since we have 32 bit computers, not 24bit), and 2) to accomodate transparency. Why doesn't X have 32 bit color? Because there really isn't such a beast.
The only time more bits matters is for processing precision: 48 bit and 64 bit (integer or floating point) colors are good for intermediate work, where you want two pixels side by side to not be the same color, and not affected by rounding errors. To the display, it's 24 bit all the way (8 bits red, green, blue). To print and other devices it might be different, but no monitor that I know of supports more than 256 shades of color on the individual colors for each pixel. This is why internally, the more recent video cards use insane precision.. the effects of each successive pixel shader demands it for there to be perfect representation of the color desired, once they're flattened down to a 24bit colorspace. If everything was done in 24bits, you'd lose a few bits precision (probably per color) in rounding errors. I can certainly notice the difference between a one rgb value difference in certain colors (esp on LCDs towards the dark end). Attempting to force (let's say two bits rounding error) 4 values each of rgb to be 'good enough' to equal is horrible, to me. (this allows about 64 different color values, all slightly different, to be possible results from a set of shader operations). Not good enough for having a huge chain of effects streun together (the more you work on it, the more noticeable those rounding errors become).
plogs were mentioned earlier on slashdot. I don't see the need for a new word for it, but hey, whatever.
Ya know, I'd agree with you. But the first time aim played one of those flash ads and I found out what the hell just made my speakers make noise without me requesting it, I fucking uninstalled it. That's just rude and retarded, and I'll never go back.
any cd burner over 8x is essentially guaranteed to have burnproof. No dvd burner made that I know of would risk NOT having it. 8x dvd burn is MUCH faster than an 8x cd burn, as other comments have shown.
The buffer is nice, but underflows aren't tragic anymore, and haven't been for years.
I realize that it's expensive and nearly impossible, but it seems to me that people that aren't challenged in school and find it boring, should be taught differently. Some people pick stuff up rather quicker than others, myself included. Do I think this is a good trait? yes. Did it lead me to being bored in high school (and college, since I couldn't afford a 'better' one) most of the time? yes.
:))
It seems to me that were I to have been challenged, I might have developed a work ethic. I'm not saying I'm the smartest person ever. I'm not attempting to gloat. I'm just saying that the current educational system is trash. I was bored senseless in high school. I actually slept through most of my classes, and still got A's, because I did the minimum amount of effort required of me to do so, which wasn't much. Now I'm looking for life in the real world and I have no work ethic. Were I to be challenged, I'd probably just give up. I never learned to 'study' for the classes that I needed to, and just ignored them. I didn't fail them, and still graduated with honors, but it was annoying because I didn't get most of what I could from them.
Any time where I can attend, either physically or just mentally (i.e. not daydreaming), any class only 6 times and still get an A is poorly structured for someone such as myself. What do I recommend? Well, one on one education with someone I consider an intellectual and knowledgeable equal on the topic of discussion would have been amazing. But how many people can afford that?
I don't have a solution, but it seems to me that if any structure set up for education is boring to you, then you're either in the wrong field, or it's being taught wrong, at least for the way you learn/think.
Too many times I've sat in a class and not paid attention for 30+ minutes while the teacher/professor explained something that seemed easy enough (took about 5 minutes), then spent the next 25 re-explaining it to one or two people in the class who just didn't get it. No offense to them, but I'd prefer that clarification such as that should be done on their time, not everyone's time.
Mod me down for being a pretentious asshole now, it's rather hard to talk about how you're better in some way than the majority of the population (and frustrated by it) without sounding like one. I really don't think I'm better than anyone else for it, it's just one of my gifts. Others can sing, do artistic things, whatever. Mine was quick understanding of various logical topics/pursuits (math, computers, mechanical/technical drawing.. anything seemingly with set rules instead of arbitrary decisions, though admittedly programming is more of an art than anything else, it's a logical art. Though, most could say that art itself is better thought of in terms of rules and logic as well
This way if you tried the demo, and it doesn't work, well.. you'll be reasonably guaranteed that the retail won't work either. Less chance to 'steal' it that way (get it and return it). Though I doubt that's the real reason.
It was probably because they didn't want anything similar to a 'clean' exe out there in the wild, such that it might be easier to find in memory and debug that way in the retail version. That, and the game was probably written with a few things integral to the game such that the protection needed to be there (instead of just being a 'boot' protection like most were). So to remove it would have been a bit more difficult than just not linking -lshittycopyprotection.
One thing I miss from windows is drempels. It's not abstract art like this, but just weird swirly patterns and stuff. You can set it to handle any overlay color, so for a while I had the backgrounds of a lot of windows set to rgb(1,1,1), which I set drempels to overlay. This way black things didn't get messed up if they were meant to be black. A great majority of the time it didn't choose certain bright colors, so use those for text.
:)
Anyone know of anything similar for my GNU/Linux/XFree86(Soon to be X.Org)/KDE machine?
What is considered the "right angle" for a forward raytracer? You can't do it based on the surface angle, unless the thing is absolutely reflective. If it's not, then there's a decent chance to not run in to any light source.
:)
Imagine a piece of paper. Shine a laser (or any light) at it. Assume the light and your eyes are a 90 degree rotation about the center of the point apart, and both looking down at the paper at an angle of 45 degrees. If you raytrace the rays from your eyes, they hit the paper, bounce off along a line between your eyes and the light spot that's on the paper, and continue off in to the darkness. Now, in real life, that light does something.. but if I were to trace physically the light source, I'd not see that spot of light on the paper?
Perhaps I'm missing something, but it seems purely backward or purely forward raytracers couldn't work? You'd have to trace forward any light, to illuminate the surface, and trace backwards to see what ones are in view. If everything was perfectly reflective, however, the light wouldn't be absorbed/scatter in such a way that this would be a problem. But how often is everything in the room a perfect mirror?
You mean there were others than me?
:)
God that was awful. But after doing that, I made my father use the computer. He realized how slow it was, and two weeks later I had a spiffy 133 w/ 32mb ram.
I like the blue hair :) Of course, I'm a bit partial, having had blue hair recently myself. Purple now, but it's faded strangely, unfortunately.
;)
I was going to say you sounded cool as well, until I saw you don't like thumpy bass music