Oh and I've found this "professional interaction designer's" webpage and it's about as terrible looking as his supposed "designs" for Duh Gimp. Who the fuck in this day and age still uses fixed-width webpages that look like they were formatted for 640x480 screens? His website is all sorts of usability problems so it makes perfect sense why this single-window version of Gimp looks like such crap.
For some good information you need to read this, this and this. Once you read these then you will understand why you are quite wrong. It's the same reason why one cannot copyright a recipe, but your own expression of that recipe can be copyrighted. The same thing applies to phone books.
You are actually wrong. Yes, information, such as a phone number or address, is not eligible for copyright protection but that does not mean the phone book as a whole work cannot be copyrighted. You have incorrectly understood the ruling on such things. This is why I can create my own phone book with information copied straight out of, for example, the Yellow Pages but at the same time I can not take a Yellow Pages phone book, scribble out their name, put my own on it and claim it as my own work as the work as a whole can be copyrighted if it meets certain statutory requirements.
Yes, but even those programmers in the second and third world are more than capable of paying $300 a year (which is mostly inflated since you add a bunch of artificial costs that are not absolutely necessity for iOS development) for the development tools. Hell you'll pay more than for Android development since you'll be forced to buy way more than just a single device to check compatibility of your apps.
If you can't afford $300 a year then you probably should choose a different job than a professional programmer. $300 is less than a days pay for any professional programmer.
And in a data point sure to further damage techies' reputation for social skills, Staples Advantage also reported that 30% of tablet users said they used their tablets while at restaurants."
Why would it damage the reputation of techies? It was the techies on Slashdot that were proclaiming that the iPad was going to be a complete flop and no one was going to want to buy tablet computers over netbooks and notebooks. But, hey, nice try at spin. It's almost as laughable as the Slashdot review of the iPod just before it took off and become the most well-known mp3 player of all time.
How was it even remotely a good design choice? The UI is cluttered, the drawing screen has so much of it's real estate taken up by the cluttered Windows and you still have to trawl through so many tabs and shit just to find options. This is not even getting to the fact that it still lacks proper hardware acceleration, proper nondestructive editing, proper high-bit depth support, a proper support for professional workflows, etc. Duh GIMP is still a piece of shit but now it's UI is worse than had they not done anything to it at all.
That's because the developers are incompetent at UX design. When people were asking for a single-window mode they didn't just want all the windows that used to be floating to be smashed together into a cluttered mess. The UI is just fucking terrible.
Because they have this ludicrous notion in their head that if all they do is smash the floating windows into a single Window that Photoshop users will in droves flock to it. This is ignoring the lack of hardware acceleration, non-destructive layers, the high-bit depth support that is still lacking, etc. Not to mention the fact that the UI actually looks more hideous and cluttered now because they didn't do a proper redesign of the UI.
I'm not so sure single-window is an improvement on small screens.
Not with the way Duh Gimp people implemented it, that's for sure. All they did was take the lazy route of smashing the formerly floating windows into a single window. That's really not the way to have done it. The single window mode also needed a subsequent REDESIGN of the UI. The UI now just looks like a cluttered mess.
No, the only thing that works is to stop buying the product and stop downloading it as well. As long as 10s or 100s of thousands of people are downloading it for free Ubisoft is going to just go on thinking they need more and more intrusive DRM to fight piracy.
Why would you not be checking your divisors for being zero before doing division? Why are you waiting for an exception to happen instead? I'm not seeing any reason other than laziness to not make sure you aren't doing bad operations before you do them. And before you say "for performance" or some nonsense, that exception handling causes a far larger performance hit than just simply checking that your divisor isn't zero.
In general, constructors should merely set member variables to their initial values. Any complex initialization should go in an explicit Init() method.
Yes, let's not do our work in the constructor, let's make it so that the user has to know to call an Init() method to not get an object in a bad state. So basically they have some really lame justifications for this and yet all this does is make the code more error prone since you have to know to call an extra method just to get your object constructed properly which is fucking dumb.
Constructors, destructors and the standard library aren't built into C++? Since when? What use is a C++ implementation that doesn't include the most vital part of the language?
Smart pointers are a library not a language feature.
*facepalm* The standard library IS a part of the language.
RAII is a best practice not a language feature.
When did I say RAII was a "language feature"? RAII is a idiom UTILIZING language features which is use your constructor to initialize your resources and your destructor to clean them up.
That's what is always funny. The most outspoken critics of C++ are usually those most ignorant of the language. Hence why we have all sorts of people in this discussion whining about having to do manual memory management in C++ whilst being pig ignorant of the built-in features and design patterns that basically eliminate most of this burden.
Epitomized by posts such as this. Yeah, who cares about doing stupid shit like closing file handles? Yeah, actually being a competent program is so dumb.
You should look at the coding guidelines Google uses for C++.
I don't recommend that. Anyone reading the Google coding guidelines will get a very wrong picture of how C++ is supposed to be done. Hell, their guidelines specifically disallow the use of RAII which is one of the dumbest things ever.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh and I've found this "professional interaction designer's" webpage and it's about as terrible looking as his supposed "designs" for Duh Gimp. Who the fuck in this day and age still uses fixed-width webpages that look like they were formatted for 640x480 screens? His website is all sorts of usability problems so it makes perfect sense why this single-window version of Gimp looks like such crap.
For some good information you need to read this, this and this. Once you read these then you will understand why you are quite wrong. It's the same reason why one cannot copyright a recipe, but your own expression of that recipe can be copyrighted. The same thing applies to phone books.
You are actually wrong. Yes, information, such as a phone number or address, is not eligible for copyright protection but that does not mean the phone book as a whole work cannot be copyrighted. You have incorrectly understood the ruling on such things. This is why I can create my own phone book with information copied straight out of, for example, the Yellow Pages but at the same time I can not take a Yellow Pages phone book, scribble out their name, put my own on it and claim it as my own work as the work as a whole can be copyrighted if it meets certain statutory requirements.
Yes, but even those programmers in the second and third world are more than capable of paying $300 a year (which is mostly inflated since you add a bunch of artificial costs that are not absolutely necessity for iOS development) for the development tools. Hell you'll pay more than for Android development since you'll be forced to buy way more than just a single device to check compatibility of your apps.
Totally. We are still fighting Apple to support things like HTML5. Oh wait...
If you can't afford $300 a year then you probably should choose a different job than a professional programmer. $300 is less than a days pay for any professional programmer.
And in a data point sure to further damage techies' reputation for social skills, Staples Advantage also reported that 30% of tablet users said they used their tablets while at restaurants."
Why would it damage the reputation of techies? It was the techies on Slashdot that were proclaiming that the iPad was going to be a complete flop and no one was going to want to buy tablet computers over netbooks and notebooks. But, hey, nice try at spin. It's almost as laughable as the Slashdot review of the iPod just before it took off and become the most well-known mp3 player of all time.
Yes, now you get to enjoy the mess of all those windows being jammed together and creating a cluttered single-window.
How was it even remotely a good design choice? The UI is cluttered, the drawing screen has so much of it's real estate taken up by the cluttered Windows and you still have to trawl through so many tabs and shit just to find options. This is not even getting to the fact that it still lacks proper hardware acceleration, proper nondestructive editing, proper high-bit depth support, a proper support for professional workflows, etc. Duh GIMP is still a piece of shit but now it's UI is worse than had they not done anything to it at all.
That's because the developers are incompetent at UX design. When people were asking for a single-window mode they didn't just want all the windows that used to be floating to be smashed together into a cluttered mess. The UI is just fucking terrible.
Because they have this ludicrous notion in their head that if all they do is smash the floating windows into a single Window that Photoshop users will in droves flock to it. This is ignoring the lack of hardware acceleration, non-destructive layers, the high-bit depth support that is still lacking, etc. Not to mention the fact that the UI actually looks more hideous and cluttered now because they didn't do a proper redesign of the UI.
I'm not so sure single-window is an improvement on small screens.
Not with the way Duh Gimp people implemented it, that's for sure. All they did was take the lazy route of smashing the formerly floating windows into a single window. That's really not the way to have done it. The single window mode also needed a subsequent REDESIGN of the UI. The UI now just looks like a cluttered mess.
So two phones that flopped due to low sales and of which neither one used an OS that was GPLv3 licensed? Great counterexample!
Now it's just down to Waldenbooks
No, Waldenbooks was owned by Borders and Borders shut down all those stores.
No, the only thing that works is to stop buying the product and stop downloading it as well. As long as 10s or 100s of thousands of people are downloading it for free Ubisoft is going to just go on thinking they need more and more intrusive DRM to fight piracy.
Why would you not be checking your divisors for being zero before doing division? Why are you waiting for an exception to happen instead? I'm not seeing any reason other than laziness to not make sure you aren't doing bad operations before you do them. And before you say "for performance" or some nonsense, that exception handling causes a far larger performance hit than just simply checking that your divisor isn't zero.
Here you go. Relevant piece:
In general, constructors should merely set member variables to their initial values. Any complex initialization should go in an explicit Init() method.
Yes, let's not do our work in the constructor, let's make it so that the user has to know to call an Init() method to not get an object in a bad state. So basically they have some really lame justifications for this and yet all this does is make the code more error prone since you have to know to call an extra method just to get your object constructed properly which is fucking dumb.
They aren't built in to C++
Constructors, destructors and the standard library aren't built into C++? Since when? What use is a C++ implementation that doesn't include the most vital part of the language?
Smart pointers are a library not a language feature.
*facepalm* The standard library IS a part of the language.
RAII is a best practice not a language feature.
When did I say RAII was a "language feature"? RAII is a idiom UTILIZING language features which is use your constructor to initialize your resources and your destructor to clean them up.
Great. So that means you can't do much more than trivial little programs. Woohoo?
That's what is always funny. The most outspoken critics of C++ are usually those most ignorant of the language. Hence why we have all sorts of people in this discussion whining about having to do manual memory management in C++ whilst being pig ignorant of the built-in features and design patterns that basically eliminate most of this burden.
Epitomized by posts such as this. Yeah, who cares about doing stupid shit like closing file handles? Yeah, actually being a competent program is so dumb.
This time, actually read my entire statement.
When you take full advantage of C++'s built-in memory management features or tools like boost, you will almost NEVER need to use new/delete.
And notice how I said you could use those "built-in features" OR boost. Seriously, the sentence isn't that hard to read.
Ever hear of SWT?
Yes, but most Java GUIs do not use it so that's mostly irrelevant.
You should look at the coding guidelines Google uses for C++.
I don't recommend that. Anyone reading the Google coding guidelines will get a very wrong picture of how C++ is supposed to be done. Hell, their guidelines specifically disallow the use of RAII which is one of the dumbest things ever.
Most likely. This person is probably the team lead.