Donald Knuth, the man uses his own assembly language when expressing algorithms? Pleeeeeaaaaaaseeeee....
I have all of his books (boxed set!), and even have all of the fasciles for the book he hasnt released yet. I've also watched all the videos online of his lextures/classes.
You picked the *wrong* name to be dropping. When you are conversing with a dedicated optimizer, thats the last person you should try to misrepresent. The second to last person you should try to misrepresent is Abrash.
You may bluster on about owning all his books, but apparently you never actually read them because he has talked in a number of his papers and in the book Literate Programming about the faults of trying to optimize every single inefficiency and about how premature optimization can lead to performance problems in a program. There is nothing in my post that misrepresents anything he has said.
You listed downsides of assembler and upsides of HLL's, while listing no upsides of assembler and no downsides of HLL's.
Maybe not in that specific post, but I didn't realize I had to write an exhaustive treatise about the entire subject in that single post.
Maybe you just don't have the ability to detect your bias.
What bias? I have no bias against assembly at all and use it extensively in programs. But like most people, I've learned that writing everything in assembly doesn't gain you much in terms of how much effort you put in and that you only optimize the biggest inefficiencies in your programs with it. The only "bias" is this one invented in your head where you think I'm completely against using assembly at all.
As far as my assembler skill, I've been programming in x86 assembler since the 8086. I also use HLL's. I mix the two because I happen to choose the right tool for the job.
And I do exactly the same. Wow, maybe next time you shouldn't jump to conclusions and throw out false statements about someone because you want to start an argument
I don't have this ignorant mindset that only one tool is great.
Any blind moneky can encode movies to the same level of blocky quality that you find on Pirate Bay. Those people basically just a use a script to do all the work and then they upload. There is nothing of value they are doing that would even deserve money.
I've played FPS games on consoles and I've played seriously on my PC. I enjoy both. Why is it that some many people like care how someone plays an FPS or RTS game and then get all worked up over the fact that people enjoy them on consoles. The world isn't this black and white were you can only enjoy playing games either on your PC or your console.
It's legal for me to watch tv or listen to radio for free by receiving transmissions, and I can even record them and keep the recording indefinitely as long as I only use it for personal use, but it's illegal for me to stream media over the internet and capture the stream, and it's illegal for me to transmit over the internet.
Yeah and? Fair Use has never allowed you to rebroadcast copyrighted content without consent of the copyright holder whether it be on the internet or through a TV transmitter.
It's legal for me to trade or lend CDs, DVDs, etc. with friends I know
Actually this can be arguable. It's more of a gray area that is most likely ignored.
or to buy or sell used copies, as long as they're legitimate (not pirated),
Yes, this would be the First Sale Doctrine.
but it's illegal for me to use the internet to facilitate either the search or the trading or to expand my group of "friends",
You've never had the right to willfully facilitate copyright infringement. This is a 36 year old precedent. I suggest you look up the ruling on Elektra Records Co. v. Gem Electronic Distributors, Inc.
even though I could go to a public library and essentially achieve the same ends by swapping media with a large group of people (the public) who I don't actually know.
Yes, because this falls under fair use. Your previous example has never been considered fair use.
If something is out of print, or censored, or otherwise unavailable, but copyrighted, I have no legal recourse to obtain a copy.
Why would you have a legal recourse? No one is obligated to sell you a product, let alone sell you one in the form you desire.
It's so good that none of the responders so far have clue #1 how torrents work!
Torrents contain a SHA-1 hash of the individual chunks of the file, split anywhere from 64KB to 4MB, to be shared. It also contains the announce URL which the URL of the tracker that will index the file. The torrent is then indexed by the tracker which maintains a list of the peers and seeders and is used to help facilitate connections between each of the peers in the swarm.
Well maybe Global Gaming Factory has 50 quintillion dollars in their war chest so that they can pay for the 10s of millions of cumulative unauthorized downloads that have and are currently happening on the site.
Maybe. I think what they are going for is a "pay a monthly fee and get all the games/music/etc you can download" and plan to pay the rights holders from the monthly fees..
Well only if those games/music/movies/etc are allowed to be uploaded to the site by the content owner.
I don't mean to be snarky, but nothing is stopping you from competing against them.
You mean other than their established net presence, their billions of dollars, and their deal with the Author's Guild? Yeah, if you completely ignore all that nothing is stopping you from competing on a level playing field against them!
And, if something has a negative effect then its not an optimization.
Depending on what point you are measuring the effect, yes it can. You can rewrite sections of code such that they locally are faster, but can in the overall cause issues in other places such that they run slower. It's all about scope.
You are spitting up FUD here.
If this is FUD then Donald Knuth is the biggest spreader of FUD ever since he has talked about just such situations in his books.
There is if (A) I wrote it, (B) I'm finished, (C) It wasn't something trivial.
What great blustering. I'm so impressed.
So *clap* *clap* *clap* hurray for you pointing out that assemblers have their limited place while refusing to admit that compilers also have their limited place.
I never did any such thing, but hey, have fun trying to act like your a bad ass because you learned some asm mnemonics that any intro level CS student could do as well.
At least the they are doing something interesting...
What is interesting or novel about this? There have been numerous OSes written in assembly language. That was pretty much what you did before C came along and even for quite some time after wards. Secondly, writing an OS kernel in assembly was a project that many people did while in school making this pretty mundane to be honest.
I mean do you really not think some company wouldn't come and grab up all their work and laugh after spitting in these guys faces
Since no company stole the work during the years while it was under the GPL, I see no reason why they would have had to worry about it enough to change the license for that reason. Secondly, why would some company want to steal an OS that has little to no features when they could just incorporate the code from a BSD instead?
One can probably also compile a Linux distro that has a equivalent dearth of features and get it to boot in only a few seconds. I don't understand why boot times are supposed to be something I'm supposed to be impressed over since I don't reboot my boxes for at least 6 months or more.
Unless mobile phones are going to start using x86 and x86-64 processors en masse any time soon, this project is probably of little importance to the phone companies since it will have to be completely ported over to an ARM architecture. And considering the dearth of features that it contains after so many years, I doubt the phone company is going to be offering them up any money.
Yeah but the major difference is that after 4 years of existence they had more than 10 users and actually had a wide suite of practical applications to use. This thing is 4 years old and the best they can tout is a TCP/IP stack, a web browser and that it can run 13 year old Quake.
Slashdot Mirror
Donald Knuth, the man uses his own assembly language when expressing algorithms? Pleeeeeaaaaaaseeeee....
I have all of his books (boxed set!), and even have all of the fasciles for the book he hasnt released yet. I've also watched all the videos online of his lextures/classes.
You picked the *wrong* name to be dropping. When you are conversing with a dedicated optimizer, thats the last person you should try to misrepresent. The second to last person you should try to misrepresent is Abrash.
You may bluster on about owning all his books, but apparently you never actually read them because he has talked in a number of his papers and in the book Literate Programming about the faults of trying to optimize every single inefficiency and about how premature optimization can lead to performance problems in a program. There is nothing in my post that misrepresents anything he has said.
You listed downsides of assembler and upsides of HLL's, while listing no upsides of assembler and no downsides of HLL's.
Maybe not in that specific post, but I didn't realize I had to write an exhaustive treatise about the entire subject in that single post.
Maybe you just don't have the ability to detect your bias.
What bias? I have no bias against assembly at all and use it extensively in programs. But like most people, I've learned that writing everything in assembly doesn't gain you much in terms of how much effort you put in and that you only optimize the biggest inefficiencies in your programs with it. The only "bias" is this one invented in your head where you think I'm completely against using assembly at all.
As far as my assembler skill, I've been programming in x86 assembler since the 8086. I also use HLL's. I mix the two because I happen to choose the right tool for the job.
And I do exactly the same. Wow, maybe next time you shouldn't jump to conclusions and throw out false statements about someone because you want to start an argument
I don't have this ignorant mindset that only one tool is great.
That's great.
Businesses still need land lines unless you plan on giving everyone a work cell phone or have them share phones.
Or, you know, just get VoIP.
Any blind moneky can encode movies to the same level of blocky quality that you find on Pirate Bay. Those people basically just a use a script to do all the work and then they upload. There is nothing of value they are doing that would even deserve money.
I've played FPS games on consoles and I've played seriously on my PC. I enjoy both. Why is it that some many people like care how someone plays an FPS or RTS game and then get all worked up over the fact that people enjoy them on consoles. The world isn't this black and white were you can only enjoy playing games either on your PC or your console.
No, it's just more of idle crap that samzenpus is posting to the wrong section again.
It's legal for me to watch tv or listen to radio for free by receiving transmissions, and I can even record them and keep the recording indefinitely as long as I only use it for personal use, but it's illegal for me to stream media over the internet and capture the stream, and it's illegal for me to transmit over the internet.
Yeah and? Fair Use has never allowed you to rebroadcast copyrighted content without consent of the copyright holder whether it be on the internet or through a TV transmitter.
It's legal for me to trade or lend CDs, DVDs, etc. with friends I know
Actually this can be arguable. It's more of a gray area that is most likely ignored.
or to buy or sell used copies, as long as they're legitimate (not pirated),
Yes, this would be the First Sale Doctrine.
but it's illegal for me to use the internet to facilitate either the search or the trading or to expand my group of "friends",
You've never had the right to willfully facilitate copyright infringement. This is a 36 year old precedent. I suggest you look up the ruling on Elektra Records Co. v. Gem Electronic Distributors, Inc.
even though I could go to a public library and essentially achieve the same ends by swapping media with a large group of people (the public) who I don't actually know.
Yes, because this falls under fair use. Your previous example has never been considered fair use.
If something is out of print, or censored, or otherwise unavailable, but copyrighted, I have no legal recourse to obtain a copy.
Why would you have a legal recourse? No one is obligated to sell you a product, let alone sell you one in the form you desire.
ISOHunt isn't a tracker. It's an indexing site for torrents hosted on other sites.
It's so good that none of the responders so far have clue #1 how torrents work!
Torrents contain a SHA-1 hash of the individual chunks of the file, split anywhere from 64KB to 4MB, to be shared. It also contains the announce URL which the URL of the tracker that will index the file. The torrent is then indexed by the tracker which maintains a list of the peers and seeders and is used to help facilitate connections between each of the peers in the swarm.
No worries they make up for this shortcoming by falling back to the business model of the dot com era where you make it up with volume!
Well maybe Global Gaming Factory has 50 quintillion dollars in their war chest so that they can pay for the 10s of millions of cumulative unauthorized downloads that have and are currently happening on the site.
But exactly how do you make a url out of this?
Maybe. I think what they are going for is a "pay a monthly fee and get all the games/music/etc you can download" and plan to pay the rights holders from the monthly fees..
Well only if those games/music/movies/etc are allowed to be uploaded to the site by the content owner.
Oh how they doubt the litigious desire of some people that believe their works turn the paper they're printed on to gold.
Or maybe they believe that if someone wants to use their work to sell ads and make money that they should be compensated for it.
I don't mean to be snarky, but nothing is stopping you from competing against them.
You mean other than their established net presence, their billions of dollars, and their deal with the Author's Guild? Yeah, if you completely ignore all that nothing is stopping you from competing on a level playing field against them!
They'd probably be better off just giving all their money away. It'll be just as successful as this asinine business model.
And, if something has a negative effect then its not an optimization.
Depending on what point you are measuring the effect, yes it can. You can rewrite sections of code such that they locally are faster, but can in the overall cause issues in other places such that they run slower. It's all about scope.
You are spitting up FUD here.
If this is FUD then Donald Knuth is the biggest spreader of FUD ever since he has talked about just such situations in his books.
There is if (A) I wrote it, (B) I'm finished, (C) It wasn't something trivial.
What great blustering. I'm so impressed.
So *clap* *clap* *clap* hurray for you pointing out that assemblers have their limited place while refusing to admit that compilers also have their limited place.
I never did any such thing, but hey, have fun trying to act like your a bad ass because you learned some asm mnemonics that any intro level CS student could do as well.
I know this is being sarcastic, but if you are doing huge amounts of number crunching you are better off writing it in FORTRAN as it will be faster.
At least the they are doing something interesting...
What is interesting or novel about this? There have been numerous OSes written in assembly language. That was pretty much what you did before C came along and even for quite some time after wards. Secondly, writing an OS kernel in assembly was a project that many people did while in school making this pretty mundane to be honest.
I mean do you really not think some company wouldn't come and grab up all their work and laugh after spitting in these guys faces
Since no company stole the work during the years while it was under the GPL, I see no reason why they would have had to worry about it enough to change the license for that reason. Secondly, why would some company want to steal an OS that has little to no features when they could just incorporate the code from a BSD instead?
Probably because releasing this written in ARM assembly would make it an even more niche OS than it already is?
One can probably also compile a Linux distro that has a equivalent dearth of features and get it to boot in only a few seconds. I don't understand why boot times are supposed to be something I'm supposed to be impressed over since I don't reboot my boxes for at least 6 months or more.
AmigaOS was C and assembly and before that contained BCPL code.
KolibriOS is a fork of Menuet while the source was still GPLed.
Unless mobile phones are going to start using x86 and x86-64 processors en masse any time soon, this project is probably of little importance to the phone companies since it will have to be completely ported over to an ARM architecture. And considering the dearth of features that it contains after so many years, I doubt the phone company is going to be offering them up any money.
Okay, I was just going off the copyright date of the license.
Yeah but the major difference is that after 4 years of existence they had more than 10 users and actually had a wide suite of practical applications to use. This thing is 4 years old and the best they can tout is a TCP/IP stack, a web browser and that it can run 13 year old Quake.