> Just as many private art collectors have pieces on loan to museums.
I thought that was so they could avoid insurance premiums and get them cared for properly until they wanted to display them above the television in the breakfast nook.
Software is most frequently distributed in.dmg (disk image) files. You download the file, maybe gunzip it, then you click on it. That mounts the volume. Then you click on the application. That runs it.
If you want to turf the.dmg and put the application in your application folder, you just drag it from the dmg to the application folder (or fan) and let go.
The biggest piece of the puzzle to making this work from a systems POV is the Mach-o linker. The linker understands executable-relative linking. The next biggest piece is the uniformity of the install environment, the common directory structure that goes with applications (like, stuff with the app goes with the app instead of parts in/bin,/etc,/usr/lib, and so on), and the understanding of the directory structure in the file manager (finder).
Put all these pieces together and you have a really nice cohesive environment for day-to-day use. The best part is, it's still a UNIX box, so you can you pop open a terminal window and do whatever the hell you want.
It will be a long time since Linux sees this type of paradigm, as it requires deep cooperation the KDE/Gnome folks, development toolchains, systems linker, and a re-invention of the directory layout in the LSB.
I thought it was the name of the material they made the spacecraft from.
Re:It wasn't about education
on
Land of Lisp
·
· Score: 1
Those giant pages filled with hex characters taught me the technique of programming environment bootstrapping and the importance of programming checksums, you insensitive clod!
Re:Oh Come On! This is a Book Review!
on
Land of Lisp
·
· Score: 1
> *obsessively tallies and double checks to make sure he closed all his parentheses before hitting submit*
You can just use a single right square bracket to close all your current lparens.
> There is also a nontrivial issue of look-alike characters, which could be a source of errors.
You said it, brother. With my aging eyes and problematic hand nerves, I frequently mis-type ; as : at the end of the line. Even though it's a syntactic element and emacs helps me, I still spend 10-12 minutes a week searching for and fixing these.
If it was a less important symbol, the bugs would be even harder to find.
ECMAScript has been composed of Unicode characters since at least ECMA-262-3. The first version of JavaScript was UCS-2, so any version can use the basic multilingual plane. And even IE-6 runs edition 3.
The OS doesn't mention DPI, but it still "knows" it. For example, a font of a certain point-size is, by definition, a certain size in other units. If I correctly recall high-school typing class, 10 points is 10 characters per inch wide and 6 lines per inch high.
Changing to a larger monitor of the same resolution should cause the same point-size to display with fewer pixels, as each pixel is now bigger.
Windows and X11 both allow you to set your monitor's DPI so that this stuff looks right. OS/X has some variable DPI stuff in the back end, but Steve won't let them expose it because they can't get it working right.
I had an unbelievably annoying experience in this regard last year. My Mac Mini with a 1280x1024 17" screen was working fine, but I needed a faster box and wanted a bigger screen. I went out and bought a 28" iMac..... only to discover that while the screen size increased, the resolution increase outpaced the physical size of the screen -- the net effect was that the writing on many dialogue boxes etc was so small that I couldn't read it. (My eyes suck, sue me)
To add insult to injury, there is also no official way on Leopard to alter the system fonts (like "Large Fonts" in Windows). Fortunately, I found some 3rd party software out there on the 'net that let me tweak the right prefs, and I now have a readable display.
But the DPI is still wrong.
Incidentally, I asked around in a bunch of mac forums and IRC channel. You know what the popular answer is among the fanbois? "Lower your resolution".
WTF?! That's stupidest answer ever! Yes, it DOES make the fonts bigger (actually illustrating the problem), but Christ almighty, especially when we're talking LCDs, what a moronic suggestion!
> Regards to Firefox, is their JagerMonkey engine based on webkit?
No, it's a method JIT with PIC and other goodies that compiles from the interpreter's byte code.
Tuning underfoot now is helping decide when to use TM instead of JM. TM runs loops through the interpreter, records the results, and generates type-specialized assembly.
TM is theoretically much faster but also much more expensive to compile and tricky to make optimal.
Slashdot Mirror
JavaScript is already in the browser, and making inroads on PHP.
It many not have the PHP stdlib, but it's faster. Way faster. And awesomer.
> Just as many private art collectors have pieces on loan to museums.
I thought that was so they could avoid insurance premiums and get them cared for properly until they wanted to display them above the television in the breakfast nook.
Why dream?
Buy a Mac.
Software is most frequently distributed in .dmg (disk image) files. You download the file, maybe gunzip it, then you click on it. That mounts the volume. Then you click on the application. That runs it.
If you want to turf the .dmg and put the application in your application folder, you just drag it from the dmg to the application folder (or fan) and let go.
The biggest piece of the puzzle to making this work from a systems POV is the Mach-o linker. The linker understands executable-relative linking. The next biggest piece is the uniformity of the install environment, the common directory structure that goes with applications (like, stuff with the app goes with the app instead of parts in /bin, /etc, /usr/lib, and so on), and the understanding of the directory structure in the file manager (finder).
Put all these pieces together and you have a really nice cohesive environment for day-to-day use. The best part is, it's still a UNIX box, so you can you pop open a terminal window and do whatever the hell you want.
It will be a long time since Linux sees this type of paradigm, as it requires deep cooperation the KDE/Gnome folks, development toolchains, systems linker, and a re-invention of the directory layout in the LSB.
Because an iPhone is too small, and a Mac Book is too big.
Duh!
Washingtonians get taxed out of their wallets. This is why they are so upset. They have to send the government *money*.
Now, this Maryland place. It sounds interesting..
I thought it was the name of the material they made the spacecraft from.
Those giant pages filled with hex characters taught me the technique of programming environment bootstrapping and the importance of programming checksums, you insensitive clod!
> *obsessively tallies and double checks to make sure he closed all his parentheses before hitting submit*
You can just use a single right square bracket to close all your current lparens.
Yes, and a significant fraction of the books they are going to scan are DaVinci's Manuscripts!
> Last time this sort of thing happened, I remember it didn't end
> well for the fellow. What was his name?
I'm not really up on Christian doctrine, but from reading the rest of this discussion, I believe you are referring to Raptor Jesus.
vim is not vi and it is hardly a clone.
Superset, perhaps, but definitely not a clone.
> There is also a nontrivial issue of look-alike characters, which could be a source of errors.
You said it, brother. With my aging eyes and problematic hand nerves, I frequently mis-type ; as : at the end of the line. Even though it's a syntactic element and emacs helps me, I still spend 10-12 minutes a week searching for and fixing these.
If it was a less important symbol, the bugs would be even harder to find.
Whoopee
ECMAScript has been composed of Unicode characters since at least ECMA-262-3. The first version of JavaScript was UCS-2, so any version can use the basic multilingual plane. And even IE-6 runs edition 3.
It's called the compose key, and it's been on proper keyboard (hint: not PC keyboards) for over twenty years.
I don't know about you, but I had a REALLY hard time getting used to running tshark instead of tethereal.
Can you imagine the havok if we suddenly have KQtDE, KQtonqueror, KQtXSLDbg, KQtBibTeX, KQtSVN, KQtDiff3, KQt9Copy, KQtb3, and so on?
Madness! Re-tooling this many brains is NOT worth it!!
You mock, but it IS a big deal.
This means I can plug my iPhone into my Vic-20!
Does ignoring a threat count as circumvention?
> Paul McCartney touting a new pay service calling itself Limewire attempting to live off past name
> recognition despite a poor business model.
Digital Holdout? Hardly! He's *all over* that Pirate Bay music store!
So... what was in the Cheyenne Mounting in the '70s?
They didn't move the gate there 'till like, 95 or something, right?
> Of course I'm not a coder so my livelihood doesn't depend on how many LOC I can do in a day, so YMMV.
Good coders don't depend on that, either.
Hell, some of my best work has been in the negative LoC count.
You can share bookmarks with Firefox, I saw an extension for that once.
I'm not sure about this friend-sharing, though. The thought of sloppy seconds always gives me the willies.
The OS doesn't mention DPI, but it still "knows" it. For example, a font of a certain point-size is, by definition, a certain size in other units. If I correctly recall high-school typing class, 10 points is 10 characters per inch wide and 6 lines per inch high.
Changing to a larger monitor of the same resolution should cause the same point-size to display with fewer pixels, as each pixel is now bigger.
Windows and X11 both allow you to set your monitor's DPI so that this stuff looks right. OS/X has some variable DPI stuff in the back end, but Steve won't let them expose it because they can't get it working right.
I had an unbelievably annoying experience in this regard last year. My Mac Mini with a 1280x1024 17" screen was working fine, but I needed a faster box and wanted a bigger screen. I went out and bought a 28" iMac..... only to discover that while the screen size increased, the resolution increase outpaced the physical size of the screen -- the net effect was that the writing on many dialogue boxes etc was so small that I couldn't read it. (My eyes suck, sue me)
To add insult to injury, there is also no official way on Leopard to alter the system fonts (like "Large Fonts" in Windows). Fortunately, I found some 3rd party software out there on the 'net that let me tweak the right prefs, and I now have a readable display.
But the DPI is still wrong.
Incidentally, I asked around in a bunch of mac forums and IRC channel. You know what the popular answer is among the fanbois? "Lower your resolution".
WTF?! That's stupidest answer ever! Yes, it DOES make the fonts bigger (actually illustrating the problem), but Christ almighty, especially when we're talking LCDs, what a moronic suggestion!
> When will the pixel density of my desktop monitor go up?
Not for a while if you own a mac.
For some strange reason, no matter the size and resolution of my monitor, Leopard insists that it's 96 dpi.
Ridiculous!
I think that last one is "Was die vick, Ihnen!"
I'm surprised you didn't know that.
> Regards to Firefox, is their JagerMonkey engine based on webkit?
No, it's a method JIT with PIC and other goodies that compiles from the interpreter's byte code.
Tuning underfoot now is helping decide when to use TM instead of JM. TM runs loops through the interpreter, records the results, and generates type-specialized assembly.
TM is theoretically much faster but also much more expensive to compile and tricky to make optimal.