> so you can -- for example -- use the "Linux" > version of make if you wish, or the AIX version
I'm not trying to be a Stallmanesque GNU/Ass, but you definately mean the "GNU Version of Make". There IS no Linux version of Make.
Personally, I have been using GNU Make for a LONG time on a variety of platforms -- BSDI, AIX (going back to version 2.something!), Solaris 2.*, SunOS 4, Win32... the list goes on and on.
I have also declared it the *standard* Make at work; it is the only Make I'm aware of (including nmake) which is widely cross-platform AND sophisticated enough to do what I need to (without propretiary extensions).
If you load,8,0 (or just,8), your SIG PRG would load at the start of BASIC, instead of just wherever BASIC starts on the machine you saved it on. This means that your SIG would be portable across all CBM machines, provided that it contains only platform-agnostic CBM BASIC 2.0 statements.
> Recording is one of those industries where the > legacy gear is prized -- vintage mics, pre-CBS > Fender guitars, old drum kits, Hammond organs, > tube compressors, etc.
Out of idle curiosity, do you know what the "right" way to record an organ with a rotating Leslie is?
It never sounds the same as it does in a room... maybe 16 mics and quadraphonic playback? Hmm.
Back in January 1998, when a good hunk of Canada had no power due to an ice storm, I couldn't go to work because we had no power at the office. I also had no power at home, and was bored out of my tree.
So, I grabbed a pair of APC BackUPS 400s, threw them in a knapsack, and walked to the local pub (which DID have power). Plugged 'em in, had a few beers, walked home, watched TV; repeat.
I tell ya, though, my back was kinda sore. Those things ain't made to be portable!
> Nothing about a priority problem. Huh. Where did I hear that?
I don't know, but I read it too.. Possibly on a NASA web site. Long story short, the solution was to change the default mutex type on the system so that low-pri processes inherited the priority of any process they were blocking... so they could finish, and the high-pri process could get back to work.
> Heck, why is "char" default signed, even when used in a string?
Char is just a really short int. A char * is no different than an int *, except for the dereferenced datatype and the multiplicand for pointer arithmetic.
Why would one integer type have different rules than another? Should the rules change based on CONTEXT? How is the compiler supposed to know that you're considering that hunk of memory to be a string?
Hint: If you want that type of behaviour, you should be using a STRING CLASS, not an array of eight bit integers!
If you want really messed-up, notice the type of the argument to the ctype functions -- it's int!
> This has bitten me enough times in C that I avoid unsigned unless I'm damn > sure that it can never go negative (and even then I check all subtractions real carefully).
Yeah, tell me about it. Ever tried to malloc -1 bytes?
I remember the day I started as a tech in a computer store in Canada; early september 1993. 486DX/2-66s cost $660 (about $500 USD then) and 1MB SIMMs cost $85 (about $70 USD).
4MB of RAM would then have been worth about $280 US in early '93, so definately more than $200 in '90 or '91.
> When your connection gets faster it becomes practical to mount disks on remote systems. > I'm forced to do this sort of thing for work and it's pretty slow even when i'm only > editing source files.
I don't know what kind of work environment you have, but I find it much faster to remote-X my Lucid Xemacs over an ssh connection that I do to mount the disks and edit them that way.
The added bonus is that I don't have to compile on my slow home boxen to test my changes.
Out of curiosity, which do you think takes more -- the power to drive an LCD screen for 10 years, or the power to chop down a tree, process it into paper, create developing/fixing fluid, and run the photomat machine?
Don't forget the CBM D9060 and D9090; they were built for the PET but could plugged in the the C64 with an IEEE-488 adaptor card. In fact, I still have my. BusMaster(?) II around here somewhere, made by Batteries Included (of Paperclip fame).
You'll spend more time with the undocumented op-codes of either chip (and their revisions) than you will the differences between the published interfaces and timings when developing a core for either chip.
Obviously, I don't know squat about the desgin of THIS unit, but I *am* familiar with the C64's design!
Why in God's name would you emulate the tape drive as a means to load software?
It would be one hell of a lot easier to just have the program loader (you know, the piece that lets you pick what game in the joystick you want to play) swap in the right bank of ROM (for a cartridge game), or RAM image, point the virtual 6502's program pointer at the right place (or just twiddle the magic address up there in page $FF and "hit" the "reset" line) and boom! Software running, no extra crap in the way. And you can use the tape buffer.:)
The "live image" for disk-based, copy-protected games could be scooped easily from a running C64, using.. oh what the hell was it called.. there was some cartridge, possibly by Epyx, where you hit the reset button and BOOM! It dumped RAM to disk, including the position of the program counter, so you could restore saved games in games which didn't save.
Damn, why can't I remember the name of that cart?
Anyhow. You'd think it would be more worthwhile making save-to-disk games work (whoever heard of save to tape??!) by backing up data to RAM... you could probably get away with just writing some custom code and point the kernel jump table at it.. I'd be willing to bet that most games (even heavily copy-protected ones) didn't bother doing anything fancy when *writing* to disk. The "proper" kernel API for disk I/O would be trivial to emulate.
> "I should send this to who?" becomes "I should send this to he?".
That's a great trick. I spotted the who/whom problem because of it faster than I normally do, and before I read your mention of it.
That said, I would normally phrase that "To whom should I send this?" -- where the whom/him falls apart; so whom/him isn't a good universal replacement, but who/he looks like it will do the trick and catch the who/whom problems anyhow.
As for restructuring "who's there" to "he is there" -- that's just one of your rules (who/he) combined with my expand-all-contractions rules.
Slashdot Mirror
> so you can -- for example -- use the "Linux"
> version of make if you wish, or the AIX version
I'm not trying to be a Stallmanesque GNU/Ass, but you definately mean the "GNU Version of Make". There IS no Linux version of Make.
Personally, I have been using GNU Make for a LONG time on a variety of platforms -- BSDI, AIX (going back to version 2.something!), Solaris 2.*, SunOS 4, Win32... the list goes on and on.
I have also declared it the *standard* Make at work; it is the only Make I'm aware of (including nmake) which is widely cross-platform AND sophisticated enough to do what I need to (without propretiary extensions).
I'm still getting the freeparking IP for the MX from my local servers, but network-tools.com is showing the right info.
Presumably my stuff is cached; but at least the TTL on the hijacked domain is to 7200s. Nice and short.
> LOAD "SIG",8,1
,8,0 (or just ,8), your SIG PRG would load at the start of BASIC, instead of just wherever BASIC starts on the machine you saved it on. This means that your SIG would be portable across all CBM machines, provided that it contains only platform-agnostic CBM BASIC 2.0 statements.
If you load
Just thought you should know.
> As far as I've seen, there's no way of encrypting, even
;)
> trivially, the backup file via the destkop software.
Norton DISKreet?
Or, better yet, install the backup file on a USB key chain. Just don't sync too often.
> Recording is one of those industries where the
> legacy gear is prized -- vintage mics, pre-CBS
> Fender guitars, old drum kits, Hammond organs,
> tube compressors, etc.
Out of idle curiosity, do you know what the "right" way to record an organ with a rotating Leslie is?
It never sounds the same as it does in a room... maybe 16 mics and quadraphonic playback? Hmm.
Back in January 1998, when a good hunk of Canada had no power due to an ice storm, I couldn't go to work because we had no power at the office. I also had no power at home, and was bored out of my tree.
So, I grabbed a pair of APC BackUPS 400s, threw them in a knapsack, and walked to the local pub (which DID have power). Plugged 'em in, had a few beers, walked home, watched TV; repeat.
I tell ya, though, my back was kinda sore. Those things ain't made to be portable!
> Nothing about a priority problem. Huh. Where did I hear that?
I don't know, but I read it too.. Possibly on a NASA web site. Long story short, the solution was to change the default mutex type on the system so that low-pri processes inherited the priority of any process they were blocking... so they could finish, and the high-pri process could get back to work.
> Heck, why is "char" default signed, even when used in a string?
Char is just a really short int. A char * is no different than an int *, except for the dereferenced datatype and the multiplicand for pointer arithmetic.
Why would one integer type have different rules than another? Should the rules change based on CONTEXT? How is the compiler supposed to know that you're considering that hunk of memory to be a string?
Hint: If you want that type of behaviour, you should be using a STRING CLASS, not an array of eight bit integers!
If you want really messed-up, notice the type of the argument to the ctype functions -- it's int!
> This has bitten me enough times in C that I avoid unsigned unless I'm damn
> sure that it can never go negative (and even then I check all subtractions real carefully).
Yeah, tell me about it. Ever tried to malloc -1 bytes?
I remember the day I started as a tech in a computer store in Canada; early september 1993. 486DX/2-66s cost $660 (about $500 USD then) and 1MB SIMMs cost $85 (about $70 USD).
4MB of RAM would then have been worth about $280 US in early '93, so definately more than $200 in '90 or '91.
A PDA with a camera. You take a picture of a sign, it OCRs it and reads you the sign in whatever language you speak.
That'd be cool.
> When your connection gets faster it becomes practical to mount disks on remote systems.
> I'm forced to do this sort of thing for work and it's pretty slow even when i'm only
> editing source files.
I don't know what kind of work environment you have, but I find it much faster to remote-X my Lucid Xemacs over an ssh connection that I do to mount the disks and edit them that way.
The added bonus is that I don't have to compile on my slow home boxen to test my changes.
> See, back in thr dawn of Interweb time, when you were 6 or so?
Jesus Christ, I knew that was you *before* I looked at who posted that.
Out of curiosity, which do you think takes more -- the power to drive an LCD screen for 10 years, or the power to chop down a tree, process it into paper, create developing/fixing fluid, and run the photomat machine?
> ... cubic inches
I always liked "there's no replacement for displacement"
Don't forget the CBM D9060 and D9090; they were built for the PET but could plugged in the the C64 with an IEEE-488 adaptor card. In fact, I still have my. BusMaster(?) II around here somewhere, made by Batteries Included (of Paperclip fame).
> Actually it was the 6510 that was in the C64.
Close enough.
You'll spend more time with the undocumented op-codes of either chip (and their revisions) than you will the differences between the published interfaces and timings when developing a core for either chip.
Obviously, I don't know squat about the desgin of THIS unit, but I *am* familiar with the C64's design!
:)
Why in God's name would you emulate the tape drive as a means to load software?
It would be one hell of a lot easier to just have the program loader (you know, the piece that lets you pick what game in the joystick you want to play) swap in the right bank of ROM (for a cartridge game), or RAM image, point the virtual 6502's program pointer at the right place (or just twiddle the magic address up there in page $FF and "hit" the "reset" line) and boom! Software running, no extra crap in the way. And you can use the tape buffer.
The "live image" for disk-based, copy-protected games could be scooped easily from a running C64, using.. oh what the hell was it called.. there was some cartridge, possibly by Epyx, where you hit the reset button and BOOM! It dumped RAM to disk, including the position of the program counter, so you could restore saved games in games which didn't save.
Damn, why can't I remember the name of that cart?
Anyhow. You'd think it would be more worthwhile making save-to-disk games work (whoever heard of save to tape??!) by backing up data to RAM... you could probably get away with just writing some custom code and point the kernel jump table at it.. I'd be willing to bet that most games (even heavily copy-protected ones) didn't bother doing anything fancy when *writing* to disk. The "proper" kernel API for disk I/O would be trivial to emulate.
LOL
:)
"pedant"
That's actually a pretty funny word to mis-type.
> I dont really understand what FireFox is so much better than Mozilla
That's easy. If all you want is a browser, why download more?
Firefox works and is feature-complete as far as I am concerned. Ditto Mozilla.
So, what are the primary differences from my perspective? It takes longer to download Mozilla, and it uses up more disk space.
Why should I download Mozilla?
The rest of it is "his story|hisstory"?
;)
How 'bout "hi(s )?story"?
Okay, okay, pendant go home.
> there are plenty of chinese-run computer stores
> that don't seem to care much about collecting any such levy.
Unless they are manufacturing or smuggling them across the border, the levy has already been paid.
Not paying the levy is generally not a profitable venture -- the cost vs. risk payoff is terrible.
> Most solar systems run 12V DC
Funny, I thought our solar system was powered by gravity.
> "I should send this to who?" becomes "I should send this to he?".
That's a great trick. I spotted the who/whom problem because of it faster than I normally do, and before I read your mention of it.
That said, I would normally phrase that "To whom should I send this?" -- where the whom/him falls apart; so whom/him isn't a good universal replacement, but who/he looks like it will do the trick and catch the who/whom problems anyhow.
As for restructuring "who's there" to "he is there" -- that's just one of your rules (who/he) combined with my expand-all-contractions rules.
Thanks for sharing.
My middle example should be a call to strcpy, not strnpy.
:)
Classic cut'n'paste error.
Now THAT's a very real development problem.