Actually, I have a degree in computer engineering. I have coding friends with degrees in EE. If you don't have these, I will not consider you an engineer.
The term 'engineer' is a way of thinking. A way of solving problems that have been pounded into your head with every engineering class you took. Even the most intelligent computer scientists I wouldn't consider an 'engineer'... however they may be smarter than engineers.
Its bigotous of me to say it, but without the piece of paper (aka diploma) that states you are an 'engineer', I won't consider you one.
I'm actually OFFENDED that you would compare PHP5 to Java. I don't want to start rambling off the difference (though I will mention EJB and taglibs, just to put something in the hat).
I'd rather ask the submitter if he'd like to truely argue why he thinks this new version of PHP is just like java.
Are specs slashdot worthy?
1.0 releases? Sure!
Betas? I suppose.
Alphas? Maaaybe.
Specs and design? Only if they incorporate groundbreaking design ideas.
This does not.
Honestly, anyone that overclocks their CPU is someone who buys CPU's individually and not bundled in a computer. Doesn't intel make more of a profit selling individual CPUs? Especially from geeks that are constantly upgrading and overclocking?
Actually, Eugenia's reviews are usually "this is a journal of what happened when I installed this non-BeOS OS." Its just a collection of thoughts. I'd call it a journal entry more than any objective review (but that's what OSNews boils down to).
Yes, I don't read anything from OSNews, because I want objective reviews, not a livejournal dedicated to operating systems.
So are you suggesting that no one in MS can teach secure and have secure code?
Remember. Windows was made over several years and hundreds (if not thousands) of coders. We're talking older code, and thousands of different coders.
Why in the world would a group of Java programmers want Templates added to the language? It's easy to find out what Class an object is in Java. I never have typecasting issues.
Again, I'm going against the grain. I'm a giant Java supporter, but your statement is rather arrogant.
Why should they add garbage collection? I never have problems writing destructors!
Perhaps you don't work in a large enterprise setting, but sometimes we have standards that require heavy typecasting, and the only good way to do that is passing around arrays (and GOD do I hate arrays when we have collections!). Templates would solve the issue by keeping a heavy typecast, but at the same time, keep collections. Everyone is happy!:-)
Why do you find Java's object model annoying/ugly?
Some people just hate java. Its either the object model, the speed (which isn't an issue anymore), or the 'memory bloat'. Ignore those comments, its just angry coders that aren't up to speed with java (or coded in it once when it was java1.1).
I already conceded this point somewhat in another reply.
Its not that I always have trouble with it, its more when dealing with another persons code and reuse that you are never sure.
BTW - Using "instanceof" is a lot easier than ".getClass().getName().toLowerCase()". Even easier would just be to catch the ClassCastException, report it (or swallow it), and go on (or get the next value).
I don't write C++ at my job, but I still long for templates.
Why?
The model layer that I tie into is very strict on casting, so they force everything into arrays (see my previous entries in this article for arrays vs collections). And being the java coder I am, I much prefer dealing with collections. Templates would make everyones life better if they existed java.
If the only thing you're ever pushing on the stack is an Integer, then there is no risk of error from casting back to Integer when you pop off.
But you can't be absolutely sure. Yes, in practice, we generally assume everything is ok, and we rarely have trouble, but when you get down to reuse things can get hairy (hey, the compiler isn't stopping me from adding my String into the Stack, so why not?).
The nice thing about Java to counter, though, is reflection. You can always check the class type and methods before casting.
I should have completed my thoughts before posting.
I wanted to conclude that the only way to ensure cast with java's is either
A.) Write a wrapper around the collection/map (where the accessors cast to the object, eg:
public void setStack( Integer input ) ).
B.) Use arrays
The big downfall of java.lang.Object is unsure cast (so you have to be careful with your coding, and follow good polymorphic code styles).
This is a legitimate question, and shouldn't be modded down. It warrents a good discussion on the topic of templates (which is, in fact, the topic of this review).
Well, I'm going against my grain here (being a Java lover), but templates mean that you ensure cast.
For example, I make a stack in C++:
Stack bleh<int> = new Stack();
int i = 1;
bleh.push( i );
(excuse my syntax, I havne't C++'ed in a few years) and I have a stack full of ints.
If i use a java container:
Stack javaStack = new Stack();
javaStack.push( new Integer( 12 ) );
I lose cast. If I pop from C++'s bleh, I'm guaranteed to have an int. If I pop from Java's javaStack, I'm getting a java.lang.Object. I have to force cast and have a chance of a runtime exception.
That is one major reason why templates are a good thing.
Those of us that have used the "big 2" webapps (weblogic + websphere) and jboss can tell you that jboss will pass J2EE compliance without any issue.
JBoss isn't necessarily as efficient or as fast as the "big 2", but its always first in adapting new versions of J2EE and JSP. JBoss is always on top of new java technology, and doesn't have the vendor specific code that the "big 2", unfortunately, have.
JBoss is really gaining serious popularity in the Java world. Its really a nice product and is true to the "non-vendor specific code" that other app servers claim to have, but don't.
To reiterate. "Classic" and ancient languages that are vital to history (sandscrit, latin, hyroglyphics, etc...) should be kept and studied. Its all the other crap that has no point of keeping (see a previous reply in this thread for an example).
Well, archeologists and historians would study the "used in writings" category.
Sure, sandscrit isn't spoken, but its still important to the study of ancient texts.
A tribal dialect of swahili used by a tribal village of canabals that died off by eating themselves and never had any texts, OTOH, should not be something worth keeping and studying...
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, I have a degree in computer engineering. I have coding friends with degrees in EE. If you don't have these, I will not consider you an engineer.
The term 'engineer' is a way of thinking. A way of solving problems that have been pounded into your head with every engineering class you took. Even the most intelligent computer scientists I wouldn't consider an 'engineer'... however they may be smarter than engineers.
Its bigotous of me to say it, but without the piece of paper (aka diploma) that states you are an 'engineer', I won't consider you one.
Just to keep up the zealotous/elitist flames:
I describe C++ as "Assembly for dummies."
Different languages for different applications. I'd like to see you write an enterprise website in C++. Its best to not flame something so ignorantly.
Its about as similar to Java as Java is to C++. Would you say "C++ by any other name" about Java?
I'm actually OFFENDED that you would compare PHP5 to Java. I don't want to start rambling off the difference (though I will mention EJB and taglibs, just to put something in the hat).
I'd rather ask the submitter if he'd like to truely argue why he thinks this new version of PHP is just like java.
You pay $10 PER MONTH.
You stop paying, you lose the game (at least, in theory).
For someone that wants to pop on and play a game casually, this is great.
But for the hardcore gamer, I think they'd prefer to have the game in hand.
Well, seeing as its illegal for anyone under the age of 18 (or is it 21?) to gamble, this will have dire legal implications.
Are specs slashdot worthy?
1.0 releases? Sure!
Betas? I suppose.
Alphas? Maaaybe.
Specs and design? Only if they incorporate groundbreaking design ideas.
This does not.
Slow news day, eh?
Its UI with OS's, not the specific OS's. They only scratch the surface of OS's, and rarely talk about the OS itself.
Honestly, anyone that overclocks their CPU is someone who buys CPU's individually and not bundled in a computer. Doesn't intel make more of a profit selling individual CPUs? Especially from geeks that are constantly upgrading and overclocking?
Actually, Eugenia's reviews are usually "this is a journal of what happened when I installed this non-BeOS OS." Its just a collection of thoughts. I'd call it a journal entry more than any objective review (but that's what OSNews boils down to).
Yes, I don't read anything from OSNews, because I want objective reviews, not a livejournal dedicated to operating systems.
Sweet crap people. Its called a "Business Alliance" and it happens an aweful lot, and not just in the IT industry.
So are you suggesting that no one in MS can teach secure and have secure code?
Remember. Windows was made over several years and hundreds (if not thousands) of coders. We're talking older code, and thousands of different coders.
But, hey, anything to insult MS, right?
Actually, if you look back to the questions, I specifically asked this (basically asking if he was overly biased).
Of course it was neither asked nor answered. Take that into consideration and come to your own conclusions.
Why in the world would a group of Java programmers want Templates added to the language? It's easy to find out what Class an object is in Java. I never have typecasting issues.
:-)
Again, I'm going against the grain. I'm a giant Java supporter, but your statement is rather arrogant.
Why should they add garbage collection? I never have problems writing destructors!
Perhaps you don't work in a large enterprise setting, but sometimes we have standards that require heavy typecasting, and the only good way to do that is passing around arrays (and GOD do I hate arrays when we have collections!). Templates would solve the issue by keeping a heavy typecast, but at the same time, keep collections. Everyone is happy!
Why do you find Java's object model annoying/ugly?
Some people just hate java. Its either the object model, the speed (which isn't an issue anymore), or the 'memory bloat'. Ignore those comments, its just angry coders that aren't up to speed with java (or coded in it once when it was java1.1).
I already conceded this point somewhat in another reply.
Its not that I always have trouble with it, its more when dealing with another persons code and reuse that you are never sure.
BTW - Using "instanceof" is a lot easier than ".getClass().getName().toLowerCase()". Even easier would just be to catch the ClassCastException, report it (or swallow it), and go on (or get the next value).
I don't write C++ at my job, but I still long for templates.
Why?
The model layer that I tie into is very strict on casting, so they force everything into arrays (see my previous entries in this article for arrays vs collections). And being the java coder I am, I much prefer dealing with collections. Templates would make everyones life better if they existed java.
If the only thing you're ever pushing on the stack is an Integer, then there is no risk of error from casting back to Integer when you pop off.
But you can't be absolutely sure. Yes, in practice, we generally assume everything is ok, and we rarely have trouble, but when you get down to reuse things can get hairy (hey, the compiler isn't stopping me from adding my String into the Stack, so why not?).
The nice thing about Java to counter, though, is reflection. You can always check the class type and methods before casting.
I should have completed my thoughts before posting.
I wanted to conclude that the only way to ensure cast with java's is either
A.) Write a wrapper around the collection/map (where the accessors cast to the object, eg:
public void setStack( Integer input )
).
B.) Use arrays
The big downfall of java.lang.Object is unsure cast (so you have to be careful with your coding, and follow good polymorphic code styles).
This is a legitimate question, and shouldn't be modded down. It warrents a good discussion on the topic of templates (which is, in fact, the topic of this review).
Well, I'm going against my grain here (being a Java lover), but templates mean that you ensure cast.
For example, I make a stack in C++:
Stack bleh<int> = new Stack();
int i = 1;
bleh.push( i );
(excuse my syntax, I havne't C++'ed in a few years) and I have a stack full of ints.
If i use a java container:
Stack javaStack = new Stack();
javaStack.push( new Integer( 12 ) );
I lose cast. If I pop from C++'s bleh, I'm guaranteed to have an int. If I pop from Java's javaStack, I'm getting a java.lang.Object. I have to force cast and have a chance of a runtime exception.
That is one major reason why templates are a good thing.
True, but are you willing to take the risk?
Those of us that have used the "big 2" webapps (weblogic + websphere) and jboss can tell you that jboss will pass J2EE compliance without any issue.
JBoss isn't necessarily as efficient or as fast as the "big 2", but its always first in adapting new versions of J2EE and JSP. JBoss is always on top of new java technology, and doesn't have the vendor specific code that the "big 2", unfortunately, have.
JBoss is really gaining serious popularity in the Java world. Its really a nice product and is true to the "non-vendor specific code" that other app servers claim to have, but don't.
To reiterate. "Classic" and ancient languages that are vital to history (sandscrit, latin, hyroglyphics, etc...) should be kept and studied. Its all the other crap that has no point of keeping (see a previous reply in this thread for an example).
Well, archeologists and historians would study the "used in writings" category.
Sure, sandscrit isn't spoken, but its still important to the study of ancient texts.
A tribal dialect of swahili used by a tribal village of canabals that died off by eating themselves and never had any texts, OTOH, should not be something worth keeping and studying...