The 64 bit migration first was on the Server Side, Linux is a Server OS. So Linux, Solaris, etc... Had been ported to 64bit a while ago. But now standard PC's are now 64 bit. So we are now pushing towards the Desktop move to 64 bit code.
Linux is not specifically a server OS. Linux and Unix applications ("desktop" and otherwise) were worked on amd64 systems from the start, because they had been ported to things like 64-bit Solaris years earlier. Or, they had been well-written.
Have you actually looked at Venus in clear skies? During the closest approach it's bright enough so that people mistake it for a motorcycle _headlight_.
For the last month or two, every time I've seen the planet it has looked exactly like a plane with its landing lights turned on.
:) As one of the original authors of some of the software that makes this Internet run (you probably are using it too, at least indirectly)
Care to name it?
Because I find your analogy about NATing with physical privacy in your own home rather bizarre.
And it should be obvious to anyone who has taken a quick look at e.g. TCP that
end-to-end *is* an internet principle.
Explaining your work is a great way to demonstrate that you actually understand it.
My standard development process is: [unit-test each function before writing the next one] My rationale is precisely that: I'm not really sure I know what I'm doing until I've described it, then figured out how my idea might fail.
Forgive my ignorance, but doesn't everyone do this?
Writing unit tests (code) is not the same thing as writing prose.
I find it doesn't trigger the same thought processes at all.
For one thing, doing it like you describe, you lose focus on anything bigger than the function:
the classes and the cooperating groups of classes.
No. Wrong. Completely wrong. Completely misses the point.
Writing is a quite different cognitive activity than "thinking". Writing about things provides distance and helps overcome the limitations of working memory that can prevent you from seeing the same problem by just "thinking". Writing documentation produces very different results than just thinking about the code.
Then how about this?
Writing (different kinds of) documentation forces you to think in different ways. *Forces* as in you can't cop out mid-sentence without noticing.
I thought everyone knew that documentation describes what you intended code to do, rather than what it actually does.
The documentation tries to document what your intentions are, just like the code tries to implement them.
The code can fail to do its job, and of course the documentation can too!
she is a natural...and I don't believe for a second that women can't kick it at this stuff, it's just a matter of attention, women can do this stuff as well as we can.
Uh, you *do* know women are allowed on Slashdot, right? "We" doesn't translate to "men" around here.
I'm the manager of a local programmer user group. In our monthly meeting, not five minutes goes by without some sort of perverted joke or comment.
Weird.
Where I am, such things are rare.
Out of my gigs (half a dozen to a dozen over 15 years) only one featured sex jokes.
Two others featured one or two sexist remarks (one by me; it still makes me blush).
Its synctax is not only inspired by C/C++, but its specific purpose was to make C/C++ developers feel at home such that adoption had the least resistence as possible.
Which of course doesn't mean that we feel at home in Java, or don't resist it...
As to blind people crossing the road. That's just going to be a new challenge. I don't see why everyone in society has to have engine noise in otherwise silent cars just so blind people can tell cars are coming.
Because most people hate killing people more than they hate sound?
Back in the old days, we just used baseball cards and clothespins to give our bikes sound effects.
Here, too! With a piece of string from the clothespin to the handle, so you could vary the sound.
Also, it occurred to me today, as I was riding my bike to work, that some noise emitted from the bike would be useful too,
to warn pedestrians. You have the bell, but it can be interpreted as rude if you ring it so you tend not to unless there's immediate danger.
So that means it's just like GNU Screen? ctrl+a d on one connection, hop wifi, ssh and screen -x. wow. Really?
Except the feature will be there even if you don't want it, I guess.
Who cleans up the dead sessions, I wonder?
It's already a problem with screen in some setups I've seen; people create sessions and then forget about them.
(Screen or similar software. I don't care what's the latest and greatest is; we're discussing the general feature of attached/detached
terminal sessions.)
And many (most?) SSH clients support auto-reconnect on short network drops.
It's not even a case of reconnect. A TCP connection lasts forever or until one side says "stop"; all the client
has to do is *not* explicitly time out after N seconds.
Misconfigured NAT devices tend to fuck this up though; one of many reasons NAT is evil.
"To bootstrap an SSP connection, the user rst logs in to the remote host using conventional means, such as SSH or Kerberos."
I stopped reading where it said they use UDP. People who say "I can outperform TCP" are almost always wrong, and I'm quite fed up with badly behaved UDP-based protocols.
Citing the "bufferbloat" theory is also a bad sign, but that may be just a misleading summary.
And also what the hell happened that the first two comments are expressing confusion over what this story is about?
I was never involved in demoscene stuff (despite having an Amiga during the early 90s), but I certainly knew about its existence. Was it really so niche after all?
Yes, I think it was. There's Unix, there's PC/Mac, and there's the various home computers. If you were in one of these camps, chances are you knew nothing about what was going on in the two others.
I don't think you fully grok what they have achieved. Google employs only a handful of people who work on Go, and probably not all them work full time on it (though maybe that's not true lately in the last release cycle).Let me give you a quote from an accomplished (hint, you use his code every day) C & C++ hacker on using Go:
"In my experience Go is probably 5-10x faster than C or C++. I estimate that programs that take me half an hour to write in Go would take me about 2½ hours in C and 5 hours in C++."
Who's that? One of the Go designers, perhaps?
He's doing something fundamentally wrong if it takes him more time to code in C++ than in C.
Then when you only have to wait about 10 seconds or so for the whole Go std library *and* all your own libs and binaries to build, you can see it's value over waiting for large C++ projects (of which Google has many) to build.
Long compile times is more of a build system problem than a compiler problem, IME.
Of course, lots of people have broken build systems, and compile the same things over and over again...
I don't care about the unibrow, but I have to admit I thought Paul Vixie would look more dashing.
I'm not sure why, but I pictured him as a cross between Indiana Jones, Flash Gordon and Dilbert.
I pictured him as dark, handsome, but boyish. With rather long, black, curly hair.
Funny how we make our own portraits of programmers, as if they were characters in a novel.
I also notice that they have the number 32665 trademarked. I have stopped doing any form of mathematics to avoid being sued. Does the trademark cover binary representations as well? If so, does anyone know of any computers that cannot use this number. (Cripes, even 8 bit computers have 16 bit addresses.)
It is time to stop worrying about the 10-20 companies who make their money from violating privacy and selling data to advertisers. Just because Google and Facebook have become popular with this business model during the past decade doesn't mean that we should give up century old principles and that we have to protect this business model in all eternity. [---] It's time to give the power back to real companies, who actually offer real products and who are interested in sustainable business based on making their customers happy.
If we're going to redistribute power anyway, why not take it back?
People instead of corporations, open protocols instead of apps, decentralized instead of centralized solutions?
Huawei is an arm of the Chinese government. Officially and in practice. There are members of the Chinese Communist Party permanently assigned to it who monitor correctness and suggest policy (under pain of death). They will spy and steal tech if the Party thinks it's useful. That's just how they roll.
Citation needed. This isn't North Korea. Huawei's (and for that matter the party's) primary concern is making money, and I doubt this cloak-and-dagger
stuff is a good way to accomplish that.
[...] It is still true to make universal statements about what men and women are better at. It may well happen that this person doesn't fit the statistical average, and that that is reasonably common (although by definition not the majority)
Huh? Few people fit the average. No woman has 1.78 babies, and so on.
but it remains true that given a random person on the street you can judge them according to statistical stereotypes, and you will probably be right.
Now, if they should prove differently and you fail to accept that, that is your problem. But the fact remains that gender (and yes, race) do influence behavior patterns, if for no other reason than biology.
I call bullshit on the racist part. It might be true, but you have no way of knowing.
Or have serious studies been made on this?
I just looked-up the specs. What would I do with 256 MB of RAM? That's the same size as my P3 laptop and it runs slow as snails (using the hard drive as memory).
You're doing something wrong, then.
My server is a PPC Mac Mini running Debian, and it has 256 MB of RAM.
The desktop I used ~4 years ago had 32 MB or 64 MB, and ran Debian. No problems.
Amen to that. While I enjoyed my years of programming and using an Amiga, I have no desire to return to those days of assembly code and hardware manuals, trying to eek out every shred of performance from the hardware.
That was not the only way to use it, though.
I did most of my Amiga programming in C, using the official APIs.
Quite similar to high-end embedded environments like VxWorks today, except you could also do GUI programming.
Slashdot Mirror
The 64 bit migration first was on the Server Side, Linux is a Server OS. So Linux, Solaris, etc... Had been ported to 64bit a while ago. But now standard PC's are now 64 bit. So we are now pushing towards the Desktop move to 64 bit code.
Linux is not specifically a server OS. Linux and Unix applications ("desktop" and otherwise) were worked on amd64 systems from the start, because they had been ported to things like 64-bit Solaris years earlier. Or, they had been well-written.
Have you actually looked at Venus in clear skies? During the closest approach it's bright enough so that people mistake it for a motorcycle _headlight_.
For the last month or two, every time I've seen the planet it has looked exactly like a plane with its landing lights turned on.
:) As one of the original authors of some of the software that makes this Internet run (you probably are using it too, at least indirectly)
Care to name it? Because I find your analogy about NATing with physical privacy in your own home rather bizarre. And it should be obvious to anyone who has taken a quick look at e.g. TCP that end-to-end *is* an internet principle.
Explaining your work is a great way to demonstrate that you actually understand it.
My standard development process is: [unit-test each function before writing the next one] My rationale is precisely that: I'm not really sure I know what I'm doing until I've described it, then figured out how my idea might fail.
Forgive my ignorance, but doesn't everyone do this?
Writing unit tests (code) is not the same thing as writing prose. I find it doesn't trigger the same thought processes at all. For one thing, doing it like you describe, you lose focus on anything bigger than the function: the classes and the cooperating groups of classes.
No. Wrong. Completely wrong. Completely misses the point.
Writing is a quite different cognitive activity than "thinking". Writing about things provides distance and helps overcome the limitations of working memory that can prevent you from seeing the same problem by just "thinking". Writing documentation produces very different results than just thinking about the code.
Then how about this? Writing (different kinds of) documentation forces you to think in different ways. *Forces* as in you can't cop out mid-sentence without noticing.
I thought everyone knew that documentation describes what you intended code to do, rather than what it actually does.
The documentation tries to document what your intentions are, just like the code tries to implement them. The code can fail to do its job, and of course the documentation can too!
Came here wondering the same thing.
Applets failed before they even had a chance to take off. Who the hell is still installing the Java plugin?
Yeah; Java applets were a fad in the late 1990s. Last time I saw one, I was using Windows 95.
she is a natural...and I don't believe for a second that women can't kick it at this stuff, it's just a matter of attention, women can do this stuff as well as we can.
Uh, you *do* know women are allowed on Slashdot, right? "We" doesn't translate to "men" around here.
I'm the manager of a local programmer user group. In our monthly meeting, not five minutes goes by without some sort of perverted joke or comment.
Weird. Where I am, such things are rare. Out of my gigs (half a dozen to a dozen over 15 years) only one featured sex jokes. Two others featured one or two sexist remarks (one by me; it still makes me blush).
Its synctax is not only inspired by C/C++, but its specific purpose was to make C/C++ developers feel at home such that adoption had the least resistence as possible.
Which of course doesn't mean that we feel at home in Java, or don't resist it ...
I want my car silent.
As to blind people crossing the road. That's just going to be a new challenge. I don't see why everyone in society has to have engine noise in otherwise silent cars just so blind people can tell cars are coming.
Because most people hate killing people more than they hate sound?
Back in the old days, we just used baseball cards and clothespins to give our bikes sound effects.
Here, too! With a piece of string from the clothespin to the handle, so you could vary the sound.
Also, it occurred to me today, as I was riding my bike to work, that some noise emitted from the bike would be useful too, to warn pedestrians. You have the bell, but it can be interpreted as rude if you ring it so you tend not to unless there's immediate danger.
So that means it's just like GNU Screen? ctrl+a d on one connection, hop wifi, ssh and screen -x. wow. Really?
Except the feature will be there even if you don't want it, I guess. Who cleans up the dead sessions, I wonder? It's already a problem with screen in some setups I've seen; people create sessions and then forget about them.
(Screen or similar software. I don't care what's the latest and greatest is; we're discussing the general feature of attached/detached terminal sessions.)
And many (most?) SSH clients support auto-reconnect on short network drops.
It's not even a case of reconnect. A TCP connection lasts forever or until one side says "stop"; all the client has to do is *not* explicitly time out after N seconds. Misconfigured NAT devices tend to fuck this up though; one of many reasons NAT is evil.
"To bootstrap an SSP connection, the user rst logs in to the remote host using conventional means, such as SSH or Kerberos."
I stopped reading where it said they use UDP. People who say "I can outperform TCP" are almost always wrong, and I'm quite fed up with badly behaved UDP-based protocols. Citing the "bufferbloat" theory is also a bad sign, but that may be just a misleading summary.
And also what the hell happened that the first two comments are expressing confusion over what this story is about?
I was never involved in demoscene stuff (despite having an Amiga during the early 90s), but I certainly knew about its existence. Was it really so niche after all?
Yes, I think it was. There's Unix, there's PC/Mac, and there's the various home computers. If you were in one of these camps, chances are you knew nothing about what was going on in the two others.
I don't think you fully grok what they have achieved. Google employs only a handful of people who work on Go, and probably not all them work full time on it (though maybe that's not true lately in the last release cycle).Let me give you a quote from an accomplished (hint, you use his code every day) C & C++ hacker on using Go:
"In my experience Go is probably 5-10x faster than C or C++. I estimate that programs that take me half an hour to write in Go would take me about 2½ hours in C and 5 hours in C++."
Who's that? One of the Go designers, perhaps? He's doing something fundamentally wrong if it takes him more time to code in C++ than in C.
Then when you only have to wait about 10 seconds or so for the whole Go std library *and* all your own libs and binaries to build, you can see it's value over waiting for large C++ projects (of which Google has many) to build.
Long compile times is more of a build system problem than a compiler problem, IME. Of course, lots of people have broken build systems, and compile the same things over and over again ...
I don't care about the unibrow, but I have to admit I thought Paul Vixie would look more dashing.
I'm not sure why, but I pictured him as a cross between Indiana Jones, Flash Gordon and Dilbert.
I pictured him as dark, handsome, but boyish. With rather long, black, curly hair. Funny how we make our own portraits of programmers, as if they were characters in a novel.
The original author of cron and bind is a "tech writer"?
You're right at large, but he wasn't the original author of cron. He made the first(?) free clone.
I also notice that they have the number 32665 trademarked. I have stopped doing any form of mathematics to avoid being sued. Does the trademark cover binary representations as well? If so, does anyone know of any computers that cannot use this number. (Cripes, even 8 bit computers have 16 bit addresses.)
In a panic!
No worries. It takes 17 bits to represent 32665.
It is time to stop worrying about the 10-20 companies who make their money from violating privacy and selling data to advertisers. Just because Google and Facebook have become popular with this business model during the past decade doesn't mean that we should give up century old principles and that we have to protect this business model in all eternity. [---] It's time to give the power back to real companies, who actually offer real products and who are interested in sustainable business based on making their customers happy.
If we're going to redistribute power anyway, why not take it back? People instead of corporations, open protocols instead of apps, decentralized instead of centralized solutions?
Huawei is an arm of the Chinese government. Officially and in practice. There are members of the Chinese Communist Party permanently assigned to it who monitor correctness and suggest policy (under pain of death). They will spy and steal tech if the Party thinks it's useful. That's just how they roll.
Citation needed. This isn't North Korea. Huawei's (and for that matter the party's) primary concern is making money, and I doubt this cloak-and-dagger stuff is a good way to accomplish that.
[...] It is still true to make universal statements about what men and women are better at. It may well happen that this person doesn't fit the statistical average, and that that is reasonably common (although by definition not the majority)
Huh? Few people fit the average. No woman has 1.78 babies, and so on.
but it remains true that given a random person on the street you can judge them according to statistical stereotypes, and you will probably be right.
Now, if they should prove differently and you fail to accept that, that is your problem. But the fact remains that gender (and yes, race) do influence behavior patterns, if for no other reason than biology.
I call bullshit on the racist part. It might be true, but you have no way of knowing. Or have serious studies been made on this?
I just looked-up the specs. What would I do with 256 MB of RAM? That's the same size as my P3 laptop and it runs slow as snails (using the hard drive as memory).
You're doing something wrong, then. My server is a PPC Mac Mini running Debian, and it has 256 MB of RAM. The desktop I used ~4 years ago had 32 MB or 64 MB, and ran Debian. No problems.
Amen to that. While I enjoyed my years of programming and using an Amiga, I have no desire to return to those days of assembly code and hardware manuals, trying to eek out every shred of performance from the hardware.
That was not the only way to use it, though. I did most of my Amiga programming in C, using the official APIs. Quite similar to high-end embedded environments like VxWorks today, except you could also do GUI programming.