I think you miss-read my comment and put your own view across (though you are not prepaired to stand by your view AC).
Where did I say remove the creationism link? I just said that it could be manipulated to show one side of the story when there are clearly at least two sides to the story.
I picked creationism because one of the parents used it as an example.
gcc is warning you of a potential error, If you really need to compile the code and don't are that your old headers may be dangerous then take off the -Werror flag and compile, or fix the headers, don't use it as an excuse for my new headers and new gcc not compiling a fresh build of xyz.
too bad I don't have time to go though and suggest editorials for the rest of wiki, if only I was on the pay-role of an encyclopedia producer like Britannica......
'the one person who is wrong but thinks he's right is taken out by the 100 who know the correct answer'
But this would happen in a commercial setting, so you can't use it for or against wiki.
Wikipedia is prone to misleading or even outright inaccurate information (kinda like/. sometimes), I'll have a search for some more obscure things or topics that may be unbalanced and see what turns up.
The words "I got a hard-on over that tittie shot and I ain't not letting anyone impeach me for this." could be overheard from the Whitehouse as congress went in to vote.
The problem with Wikipedia is that the one person who knows the correct answer is taken out by the 100 who 'think' they know the correct answer and yours is wrong. In a business scenario I would hope that you require more proofing for your answer. With some things like 1 + 1=2 (except for large values of 1) I can write a proof via refernece, things like , George Washington's birthday, or God then there's.
It only takes 13% of Americans believe that Creationism and evolution should be taught as 'scientific theories' in science class; 16% of Americans believe that only Creationism should be taught; or 20% of Americans believe public schools should teach evolution only;
to unbalance the article.
n.b. The discovering the structure of DNA was held up because text books listed an incorrect structure for one of the amino acids.
Well, use cast. telling you that you should or shout not be using a CONSTANT value is very important.
Sending a const to a non const function is dangerous, since that function has 'stated' that it intends to modify the value.
On the same note (but not so critical), your not guaranteeing that a char * is going to be constant so sending it to a function that required a constant throughout it's execution is also important.
I'm not using old headers or an old compiler. Either fix the headers, cast, pragma a message or whatever. just make the thing compile with -Werror so that when the application code accidental sends a char * to a const char * function my compiler chokes, it may be that the functions threaded and synchronisation is missing. With sony are starting to make 4.5 gen systems (8+processors) as games consoles, 40+ processors on a desktop looks promising and I would expect your code to be thread safe *cough* QT/Troltech *cough*
I would also like to compile everything with compile with -Werror, but my Gentoo can't take it, as it is compiling with -Werror-implicit-function-declaration causes some builds to fail at configure time.
Until the day when everyone uses pragmas or gcc ship with -Werror hard-on, I'm going to keep telling people to use CONSTANT == just incase.
wow, I managed to use hard-on in a sentence, I'll have to try that in an interview someday.
' I would rather see longer variable names, descriptive control structures and a total lack of goto statements'
How does this objective work against the most efficient or clever solution. (ok lack of gotos can sometime be a pain, but you can usually innline that away, or 03 it out)
optimise settings on GCC above 3 are useless, generally go for 2 as you tend to get tighter code that fits in cache better.
I don't see where there is a contradiction, well unless the guy reading you code can't understand a quick-sort, even with enough comments to write a book on the subject.
The optimisation rules are.
Good algorithms, beats any optimisation of bad ones hands down.
The make sure you know what the algorithm does, that way you can possibly minimise work. (e.g. a div is just a lot of subtracts and shifts)
then good 'hints' for the compiler.
then do it by hand if the compiler it making a mess of things.
Consider that I could write a 'fast' Word processor in VB3(all interpreted) when compared to one written in C fully optimised, because I make good algorithm choices.
There's a HSV colour picker in one application that is slow as a dog, they could have used a look-up table and made it possibly a hundred times faster. (near real-time, vs visible delay)
as far as the code examples.
I think you should use if(NULL == something), that way the compiler will choke if you type if(NULL = something) by accident.
some people say just use HeapFree, because it checks nulls and is fast, I say check the null when expected and not when not.
" You're progressing faster than I thought you would", an interesting statement from someone who thinks,
'cell-like' conditions can already be created in the Lab, in 50-100 or even if it's a million years time you WILL be able to create a cell identical to the one you would have inserted into the womb.'
is lunacy, you are a creationist right? you know the world isn't flat (well while you awake it's flat and the sun moves around it, when you asleep it's triangular and revolves around you)
So your OK with global warming then, what about air pollution?
I don't think that keeping birds in a cage or killing them for food is any better than burning all the oil and causing global warming. What's your take on slavery and murder?
What's your point? do you have one except, humans are special, lets all pat ourselves on the back. oops there's another little miracle, how ever did that happen I must have been drunk.
'You found your ideas upon lunacy. You should be ashamed of yourself.'
I'm not the one saying.'what you want to abort or turn into veal cattle is *not* a human being', as if being human is something more special than being a piece of stone.
You apparently are the lunatic who thinks that humans are something 'special', so I class you with the other Idiots. not just because you believe that humans are 'special' but because you let your belief affect you actions.
It seems quite odd that I base my argument on science and you base yours on humans being different. Your argument right from the start has been total nonsense.
'Oh yes you are' Who are you to tell me what I am and am not against, in your little world I may have shown ' nothing but contempt, scorn, and hatred', but then again you don't think.
'That's some serious personality disorder you've got. I suggest getting it treated before it causes permanent harm.'
No, I'm just laughing at you hoping that your a troll.
'Skin cells, placed in the womb and given the correct conditions, will not grow into a human.' Yes they will, WTF do you think the 'correct' conditions are? idiot.
'if you vacuumed them up off the floor, THEY'D BE DEAD', just as dead as if I've frozen them with liquid nitrogen, nothing is ever 'dead'.
'No other cells will either, with the sole exception of a fertilised human egg.' Idiot, this shows your lack of thought on the subject.
What is a stem cell? go on, I'd like to hear you tell me, do you even know what your talking about.
Now tell me the difference between a 'stem cell' and embryo and the skin I put in the waste bin.
'cell-like' conditions can already be created in the Lab, in 50-100 or even if it's a million years time you WILL be able to create a cell identical to the one you would have inserted into the womb.
If I can with my chemistry set create exactly the think that you say is the corner stone of life, then I can only call you an idiot for thinking that I cannot.
I do not found my ideas upon 'beliefs' I found them upon facts.
'So now that your "argument" is unravelling, what shall you do, hmm? I predict at least two posts worth of ranting and raving, more non sequiturs,and general nonsensical behaviour.'
'One, drawn up by Costa Rica and backed by the United States and 60 other countries', In the UN there is 'backing' and sponsorship. First time around the plan only had a few 'sponsors' later it had 60 backers. anyhow It's not Bush I'm against, it's the people that converted him, Bush is just an easy example.
'Again, you're not actually being affected by anyone's beliefs. You're being affected by their actions.'
I'm not against their beliefs I'm against the actions they perform because of their beliefs or do the Cristian Right not have right wing Cristian beliefs?
"Could you trust someone who believed that Jesus came to save us", doesn't ask you not to believe them, it just asks if you would like to be affected by them, you not placing trust in someone who does nothing isn't going to affect you or them.
"That makes no sense. " So, your saying that the christian right don't want to ban human cloning so this does not affect me.
"When you can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt (and don't think for a second that you have) that what you want to abort or turn into veal cattle is *not* a human being"
That's the problem you don't think.
When you can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt(and I KNOW you cannot) that a embryo is any different from the skin I hoover up and throw in the dustbin every day, then you can have you ban on abortions and 'slave' cloning. 'Quick, catch that sneeze it contains valuable human cells that could produce another life.'
Now that's even before I've touched on human life being more 'valuable' than anything else except oil.
Idiot, banning human cloning stops the significant proportion of stem cell research.
'. But no, Bush must be solely responsible, must have brainwashed all those other people. You are an idiot.'
Idiot, the US sponsored the ban, not one out of 60, more like one out of three.
'Again, you're not actually being affected by anyone's beliefs'
So your saying that the christian right who want to ban human cloning don't affect me in what way?
If I was a woman and lived in Ireland would you say the same. How about my cloning a human doesn't directly affect you, why stop me with your phony beliefs.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you miss-read my comment and put your own view across (though you are not prepaired to stand by your view AC).
Where did I say remove the creationism link? I just said that it could be manipulated to show one side of the story when there are clearly at least two sides to the story.
I picked creationism because one of the parents used it as an example.
gcc is warning you of a potential error,
If you really need to compile the code and don't are that your old headers may be dangerous then take off the -Werror flag and compile, or fix the headers, don't use it as an excuse for my new headers and new gcc not compiling a fresh build of xyz.
too bad I don't have time to go though and suggest editorials for the rest of wiki, if only I was on the pay-role of an encyclopedia producer like Britannica......
'the one person who is wrong but thinks he's right is taken out by the 100 who know the correct answer'
/. sometimes), I'll have a search for some more obscure things or topics that may be unbalanced and see what turns up.
But this would happen in a commercial setting, so you can't use it for or against wiki.
Wikipedia is prone to misleading or even outright inaccurate information (kinda like
more like sex obsessed.
The words "I got a hard-on over that tittie shot and I ain't not letting anyone impeach me for this." could be overheard from the Whitehouse as congress went in to vote.
The problem with Wikipedia is that the one person who knows the correct answer is taken out by the 100 who 'think' they know the correct answer and yours is wrong. In a business scenario I would hope that you require more proofing for your answer. With some things like 1 + 1=2 (except for large values of 1) I can write a proof via refernece, things like , George Washington's birthday, or God then there's .
For instance creationism doesn't have the theory of evolution or any counter argument listed as a related topic.
It only takes
13% of Americans believe that Creationism and evolution should be taught as 'scientific theories' in science class;
16% of Americans believe that only Creationism should be taught;
or
20% of Americans believe public schools should teach evolution only;
to unbalance the article.
n.b. The discovering the structure of DNA was held up because text books listed an incorrect structure for one of the amino acids.
Well, use cast. telling you that you should or shout not be using a CONSTANT value is very important.
Sending a const to a non const function is dangerous, since that function has 'stated' that it intends to modify the value.
On the same note (but not so critical), your not guaranteeing that a char * is going to be constant so sending it to a function that required a constant throughout it's execution is also important.
I'm not using old headers or an old compiler.
Either fix the headers, cast, pragma a message or whatever. just make the thing compile with -Werror so that when the application code accidental sends a char * to a const char * function my compiler chokes, it may be that the functions threaded and synchronisation is missing.
With sony are starting to make 4.5 gen systems (8+processors) as games consoles, 40+ processors on a desktop looks promising and I would expect your code to be thread safe *cough* QT/Troltech *cough*
That should be "especially since _I_ will have to look at it _later_"
Don't just write nice code for other people to read, write it for yourself.
I would also like to compile everything with compile with -Werror, but my Gentoo can't take it, as it is compiling with -Werror-implicit-function-declaration causes some builds to fail at configure time.
Until the day when everyone uses pragmas or gcc ship with -Werror hard-on, I'm going to keep telling people to use CONSTANT == just incase.
wow, I managed to use hard-on in a sentence, I'll have to try that in an interview someday.
I more worried about the AI (or lack of), I don't care if it looks hand painted by Van gogh if it plays like a childs toy.
reading the site, the AI includes.
Paths, paths with slight deviations and using switches to open doors. Looks like it's going to be another Doom3/half-life 2
but did you see the site...
Requires IE 4.0 or compatible browser
with activex, java and javascript enabled.
add an extra processor just for the spam bot.
long enough for IBM to take over , and put Microsofts balls in a bag (since they pay SCO tax at the moment)
I tend to write the slow clear way as a comment and in code then beef it up as and when required.
That said, most applications are dog slow and need a hell of a lot of performance work doing on them *cough* KDE *cough*
KDE doesn't fit into the clean clear code category either.
' I would rather see longer variable names, descriptive control structures and a total lack of goto statements'
How does this objective work against the most efficient or clever solution.
(ok lack of gotos can sometime be a pain, but you can usually innline that away, or 03 it out)
optimise settings on GCC above 3 are useless, generally go for 2 as you tend to get tighter code that fits in cache better.
I don't see where there is a contradiction, well unless the guy reading you code can't understand a quick-sort, even with enough comments to write a book on the subject.
The optimisation rules are.
Good algorithms, beats any optimisation of bad ones hands down.
The make sure you know what the algorithm does, that way you can possibly minimise work.
(e.g. a div is just a lot of subtracts and shifts)
then good 'hints' for the compiler.
then do it by hand if the compiler it making a mess of things.
Consider that I could write a 'fast' Word processor in VB3(all interpreted) when compared to one written in C fully optimised, because I make good algorithm choices.
There's a HSV colour picker in one application that is slow as a dog, they could have used a look-up table and made it possibly a hundred times faster. (near real-time, vs visible delay)
as far as the code examples.
I think you should use if(NULL == something), that way the compiler will choke if you type if(NULL = something) by accident.
some people say just use HeapFree, because it checks nulls and is fast, I say check the null when expected and not when not.
" You're progressing faster than I thought you would",
an interesting statement from someone who thinks,
'cell-like' conditions can already be created in the Lab, in 50-100 or even if it's a million years time you WILL be able to create a cell identical to the one you would have inserted into the womb.'
is lunacy, you are a creationist right? you know the world isn't flat (well while you awake it's flat and the sun moves around it, when you asleep it's triangular and revolves around you)
So your OK with global warming then, what about air pollution?
I don't think that keeping birds in a cage or killing them for food is any better than burning all the oil and causing global warming. What's your take on slavery and murder?
What's your point? do you have one except, humans are special, lets all pat ourselves on the back.
oops there's another little miracle, how ever did that happen I must have been drunk.
believe only what you find out to be true, don't even believe what I am saying now.
What didn't you understand about the laughing bit, idiot. I think Idiot is quite a good name for you.
As for being a fascist, as your would be friend said, 'You're just a wussy emo who can't handle any deviation from your own beliefs.'
I don't think you stuck any nerve, the more the merrier.
Yeh, get rid of checks in shops. I only use those for postal services.
Like I couldn't mug you for a check book any harder than I could for cash.
Credit cards are great, until you can't pay them off at the end of the month.
'You found your ideas upon lunacy. You should be ashamed of yourself.'
I'm not the one saying.'what you want to abort or turn into veal cattle is *not* a human being', as if being human is something more special than being a piece of stone.
You apparently are the lunatic who thinks that humans are something 'special', so I class you with the other Idiots. not just because you believe that humans are 'special' but because you let your belief affect you actions.
It seems quite odd that I base my argument on science and you base yours on humans being different. Your argument right from the start has been total nonsense.
'Oh yes you are'
Who are you to tell me what I am and am not against, in your little world I may have shown ' nothing but contempt, scorn, and hatred', but then again you don't think.
'That's some serious personality disorder you've got. I suggest getting it treated before it causes permanent harm.'
No, I'm just laughing at you hoping that your a troll.
'Skin cells, placed in the womb and given the correct conditions, will not grow into a human.'
Yes they will, WTF do you think the 'correct' conditions are? idiot.
'if you vacuumed them up off the floor, THEY'D BE DEAD', just as dead as if I've frozen them with liquid nitrogen, nothing is ever 'dead'.
'No other cells will either, with the sole exception of a fertilised human egg.'
Idiot, this shows your lack of thought on the subject.
What is a stem cell? go on, I'd like to hear you tell me, do you even know what your talking about.
Now tell me the difference between a 'stem cell' and embryo and the skin I put in the waste bin.
'cell-like' conditions can already be created in the Lab, in 50-100 or even if it's a million years time you WILL be able to create a cell identical to the one you would have inserted into the womb.
If I can with my chemistry set create exactly the think that you say is the corner stone of life, then I can only call you an idiot for thinking that I cannot.
I do not found my ideas upon 'beliefs' I found them upon facts.
'So now that your "argument" is unravelling, what shall you do, hmm? I predict at least two posts worth of ranting and raving, more non sequiturs,and general nonsensical behaviour.'
'One, drawn up by Costa Rica and backed by the United States and 60 other countries',
In the UN there is 'backing' and sponsorship.
First time around the plan only had a few 'sponsors' later it had 60 backers. anyhow It's not Bush I'm against, it's the people that converted him, Bush is just an easy example.
'Again, you're not actually being affected by anyone's beliefs. You're being affected by their actions.'
I'm not against their beliefs I'm against the actions they perform because of their beliefs or do the Cristian Right not have right wing Cristian beliefs?
"Could you trust someone who believed that Jesus came to save us", doesn't ask you not to believe them, it just asks if you would like to be affected by them, you not placing trust in someone who does nothing isn't going to affect you or them.
"That makes no sense. "
So, your saying that the christian right don't want to ban human cloning so this does not affect me.
"When you can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt (and don't think for a second that you have) that what you want to abort or turn into veal cattle is *not* a human being"
That's the problem you don't think.
When you can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt(and I KNOW you cannot) that a embryo is any different from the skin I hoover up and throw in the dustbin every day, then you can have you ban on abortions and 'slave' cloning.
'Quick, catch that sneeze it contains valuable human cells that could produce another life.'
Now that's even before I've touched on human life being more 'valuable' than anything else except oil.
"Human cloning" != "stem-cell research".
Cat != mammals.
Idiot, banning human cloning stops the significant proportion of stem cell research.
'. But no, Bush must be solely responsible, must have brainwashed all those other people. You are an idiot.'
Idiot, the US sponsored the ban, not one out of 60, more like one out of three.
'Again, you're not actually being affected by anyone's beliefs'
So your saying that the christian right who want to ban human cloning don't affect me in what way?
If I was a woman and lived in Ireland would you say the same. How about my cloning a human doesn't directly affect you, why stop me with your phony beliefs.
you an AC troll of the most morinoc idiot type.