I can understand they should learn C for OS internals, but what's C++ for? Its object model is over-complicated and underused in most of serious projects, yet still inferior to Eiffel's.
Some idiots bought Mac because they loved its well designed appearance, then after a few weeks they realized OS/X sucks ass because apps on it are designed for true idiots (ex: those who always sort hundreds of bookmarks manually and unzip files of TBs in the same place then move them).
Being able to utilize only 10% of your hardware is NOT good - there is a zero missing!
It sucks and you know it and that's why you're testing TF2 rather than real games on it. By real games I mean it should at least heat your GFX card to 80C and fans running in maximum speed.
I suppose it's more about integration and optimization of resource allocation around transactions.
Most systems cannot do that efficiently due to multiple layers of abstraction and opacity. For instance, your application server isn't supposed to know about what files and databases are accessed by certain modules/classes and in which ways they're accessed (like append, RW or RO, etc), therefore it couldn't even attempt to improve the overall load by re-arranging requests/transactions in better ways to maximize resource utilization and reduce contention and waiting.
SceneBuilder is more like a toy or showcase of JavaFX itself. It can't even discover 3rd-party controls from your own code and there is zero support for expression.
With their deprecated JavaFX builders you could build UI much easier, like: JFX.borderPane().top(JFX.toolBar().items(
JFX.button().text("update").bindDisable(this.activeProperty.not()).onAction(e -> this.doUpdate()).build(),
JFX.separator().build(),
JFX.label.text("Scale: ").build(),
JFX.slider().min(0.1).max(1.0).bindBidirectionalValue(this.scaleProperty).onMouseClicked(e -> System.out.println("clicked!").build(),
JFX.label.bindText(this.scaleProperty.asString(
s -> String.format("%.0f%%", s.doubleValue() * 100))).build()
)
).center(...).build()
Imagine how much extra mouse dragging and typing you'd need to make that with FXML in scene builder and code the controller.
Being actually using it for half of a year. It's a significant improvement over Swing and definitely superior to winform or GTK#, not so over WPF.
A few problems with it:
* The data-binding/observable mechanism isn't directly compatible with old Java beans. The mechanism is the only reason I choose JavaFX. It also requires some learning and adaption to get used to the programming style but definitely worth it.
* Toolset is incomplete and you wouldn't even find any IDE with proper FXML support
* Documentation isn't too good and you'd need to read source code instead. The code is quite readable though.
* Lacks some basic controls (dialogs will be in next release) and you'd need 3rd-party libraries from the start (ex: ControlsFX).
* Loading complex UI takes time, as can be seen from their own demo Modena. Instead of constructing everything at once (as can be done in Qt or WPF without problem), you might need to manually lazy-load parts.
* Be careful of weak references/events used everywhere in JavaFX. Things could be GC'ed when you don't think they're supposed to be.
* Oracle deprecated the fluent builders API in v8. I recreated the generator and the API here JXTN which is also customizable
* It cannot embed native controls/widgets, though it can be embedded into others such as Eclipse RCP/SWT, as what I'm doing now.
. . I don't think you'd find a better cross-platform choice. However it'd be very unsuitable for tighter integration with Linux desktop (notifications/WM/process/shell controls etc).
Just an aside: I'm no fan of MS, even though I have to work in a Windows environment; however, when dealing with MS Servers, I have found that the recent versions of the Microsoft RDC Client for OS X is actually even more capable, just as fast (or maybe even faster), and a WHOLE lot better-mannered than even the Windows native RDC Client.
That's why they're doomed. They used to make attractive garbage, but now they're actually improving the quality of their products, probably because they don't know anything else to do.
We should be able to pay for it ourselves, and reap the rewards individually
So you're saying if some people don't agree with nuclear research they should have their electricity cut from nuclear planets, even when nuclear planets become the only type of power planets? What about their kids? What about people who disagree with environment preservation or food safety, or military defense?
Sony is NOT professional at making audio devices. Their amplifiers, speakers, headphones etc are all consumer-grade stuff with cool functions and effects but not much quality, and definitely not the type you would use for decades. It's hard to believe they would make any real high-end audio player, portable or not.
to work for 90% of functions, sure. But when I bought a new computer, I want 100% of it to work, not 90%, not even 99%.
There are still a lot of vendor-specific things that require Windows - ex: every of new laptops we bought at work last year need Intel XTU to configure and stabilize turbo boost, and custom windows-only utility to switch the fan to manual control. Running Linux on them would mean 60-80% of performance, because Intel and laptop firmware makers thought people don't need to keep their laptops at highest running speed for 24/7. Then comes the nVIDIA Optimus, which is only partially supported since 2013, 3 years after its official release and support on Windows.
You can blame the vendors for all their closed specs and ignorance of OS market, but it wouldn't really help anything. No matter the popularity, the situation will remain until Linux stops being hostile toward commercial/closed drivers and starts to keep binary-level compatibility for kernel modules, or Windows dies.
actually solving the problem is NOT what most environmentalists really want.
Environmentalists can help solve a lot of problems by committing suicide. Less people = less waste and demand of cattle and electrics = more green space.
While that's true in theory, in practice its usefulness is directly based on correct design of interfaces, which even developers of Java itself couldn't do well.
For instance, the Iterable/Iterator - if you're looping through a directory which may throw IOException in the middle, you are forced to wrap all such problems into RuntimeException or other types of ugly workground, because they didn't expect Iterable/Iterator to throw exception during iteration - not that it's hard to implement, in fact it's perfectly solvable by generics (ex: Iterable), but you're totally screwed as long as Sun/Oracle don't fix their broken API themselves.
Another is MalformedURLException - it appears 20 years ago some idiot believed URLs are supposed to come from user input on browser rather than created internally from Path or somewhere else, which couldn't and shouldn't produce malformed URLs. Now because of his stupidity everyone has to live with the annoying yet meaningless exception that's never actually thrown.
All those disadvantages wouldn't matter for a complete in-house project where you can just correct any spec and any inappropriate design when sighted, like those of our own, where checked exception could benefit a lot (I realized that when I was polishing a.NET project). Unfortunately Sun made a lot of things wrong and they never bothered to fix any of them. If they have done less, we'd have suffered less.
Debugging is also inherently easier on the platform because.NET coders are not forced to catch every exceptions and mishandle them in wrong place and wrong time. Breaking on exception in any large Java app is a nightmare.
Slashdot Mirror
Serious project work was done in C++ completely.
was
I can understand they should learn C for OS internals, but what's C++ for? Its object model is over-complicated and underused in most of serious projects, yet still inferior to Eiffel's.
Exactly, what can C do that python can't?
Handle blocks of code independant of formatting constraints like indenting.
Most of time it ends up with fucked up formatting or no formatting at all. That doesn't sound like a benefit.
^^^ that.
Natural human languages are stupid, inconsistent and illogical, and their syntax is simply not suitable to express anything complex.
People who love any form of Basic shouldn't be programmers at all. They might be good typewriter operators though.
Some idiots bought Mac because they loved its well designed appearance, then after a few weeks they realized OS/X sucks ass because apps on it are designed for true idiots (ex: those who always sort hundreds of bookmarks manually and unzip files of TBs in the same place then move them).
Never again.
Old games don't, but new games such as Rome 2 Total War can utilize 4+ cores and i5/i7 gives huge performance boost.
Being able to utilize only 10% of your hardware is NOT good - there is a zero missing!
It sucks and you know it and that's why you're testing TF2 rather than real games on it. By real games I mean it should at least heat your GFX card to 80C and fans running in maximum speed.
I suppose it's more about integration and optimization of resource allocation around transactions.
Most systems cannot do that efficiently due to multiple layers of abstraction and opacity. For instance, your application server isn't supposed to know about what files and databases are accessed by certain modules/classes and in which ways they're accessed (like append, RW or RO, etc), therefore it couldn't even attempt to improve the overall load by re-arranging requests/transactions in better ways to maximize resource utilization and reduce contention and waiting.
SceneBuilder is more like a toy or showcase of JavaFX itself. It can't even discover 3rd-party controls from your own code and there is zero support for expression.
With their deprecated JavaFX builders you could build UI much easier, like:
.top(JFX.toolBar() .items( .bindDisable(this.activeProperty.not()) .onAction(e -> this.doUpdate()) .build(), .bindBidirectionalValue(this.scaleProperty) .onMouseClicked(e -> System.out.println("clicked!") .build(), .bindText(this.scaleProperty.asString( .build() .center(...) .build()
JFX.borderPane()
JFX.button().text("update")
JFX.separator().build(),
JFX.label.text("Scale: ").build(),
JFX.slider().min(0.1).max(1.0)
JFX.label
s -> String.format("%.0f%%", s.doubleValue() * 100)))
)
)
Imagine how much extra mouse dragging and typing you'd need to make that with FXML in scene builder and code the controller.
How about Java FX 8?
Being actually using it for half of a year. It's a significant improvement over Swing and definitely superior to winform or GTK#, not so over WPF.
A few problems with it:
.
.
I don't think you'd find a better cross-platform choice. However it'd be very unsuitable for tighter integration with Linux desktop (notifications/WM/process/shell controls etc).
I was given an F and made to erase the program.
Probably because of the mushroom reminding him his baldness and intelligence level.
Just an aside: I'm no fan of MS, even though I have to work in a Windows environment; however, when dealing with MS Servers, I have found that the recent versions of the Microsoft RDC Client for OS X is actually even more capable, just as fast (or maybe even faster), and a WHOLE lot better-mannered than even the Windows native RDC Client.
That's why they're doomed. They used to make attractive garbage, but now they're actually improving the quality of their products, probably because they don't know anything else to do.
Clearly they're cultured people, despite lacking basic computer skills and intelligence in general.
I was wrong about them!
.
.
As the original author of mac menubar for GTK/GNOME (it's gnome right? not KDE?), I must say I feel really good about that. Long Live the Kim!
We should be able to pay for it ourselves, and reap the rewards individually
So you're saying if some people don't agree with nuclear research they should have their electricity cut from nuclear planets, even when nuclear planets become the only type of power planets? What about their kids? What about people who disagree with environment preservation or food safety, or military defense?
Being expensive is not the problem.
Sony is NOT professional at making audio devices. Their amplifiers, speakers, headphones etc are all consumer-grade stuff with cool functions and effects but not much quality, and definitely not the type you would use for decades. It's hard to believe they would make any real high-end audio player, portable or not.
And how is India different?
In India idiots are recognized as idiots.
to work for 90% of functions, sure. But when I bought a new computer, I want 100% of it to work, not 90%, not even 99%.
There are still a lot of vendor-specific things that require Windows - ex: every of new laptops we bought at work last year need Intel XTU to configure and stabilize turbo boost, and custom windows-only utility to switch the fan to manual control. Running Linux on them would mean 60-80% of performance, because Intel and laptop firmware makers thought people don't need to keep their laptops at highest running speed for 24/7. Then comes the nVIDIA Optimus, which is only partially supported since 2013, 3 years after its official release and support on Windows.
You can blame the vendors for all their closed specs and ignorance of OS market, but it wouldn't really help anything. No matter the popularity, the situation will remain until Linux stops being hostile toward commercial/closed drivers and starts to keep binary-level compatibility for kernel modules, or Windows dies.
One-click to generate and submit stupid questions like this one to /. and all well known news sites and forums!
35 KB may be the max speed of NK internet.
fixed for you.
actually solving the problem is NOT what most environmentalists really want.
Environmentalists can help solve a lot of problems by committing suicide. Less people = less waste and demand of cattle and electrics = more green space.
It'll convince them Americans are good people when they come to blow Kim's head off.
But South Korea was just as shitty when they made peace with NK, if not worse. It wasn't any better than Saddam's Iraq or Gaddafi's Libya.
Also US did top the Iranian government before - A true democracy replaced by an authoritarian and oppressive regime.
Not again.
Yet it works. Better than one which doesn't work at all.
While that's true in theory, in practice its usefulness is directly based on correct design of interfaces, which even developers of Java itself couldn't do well.
For instance, the Iterable/Iterator - if you're looping through a directory which may throw IOException in the middle, you are forced to wrap all such problems into RuntimeException or other types of ugly workground, because they didn't expect Iterable/Iterator to throw exception during iteration - not that it's hard to implement, in fact it's perfectly solvable by generics (ex: Iterable), but you're totally screwed as long as Sun/Oracle don't fix their broken API themselves.
Another is MalformedURLException - it appears 20 years ago some idiot believed URLs are supposed to come from user input on browser rather than created internally from Path or somewhere else, which couldn't and shouldn't produce malformed URLs. Now because of his stupidity everyone has to live with the annoying yet meaningless exception that's never actually thrown.
All those disadvantages wouldn't matter for a complete in-house project where you can just correct any spec and any inappropriate design when sighted, like those of our own, where checked exception could benefit a lot (I realized that when I was polishing a .NET project). Unfortunately Sun made a lot of things wrong and they never bothered to fix any of them. If they have done less, we'd have suffered less.
Debugging is also inherently easier on the platform because .NET coders are not forced to catch every exceptions and mishandle them in wrong place and wrong time. Breaking on exception in any large Java app is a nightmare.
For what reasons? Here .NET has been replacing Java in all areas for many years.