Please, read the TextCursor API page linked above, and then see if you can quickly understand what properties and methods a TextCursor object has.
Okay, I've never once looked at the OO.o API document, but I can tell you right now that, as a developer, those docs are completely understandable. The TextCursor object implements a whole series of interfaces. If you want to know what those specific interfaces do, then hit the links for them. For example, here's the doc for the XTextCursor interface:
As you can see, it has a bunch of methods for moving the cursor around. The other interfaces do essentially the same thing, but at the sentence and paragraph level. Meanwhile, the XPropertySet interface, described here:
Gives access to the TextCursor state. This is the one problem I see with the documentation. Because the XPropertySet interface exports a generic property provider interface, there isn't actually any doc to describe the properties that are applicable to a TextCursor instance. 'course, the easiest answer is to hack up some test code to emit all the properties and see what's there, but that's certainly not ideal.
So... what was it you were complaining about, again?
No true liberal would ever support the current system
Actually, I'm very much a liberal, and I support the current system because I realize that inflation is *much* better than the alternative, that being deflation.
But, of course, my belief is based on actually understanding the affects of both. How 'bout you?
Are you saying he was secretly a professional physicist
Do you even know what a "layman" is? Here, let me explain: It's someone who is uneducated in the subject manner about which he is speaking.
Einstein was *not* a physics layman. The man was formally educated in the topic!
He wasn't a layman like you and I are, but he was hardly a member of the physics establishment.
Fair enough, but my comment wasn't directed at people who are both educated and outside the establishment. It was directed at *laymen*. People who are *not* actually educated in the field they're discussing. You know, people like your neighbour who tells you global warming mustn't be happening because it's cold outside, or because the sun is really just getting hotter but the scientists are apparently too dumb to notice.
In short, you are, at best, missing my entire point. At worst, you're manufacturing an argument for kicks.
By the way, to continue my tirade against moderators who misuse their points, the parent is *not a god damned troll!* Do I think he's wrong? Sure. But I'm sorry, there's simply no way his comment can be misconstrued as trollish... maybe a tad dickish, but my posts are certainly no better.
FFS mods: Troll, Overrated, and Flamebait are not for posts you simply disagree with!
Yeah, if the history of physics has shown us anything, it's that laymen have never had any special insight into areas that professional physicists do not.
You really need to educate yourself if you honestly believe Einstein, a man who graduated in 1900 with a physics degree from ETH Zurich with a physics degree, was a layman.
If you strongly believe that fractional reserve banking causes inflation, can you recommend an alternative loan system to replace it?
Why would I? I think fractional reserve banking is a good idea, and that full-reserve banking is a road straight to deflationary hell.
The OP was just wrong, and I was correcting him/her. Fractional reserve banking means that, quite literally, banks *create* new money, and that money enters the money supply, increasing the total amount of money in the system. This is true. And it's all I'm saying.
Incidentally, FRB generally results in inflation because, of course, the money supply is constantly growing. But low levels of inflation is a good thing, not a bad one, so I don't consider that a criticism of the system.
I strongly suggest you go read this. Specifically, go read the section on money creation. As an aside, I'd strongly suggest you learn the difference between money and currency.
They don't loan out more money than they receive as deposits.
Actually, they do. In most modern fiat currency models, banks must hold a minimum reserve relative to the amount of loans they give out, but can otherwise issue loans up to that ratio.
In fact, banks quite literally create money by making these loans, which is how the US money supply grows (and is one of the reasons why adjusting the interest rate affects inflation... if you reduce the rate at which loans are granted, you reduce the rate the money supply grows, which translates to lower inflation). It's actually a pretty fascinating, if confusing, topic. I'd recommend reading up on it!
Fractional reserve is the root of our problems today.
FYI, just 'cuz you says it's true, doesn't *actually* make it true.
The system is designed to lend out more money than actually exists,
Wrong. The system is designed to allow banks to *create* money by providing loans. In effect, the value of, say, a home, is translated into liquid cash which then enters the economy.
As such, a fiat currency, rather than being backed by a single asset, like gold, is backed by the sum total of assets that exist in the economy, which actually makes a lot more sense, as it means the amount of cash grows as the economy grows, this preventing disastrous deflation.
You can say what you want about wealth, but there is a fixed amount of natural, life-sustaining resources in the world
Ahh, I see. So you're saying no one ever creates wealth. Well, that's funny, because I'm pretty sure my house is worth more than the sum total of the material it's made of. And that additional value must come from *somewhere*.
I often wonder if we're looking in the wrong place for an explanation...flaws in our cosmology sound more plausible to me than weird forms of matter and energy.
Yes, because no one has been looking in other places, say modified Newtonian gravity, for alternative explanations...
The real problem is that no one has come up with an alternative theory which both excludes dark matter/dark energy while simultaneously explaining all current observations.
Obviously. If you were even passingly familiar with the area, you'd realize that a) people *have* been re-examining the orthodoxy (see MOND, among other things), because, you know, some scientists are as smart as you (or perhaps even smarter) and realize that it's an interesting area of research, and b) no one has found an alternate theory that explains the current set of observations (see the Bullet Cluster, and some even more recent results).
Honestly, what is it with laymen who somehow believe that *they* have some insight into an area that those who've been studying it their entire lives do not?
The truth is that labor relations and labor LAWS had been changing for a good 50 years by the time unions arrived on the scene. Indeed, there is ample evidence to show that, rather than speed the adoption of improved safety and labor laws, the unions, and the backlash they produced, actually SLOWED the advancement of labor and safety laws in the United States.
Excellent! I suppose you can provide this evidence, then? It's an interesting topic, and I haven't heard this claim before, so I'd be interested to read your citations.
Wrong. Taxation to pay for productive services that benefit me directly or indirectly, such as road maintenance or national parks, is not theft. It is payment for a service
Congratulations, you understand something jcr, the original poster I was replying to, doesn't. *He* is a libertarian. *You* are a fiscal conservative.
the main reason the current governing party is in place is because it is distintly centrist at the moment....
Bahahahaha! Tell that to the women that would've had their right to sue for equal pay revoked. Or the parties that would've had their funding removed.
Sorry, the conservatives are, at best, proposing a soft-right agenda right now, and only because they got bitch slapped over these issues. Now, that's not to say I disagree with a soft-right agenda... but to say they're even remotely "centrist" is to misundertand the difference between what the party does to stay in power in the face of a minority government, and what the party would like to do if it had it's druthers.
Someone's a self-deluding soft conservative... the idea that the Liberal's are heavy-left is laughable at best. At best, they're somewhat left of center. Maybe. While the old PC party was somewhat right of center. The NDP and the old reform/now conservatives are clearly the extremist parties in this country, and anyone who suggests otherwise has a very skewed view of the general tenor of the Canadian electorate.
I would think that some functional programming would be useful though.
I have a better idea. Learn Smalltalk. That way, you can learn more about both functional programming and proper object-oriented software design. The simple reality is that Ruby, Python, Java, and C# all borrow heavily from Smalltalk (PHP is more of a successor to Perl), so learning Smalltalk will give you a leg up on almost any modern, object-oriented language.
That said, learning a bit about Lisp or Scheme is always a good idea (Lisp's macro system is particularly intriguing)... just don't expect it to be terribly practical in a real-world setting.
Finally, the most important thing to realize is this: languages exist to express ideas. Those ideas may be whole programs, or they may be design patterns or other programming constructs. ie, whether you learn Ruby, Smalltalk, or Perl, all have the concept of an object, all have the concept of a closure, higher-order functions, and so forth. So focus on learning the *concepts*... how they're expressed in a given language is really more of a technicality.
Besides CPAN, Perl was one of the first languages to integrate advanced data structures - lists and hashes - directly into language itself.
Wow, the ignorance is remarkable. Learn a bit of history. Lisp had lists at the very beginning, and Smalltalk's collections put most high-level languages to shame, and that includes.NET and Java, which ostensibly have very extensive class libraries.
Of course, I suppose one could argue that, in Smalltalk, collections aren't in the "language itself"... but in Smalltalk, that's also true of, say, all the flow control operations.
Seriously, what can I do on a 64-bit desktop Linux computer that I can't do on a 32-bit Linux computer?
Nothing. Addressing >4GB of RAM would be a bit more efficient, and some CPU-intensive tasks would be faster (eg, audio/video encoding, etc, which benefit from the extra registers available, and the guarantee of things like SSE2 being present), but that's about it. And the larger pointer and opcode size actually means that performance might *degrade* due to the greater chance of data being evicted from your L1 cache.
That said, I run 64-bit on my Laptop, partly because, bafflingly enough, suspend works better than it does on the 32-bit equivalent, and partly because... well... meh, why not?:)
what about mplayerplug-in the firefox plugin to use mplayer to display videos?
I believe Firefox will automagically do the right thing, here, thanks to the Ubuntu plugin that's part of their default browser install. That said, I could be wrong... I've never had a problem playing videos, so I've never needed it. They all just work out-of-the-box.
Also if i need specific file/command how do i find it using synaptic?
You... type the command and press enter. When the command isn't available, Ubuntu flat out tells you which package that command can be found in.
I've been using linux since the redhat 6.1 days(yes yes cue up "get off my lawn" comments) and still cannot find my way around ubuntu.
Uhh... I was using RedHat during the 4.x days, and Slackware before that. I then switched to Debian for a number of years before moving to Ubuntu. Meanwhile, I've deployed and administered a number of Fedora Core boxes. And in all that time, I honestly believe Ubuntu has proven to be, hands down, without question, the most user-friendly, polished distribution of the bunch.
Also why is it that it only installs things one at a time, and why can't I run 2 copies of the "package manager" at once?
It doesn't. Using synaptic, you can select any number of packages to install, and then hit execute, and it does what you ask. If you use apt-get, you can just provide a list of packages to install.
You can only run one package manager at a time because the package database must be locked to prevent concurrent access from corrupting the database. And as it happens, you can't run concurrent copies of Yum on Fedora, either... this is nothing new, and it sure as heck isn't unique to Ubuntu.
It was worse than I could have imagined. The only thing that was fast was the boot time but afterward everything was almost non-responsive and did not get much better after all the drivers were installed.
To be fair, my Laptop (on which I normally run 64-bit Ubuntu 8.10), a T61 with a 2Ghz Core2 and 2GB of RAM, has Vista Business installed on it, and while it took a fair bit of tweaking to get things smoothed out (turn off Aero and which to classic win2k GUI, disable the disk defrag service, disable drive indexing, and a whole host of other services that I didn't need), the machine now boots up fairly quickly, and actually gets to a usable desktop *faster* than Ubuntu. It also sleeps/wakesup more or less instantaneously, and hibernates flawlessly.
Of course, I'm an old Linux diehard, so Ubuntu has the applications I want, a desktop environment I prefer, and so forth, so I use that as my regular environment, despite it's failings, such as a lack of hibernate support, and resume support that's a tad flakey. But for the few times I do need Vista, I find it actually works quite well. *But*, it does *not* work well out of the box.
Firefighters, policemen, et. al. are doing work to get that money. It's not redistribution, it is payment.
Splitting hairs much? Look, either the government taking money from the people to give to other people is redistribution of wealth, or it's not. Taxation is either theft, or it's not. Libertarians can't have it both ways. As much as they might try.
The government is trying to do themselves a favor by printing off more money so they can spend their way out of problems and pay off their debt at the same time.
Says the guy who clearly has no education in monetary policy.
Gradual inflation is vital as it reduces the incentive for people to hide their investments in cash. It also benefits those who perform leveraged investments (such as homeowners and small businesses), as it means that, over the long term, their debts shrink rather than grow (as would be the case in a deflationary scenario). There are any number of other reasons why low levels of inflation is actually a very good thing, but these are just a couple off the top of my head.
Slashdot Mirror
Please, read the TextCursor API page linked above, and then see if you can quickly understand what properties and methods a TextCursor object has.
Okay, I've never once looked at the OO.o API document, but I can tell you right now that, as a developer, those docs are completely understandable. The TextCursor object implements a whole series of interfaces. If you want to know what those specific interfaces do, then hit the links for them. For example, here's the doc for the XTextCursor interface:
http://api.openoffice.org/docs/common/ref/com/sun/star/text/XTextCursor.html
As you can see, it has a bunch of methods for moving the cursor around. The other interfaces do essentially the same thing, but at the sentence and paragraph level. Meanwhile, the XPropertySet interface, described here:
http://api.openoffice.org/docs/common/ref/com/sun/star/beans/XPropertySet.html
Gives access to the TextCursor state. This is the one problem I see with the documentation. Because the XPropertySet interface exports a generic property provider interface, there isn't actually any doc to describe the properties that are applicable to a TextCursor instance. 'course, the easiest answer is to hack up some test code to emit all the properties and see what's there, but that's certainly not ideal.
So... what was it you were complaining about, again?
Theft of services generally refers to failing to pay for a previously agreed upon service.
Pure bullshit. Watch premium cable without a subscription? That's theft of service, and there's certainly no prior agreement involved.
Another way to put it is that it *emulates* the behavior of those APIs.
No, it *implements* those APIs.
Geez, based on your argument, glib emulates POSIX, and GNU Classpath emulates the JDK.
No true liberal would ever support the current system
Actually, I'm very much a liberal, and I support the current system because I realize that inflation is *much* better than the alternative, that being deflation.
But, of course, my belief is based on actually understanding the affects of both. How 'bout you?
Are you saying he was secretly a professional physicist
Do you even know what a "layman" is? Here, let me explain: It's someone who is uneducated in the subject manner about which he is speaking.
Einstein was *not* a physics layman. The man was formally educated in the topic!
He wasn't a layman like you and I are, but he was hardly a member of the physics establishment.
Fair enough, but my comment wasn't directed at people who are both educated and outside the establishment. It was directed at *laymen*. People who are *not* actually educated in the field they're discussing. You know, people like your neighbour who tells you global warming mustn't be happening because it's cold outside, or because the sun is really just getting hotter but the scientists are apparently too dumb to notice.
In short, you are, at best, missing my entire point. At worst, you're manufacturing an argument for kicks.
By the way, to continue my tirade against moderators who misuse their points, the parent is *not a god damned troll!* Do I think he's wrong? Sure. But I'm sorry, there's simply no way his comment can be misconstrued as trollish... maybe a tad dickish, but my posts are certainly no better.
FFS mods: Troll, Overrated, and Flamebait are not for posts you simply disagree with!
Yeah, if the history of physics has shown us anything, it's that laymen have never had any special insight into areas that professional physicists do not.
You really need to educate yourself if you honestly believe Einstein, a man who graduated in 1900 with a physics degree from ETH Zurich with a physics degree, was a layman.
If you strongly believe that fractional reserve banking causes inflation, can you recommend an alternative loan system to replace it?
Why would I? I think fractional reserve banking is a good idea, and that full-reserve banking is a road straight to deflationary hell.
The OP was just wrong, and I was correcting him/her. Fractional reserve banking means that, quite literally, banks *create* new money, and that money enters the money supply, increasing the total amount of money in the system. This is true. And it's all I'm saying.
Incidentally, FRB generally results in inflation because, of course, the money supply is constantly growing. But low levels of inflation is a good thing, not a bad one, so I don't consider that a criticism of the system.
I strongly suggest you go read this. Specifically, go read the section on money creation. As an aside, I'd strongly suggest you learn the difference between money and currency.
They don't loan out more money than they receive as deposits.
Actually, they do. In most modern fiat currency models, banks must hold a minimum reserve relative to the amount of loans they give out, but can otherwise issue loans up to that ratio.
In fact, banks quite literally create money by making these loans, which is how the US money supply grows (and is one of the reasons why adjusting the interest rate affects inflation... if you reduce the rate at which loans are granted, you reduce the rate the money supply grows, which translates to lower inflation). It's actually a pretty fascinating, if confusing, topic. I'd recommend reading up on it!
Fractional reserve is the root of our problems today.
FYI, just 'cuz you says it's true, doesn't *actually* make it true.
The system is designed to lend out more money than actually exists,
Wrong. The system is designed to allow banks to *create* money by providing loans. In effect, the value of, say, a home, is translated into liquid cash which then enters the economy.
As such, a fiat currency, rather than being backed by a single asset, like gold, is backed by the sum total of assets that exist in the economy, which actually makes a lot more sense, as it means the amount of cash grows as the economy grows, this preventing disastrous deflation.
You can say what you want about wealth, but there is a fixed amount of natural, life-sustaining resources in the world
Ahh, I see. So you're saying no one ever creates wealth. Well, that's funny, because I'm pretty sure my house is worth more than the sum total of the material it's made of. And that additional value must come from *somewhere*.
I often wonder if we're looking in the wrong place for an explanation...flaws in our cosmology sound more plausible to me than weird forms of matter and energy.
Yes, because no one has been looking in other places, say modified Newtonian gravity, for alternative explanations...
The real problem is that no one has come up with an alternative theory which both excludes dark matter/dark energy while simultaneously explaining all current observations.
I have to agree with ghostdoc. IANAP
Obviously. If you were even passingly familiar with the area, you'd realize that a) people *have* been re-examining the orthodoxy (see MOND, among other things), because, you know, some scientists are as smart as you (or perhaps even smarter) and realize that it's an interesting area of research, and b) no one has found an alternate theory that explains the current set of observations (see the Bullet Cluster, and some even more recent results).
Honestly, what is it with laymen who somehow believe that *they* have some insight into an area that those who've been studying it their entire lives do not?
The truth is that labor relations and labor LAWS had been changing for a good 50 years by the time unions arrived on the scene. Indeed, there is ample evidence to show that, rather than speed the adoption of improved safety and labor laws, the unions, and the backlash they produced, actually SLOWED the advancement of labor and safety laws in the United States.
Excellent! I suppose you can provide this evidence, then? It's an interesting topic, and I haven't heard this claim before, so I'd be interested to read your citations.
Wrong. Taxation to pay for productive services that benefit me directly or indirectly, such as road maintenance or national parks, is not theft. It is payment for a service
Congratulations, you understand something jcr, the original poster I was replying to, doesn't. *He* is a libertarian. *You* are a fiscal conservative.
the main reason the current governing party is in place is because it is distintly centrist at the moment....
Bahahahaha! Tell that to the women that would've had their right to sue for equal pay revoked. Or the parties that would've had their funding removed.
Sorry, the conservatives are, at best, proposing a soft-right agenda right now, and only because they got bitch slapped over these issues. Now, that's not to say I disagree with a soft-right agenda... but to say they're even remotely "centrist" is to misundertand the difference between what the party does to stay in power in the face of a minority government, and what the party would like to do if it had it's druthers.
Someone's a self-deluding soft conservative... the idea that the Liberal's are heavy-left is laughable at best. At best, they're somewhat left of center. Maybe. While the old PC party was somewhat right of center. The NDP and the old reform/now conservatives are clearly the extremist parties in this country, and anyone who suggests otherwise has a very skewed view of the general tenor of the Canadian electorate.
I would think that some functional programming would be useful though.
I have a better idea. Learn Smalltalk. That way, you can learn more about both functional programming and proper object-oriented software design. The simple reality is that Ruby, Python, Java, and C# all borrow heavily from Smalltalk (PHP is more of a successor to Perl), so learning Smalltalk will give you a leg up on almost any modern, object-oriented language.
That said, learning a bit about Lisp or Scheme is always a good idea (Lisp's macro system is particularly intriguing)... just don't expect it to be terribly practical in a real-world setting.
Finally, the most important thing to realize is this: languages exist to express ideas. Those ideas may be whole programs, or they may be design patterns or other programming constructs. ie, whether you learn Ruby, Smalltalk, or Perl, all have the concept of an object, all have the concept of a closure, higher-order functions, and so forth. So focus on learning the *concepts*... how they're expressed in a given language is really more of a technicality.
Besides CPAN, Perl was one of the first languages to integrate advanced data structures - lists and hashes - directly into language itself.
Wow, the ignorance is remarkable. Learn a bit of history. Lisp had lists at the very beginning, and Smalltalk's collections put most high-level languages to shame, and that includes .NET and Java, which ostensibly have very extensive class libraries.
Of course, I suppose one could argue that, in Smalltalk, collections aren't in the "language itself"... but in Smalltalk, that's also true of, say, all the flow control operations.
Seriously, what can I do on a 64-bit desktop Linux computer that I can't do on a 32-bit Linux computer?
Nothing. Addressing >4GB of RAM would be a bit more efficient, and some CPU-intensive tasks would be faster (eg, audio/video encoding, etc, which benefit from the extra registers available, and the guarantee of things like SSE2 being present), but that's about it. And the larger pointer and opcode size actually means that performance might *degrade* due to the greater chance of data being evicted from your L1 cache.
That said, I run 64-bit on my Laptop, partly because, bafflingly enough, suspend works better than it does on the 32-bit equivalent, and partly because... well... meh, why not? :)
There's ads on Slashdot?? Well, thank you Adblock!
what about mplayerplug-in the firefox plugin to use mplayer to display videos?
I believe Firefox will automagically do the right thing, here, thanks to the Ubuntu plugin that's part of their default browser install. That said, I could be wrong... I've never had a problem playing videos, so I've never needed it. They all just work out-of-the-box.
Also if i need specific file/command how do i find it using synaptic?
You... type the command and press enter. When the command isn't available, Ubuntu flat out tells you which package that command can be found in.
I've been using linux since the redhat 6.1 days(yes yes cue up "get off my lawn" comments) and still cannot find my way around ubuntu.
Uhh... I was using RedHat during the 4.x days, and Slackware before that. I then switched to Debian for a number of years before moving to Ubuntu. Meanwhile, I've deployed and administered a number of Fedora Core boxes. And in all that time, I honestly believe Ubuntu has proven to be, hands down, without question, the most user-friendly, polished distribution of the bunch.
Also why is it that it only installs things one at a time, and why can't I run 2 copies of the "package manager" at once?
It doesn't. Using synaptic, you can select any number of packages to install, and then hit execute, and it does what you ask. If you use apt-get, you can just provide a list of packages to install.
You can only run one package manager at a time because the package database must be locked to prevent concurrent access from corrupting the database. And as it happens, you can't run concurrent copies of Yum on Fedora, either... this is nothing new, and it sure as heck isn't unique to Ubuntu.
It was worse than I could have imagined. The only thing that was fast was the boot time but afterward everything was almost non-responsive and did not get much better after all the drivers were installed.
To be fair, my Laptop (on which I normally run 64-bit Ubuntu 8.10), a T61 with a 2Ghz Core2 and 2GB of RAM, has Vista Business installed on it, and while it took a fair bit of tweaking to get things smoothed out (turn off Aero and which to classic win2k GUI, disable the disk defrag service, disable drive indexing, and a whole host of other services that I didn't need), the machine now boots up fairly quickly, and actually gets to a usable desktop *faster* than Ubuntu. It also sleeps/wakesup more or less instantaneously, and hibernates flawlessly.
Of course, I'm an old Linux diehard, so Ubuntu has the applications I want, a desktop environment I prefer, and so forth, so I use that as my regular environment, despite it's failings, such as a lack of hibernate support, and resume support that's a tad flakey. But for the few times I do need Vista, I find it actually works quite well. *But*, it does *not* work well out of the box.
Firefighters, policemen, et. al. are doing work to get that money. It's not redistribution, it is payment.
Splitting hairs much? Look, either the government taking money from the people to give to other people is redistribution of wealth, or it's not. Taxation is either theft, or it's not. Libertarians can't have it both ways. As much as they might try.
The government is trying to do themselves a favor by printing off more money so they can spend their way out of problems and pay off their debt at the same time.
Says the guy who clearly has no education in monetary policy.
Gradual inflation is vital as it reduces the incentive for people to hide their investments in cash. It also benefits those who perform leveraged investments (such as homeowners and small businesses), as it means that, over the long term, their debts shrink rather than grow (as would be the case in a deflationary scenario). There are any number of other reasons why low levels of inflation is actually a very good thing, but these are just a couple off the top of my head.