Thanks for the link--I had a vague notion that C++ iostreams could do something like this, but hadn't seen an example.
Unfortunately, this doesn't address the problem I was speaking of, for two reasons:
It isn't enabled by default (so it won't help naive programmers), and
the default error message--meaning "what gets printed if the exception isn't caught"--isn't sufficiently useful, at least for g++ 4.0. So, for example, if you try to open a nonexistent file, the message doesn't say that, nor name the file:
terminate called after throwing an instance of 'std::ios_base::failure' what(): basic_ios::clear Aborted
Still, if this were enabled by default, it'd be an improvement.
It's amazing how much simpler life is if your language will check errors (esp I/O errors) by default. That is, if you do a write and if fails (e.g., because the disk is full), an exception gets thrown, and even if you haven't written any error handling code at all, you get a nice explanatory error message.
C, C++, and Perl are not "safe" in this sense. Python is. Not sure about other common languages.
Owners of first-generation Intel Macs that used (32-bit only) Core Duo CPUs may not be so happy knowing that Vista will be the last Windows they will be able to run.
Where can I go to sign up to have Vista be the last Windows I have to run?
No one else is saying it, so I will: Some managers are just stupid. "Paris Hilton stupid" even.
If this is the case, better communication will not help. Rather, work on cultivating an attitude of acceptance, and consider whether you should change jobs.
Well said. It is possible to lose weight (despite many naysayers), but the journey is not as simple as drawing a line to your destination and following it. It's a hard, hard problem to solve, and it's not surprising that many take years to solve it, or give up in despair.
Saying that fat people stay fat because it's easier than the alternative is meaningless. Everything we humans do we do because we perceive it to be easier than the alternatives.
It's a simple formula: calories in - calories burned = fat stored. This is undoubtedly true, and about as useful as telling someone who's on fire that they need to reduce their temperature. Being fat is very unpleasant in our world, and if it was easy to stop, a lot more people would be doing it.
Funny that you should say that. I seem to recall reading a study about people who have internal vs external explanatory styles (i.e., they tend to blame, or respectively not blame, themselves when bad things happen). The former tend (as you say) toward depression. They are also more in tune with reality, as measured by their ability to realistically judge the chances of events happening. The latter are more optimistic, but also what may people would call irresponsible.
We have one of these at like one of the 3rd busiest intersection in Orange County, CA. The problem is that when you turn left at the signal and have a big-rig in front of you while turning you cannot see the light; I would say not to tailgate but since we are at a stand still and than start to move forward to turn it does not become obvious that it is changing until your front tires are at the first line and by that time it is too late.
Respectfully, there is a simple solution to this problem that you can implement entirely by yourself: Do not enter an intersection unless you can see that the light is green and that it is clear (no one is in the way of you going through and exiting the intersection on the other side).
Does this sound a little excessive? I imagine that it does if you drive like a typical American. Nonetheless, it's easy to see that if you don't follow this rule, it's just a matter or time (or luck) before you're involved in a wreck as a result. (And it certainly won't be an "accident".)
I agree with you, except for your last sentence. The design of intersections here in the US tends to be hit and miss, especially for older intersections, and I'm a big believer in doing whatever can reasonably be done to make them safer.
That said, I believe each driver has an absolute responsibility to obey the rules (laws) whenever it is possible. In the particular case I cited, the driver could easily have chosen to observe whether or not the light was red by waiting a couple of seconds. Instead, he chose to drive through the intersection without confirming that the light was green, risking a fatal collision. And then, rather than acknowledging his error, he tried to shift blame elsewhere. Would you let someone who acts like this watch your kids?
Our city's newspaper had one of those "call for action" articles last week, in which a local resident was complaining about a ticket he got. Why was he complaining? Because he was pulled up behind a semi truck at a stop light, and went through the light after it turned red, because he couldn't see it (i.e., because he was tailgating the truck). His complaint was that it was all the fault of the traffic light, which was mounted too low. Idiots like this shouldn't be allowed to operate power tools, let alone drive cars.
Anyway, the moral of the story is that we have an innate ability to shift blame. No
"technology" is required. (Or rather, maybe blame shifting is a technology.)
Uh, have you ever driven a pickup truck in snow? Take it from me--they suck, even on the road. Off road I guess they'd just make an impressive tire spinning sound.
Obligatory off-topic tale: One New Year's Eve, I was driving home in the ice storm from hell with a girlfriend, when we come across a pickup truck trying to go up a particularly icy street in front of a bar. They were flooring it, and apparently had been for some time, because by the time we got there they had worn the turning wheel down to bare rim, which was shooting an impressive stream of sparks as they gunned it. Said girlfriend hopped out and dropped a hint. Slightly drunken answer: "We know." I guess if ya gotta drive drunk, it's best if your vehicle at least doesn't actually move.
As I recall it, every technology named DCE has gone slowly down in flames, taking a number of companies with it. But please proceed--maybe you'll be the exception...
An occupational hazard of being a system administrator is turning into a control freak. Or, alternatively, the occupation may tend to draw control freaks. In my experience, good admins have a basic attitude of "how can I solve your problem" or better yet "how can I make you happy in the long run". Bad admins, which seem to be the majority, have a basic (can I call it "Republican"?) stance of "if I can say no to you, I will", "if I haven't already decided that I'm providing it, you can't have it", and "if I don't know how to do it, it's impossible".
I've spent a number of years watching this on both sides. I seem to be relatively immune to this problem myself, but unfortunately I don't really want to be an admin.:-)
I think that probably the only real solution to this is counseling from above, together with a "three strikes and you're out" policy.
How many years has it been since "csh considered harmful" was published? There is simply no excuse for its continued use as a default shell--bash is the current best practice that newbies should be steered toward.
Most professsional programmers, most of the time, are immersed in an environment where writing a piece of truly excellent software is simply not allowed. Writing Free and Open Source Software is one of the only avenues available to scratch this itch, if you have it.
Slashdot Mirror
Unfortunately, this doesn't address the problem I was speaking of, for two reasons:
Still, if this were enabled by default, it'd be an improvement.
C, C++, and Perl are not "safe" in this sense. Python is. Not sure about other common languages.
When I was in school in the 70s, the subject of the war in Viet Nam was always scrupulously avoided, for the same reason.
Well, presumably market forces will fix this problem soon enough. As long as ethanol isn't being subsidized. Oh, wait...
This is why socialism doesn't work and why market economics does.
So, you're saying that we should
- cut back on corporate welfare,
- stop subsidizing oil companies, and
- let gasoline prices rise to their true market value?
Sounds good to me!Heh. I almost would, but they don't yet seem to reliably boot Ubuntu...
Where can I go to sign up to have Vista be the last Windows I have to run?
If this is the case, better communication will not help. Rather, work on cultivating an attitude of acceptance, and consider whether you should change jobs.
Well said. It is possible to lose weight (despite many naysayers), but the journey is not as simple as drawing a line to your destination and following it. It's a hard, hard problem to solve, and it's not surprising that many take years to solve it, or give up in despair.
Saying that fat people stay fat because it's easier than the alternative is meaningless. Everything we humans do we do because we perceive it to be easier than the alternatives.
Wish we had a President who could admit his ignorance.
Controlling one's diet is at least as hard.
Funny that you should say that. I seem to recall reading a study about people who have internal vs external explanatory styles (i.e., they tend to blame, or respectively not blame, themselves when bad things happen). The former tend (as you say) toward depression. They are also more in tune with reality, as measured by their ability to realistically judge the chances of events happening. The latter are more optimistic, but also what may people would call irresponsible.
Respectfully, there is a simple solution to this problem that you can implement entirely by yourself: Do not enter an intersection unless you can see that the light is green and that it is clear (no one is in the way of you going through and exiting the intersection on the other side).
Does this sound a little excessive? I imagine that it does if you drive like a typical American. Nonetheless, it's easy to see that if you don't follow this rule, it's just a matter or time (or luck) before you're involved in a wreck as a result. (And it certainly won't be an "accident".)
That said, I believe each driver has an absolute responsibility to obey the rules (laws) whenever it is possible. In the particular case I cited, the driver could easily have chosen to observe whether or not the light was red by waiting a couple of seconds. Instead, he chose to drive through the intersection without confirming that the light was green, risking a fatal collision. And then, rather than acknowledging his error, he tried to shift blame elsewhere. Would you let someone who acts like this watch your kids?
Anyway, the moral of the story is that we have an innate ability to shift blame. No "technology" is required. (Or rather, maybe blame shifting is a technology.)
Obligatory off-topic tale: One New Year's Eve, I was driving home in the ice storm from hell with a girlfriend, when we come across a pickup truck trying to go up a particularly icy street in front of a bar. They were flooring it, and apparently had been for some time, because by the time we got there they had worn the turning wheel down to bare rim, which was shooting an impressive stream of sparks as they gunned it. Said girlfriend hopped out and dropped a hint. Slightly drunken answer: "We know." I guess if ya gotta drive drunk, it's best if your vehicle at least doesn't actually move.
As I recall it, every technology named DCE has gone slowly down in flames, taking a number of companies with it. But please proceed--maybe you'll be the exception...
I've spent a number of years watching this on both sides. I seem to be relatively immune to this problem myself, but unfortunately I don't really want to be an admin. :-)
I think that probably the only real solution to this is counseling from above, together with a "three strikes and you're out" policy.
Now, is it reasonably current?
How many years has it been since "csh considered harmful" was published? There is simply no excuse for its continued use as a default shell--bash is the current best practice that newbies should be steered toward.
Most professsional programmers, most of the time, are immersed in an environment where writing a piece of truly excellent software is simply not allowed. Writing Free and Open Source Software is one of the only avenues available to scratch this itch, if you have it.
That's not the way I heard it...