Old-school lines of code were assembly instructions, or COBOL statements (which map fairly easily to assembler anyway).
But all this has changed, a lot.
Software these days is about components, about reuse, about APIs. Reinventing printf gets you more lines of code, but is useless and stupid (in most cases).
Object orientation throws productivity into a whole new ball game. You should get productivity points for reusing code, not for rewriting. So it's never, hasn't been for some time, about lines of code.
Even function points are better.
But anyway, is productivity such an issue for programmers?
Productivity is a business concern, and makes sense in a business environment. And businesses don't (shouldn't) build software by throwing programmers at it.
Businesses build software through a process that involves requirements, analysis, then design, test suites, and then coding and testing and documenting.
What part of all this does programming involve? 15%?
Forget lines of code. Forget kindergarden productivity measures, forget subjective analysis into what is "good code" and "documented code". You document BEFORE you code. And it is "good code" if it implements what is documented.
The definition seems to lack the ability of actually proving that the said electronic record originated from me. Is there no provision in common law that at least attempts to prevent false signatures?
Better yet, you could hack the system into making her system tell her all this good stuff about you. How you are smart, and sexy, and a great lover, and hones... well, never mind.
A lot of people tried and failed to make a clock accurate at sea.
I wish I could get that series on DVD.
I wish I could make a DVD accurate at sea. I mean, get it to respect the DVD zoning regulations, like switching to the American zone when I get to America. That would really be compliant with the Law.
Hmm, guess that means the thing would have to be able to play multiple region DVDs... Mine doesn't. So mine is not compliant? oopsie, got to go buy that Region-X stuff before the cops come and get me!
As for securely wiping files, most of us already know a bit about it.
Regarding slack space, yes, it works as described, you can use slack space to write your data, and hope that it doesn't get overwritten when the file grows.
Using encription and spanning multiple slack zones, namely on binary files, you can, for instance, write a tool that encrypts a file, writes it on a number of slack zones for the files in/usr/bin (since these won't grow much over time, will they?), and then is able to recover the file.
You can even write the tool so that it creates two pipes, one to read, another to write.
But in the end, is this good or bad? Like it is said in the article, it can as easily be used to hide evidence as it can be to plant evidence.
What should we do? Write tools to use this to our advantage, or write tools to automatically wipe clean the slack area and render this inoperant?
If I give you a car, am I liable for the fact that it has no brakes? What if I sell you a car?
What if I give you a tool? Am I liable that it breaks and breaks whatever you were trying to fix with it, too? What if I sell you one? What if I sell you one and say that it's rated for the work you're trying to do, but it still breaks?
See the differences?
Now for software:
What if I give you a binary? Am I liable that it doesn't work? Am I liable that it has flaws?
What if I sell it to you? Am I liable then?
Now for something completely different: Source Code
What if I give you source code? It's available for your inspection... Can we say that source code documents itself? If you are worried about what the code does, you can read it, compile it, debug it, step-trace it. Source code is NOT a program, it's closer to an algorithm than to a program. Can I be sued for giving you instructions on how to tell you computer to do something?
If source code if just instructions, directions for a computer, then source code starts to look like something different, and precedent must come not from binary-software but from things like legal advice.
And you know how that goes... IANAL, so I can say anything, you take my word if you want to. So, if IANAP (not a programmer), can I give you whatever source code I want, and I won't be liable?
The OS/2 file system had the beginning of an object orientation famework embedded into it. And yes, it worked. And yes, it was good. And yes, it was sort-of-backwards-compatible, too. And yes, now you mention it, it was 6 years ago.
Sorry if I have to point it out, but... 170 mm * 170 mm is NOT 170 mm^2
This motherboard is 28900 mm^2, or 289 cm^2.
Still a nice little board, at that:)
What part of it didn't you understand?
The machine he's running in is a Sequent/IBM NUMA-Q, not just a bunch of PC servers...
I don't know what was meant by the submitter or the editor or whomever it was that was ranting about $500 machines, but this is not what it's about.
First of all, it's a porting project, making linux run on the platform. Only then, it's a feature project, making linux make good use of the NUMA capabilities.
So there. It's a work in progress, and no, you can't afford one of these for home. Maybe, in time, the lessons learned from here will help us build generic Fast-NOW clusters and have software-based NUMA on linux. Until then, keep dreaming, or start working on a project you can contribute to. Remember, the difference with open-source is that you can always do more than just complain.
Are there any reliable brands left, or have they all been sucked of their value by the ineffable brilliance of day traders and quarterly profit reports?
Slashdot Mirror
slashdotters are not exactly famous for reading the things they are commenting on
Oh well...
Read about it here.
It never was. Or maybe it was, back then.
Old-school lines of code were assembly instructions, or COBOL statements (which map fairly easily to assembler anyway).
But all this has changed, a lot.
Software these days is about components, about reuse, about APIs. Reinventing printf gets you more lines of code, but is useless and stupid (in most cases).
Object orientation throws productivity into a whole new ball game. You should get productivity points for reusing code, not for rewriting. So it's never, hasn't been for some time, about lines of code.
Even function points are better.
But anyway, is productivity such an issue for programmers?
Productivity is a business concern, and makes sense in a business environment. And businesses don't (shouldn't) build software by throwing programmers at it.
Businesses build software through a process that involves requirements, analysis, then design, test suites, and then coding and testing and documenting.
What part of all this does programming involve? 15%?
Forget lines of code. Forget kindergarden productivity measures, forget subjective analysis into what is "good code" and "documented code". You document BEFORE you code. And it is "good code" if it implements what is documented.
Anything else is just fooling around.
The definition seems to lack the ability of actually proving that the said electronic record originated from me. Is there no provision in common law that at least attempts to prevent false signatures?
Better yet, you could hack the system into making her system tell her all this good stuff about you. How you are smart, and sexy, and a great lover, and hones... well, never mind.
I wish I could get that series on DVD.
I wish I could make a DVD accurate at sea. I mean, get it to respect the DVD zoning regulations, like switching to the American zone when I get to America. That would really be compliant with the Law.
Hmm, guess that means the thing would have to be able to play multiple region DVDs... Mine doesn't. So mine is not compliant? oopsie, got to go buy that Region-X stuff before the cops come and get me!
Regarding slack space, yes, it works as described, you can use slack space to write your data, and hope that it doesn't get overwritten when the file grows.
Using encription and spanning multiple slack zones, namely on binary files, you can, for instance, write a tool that encrypts a file, writes it on a number of slack zones for the files in /usr/bin (since these won't grow much over time, will they?), and then is able to recover the file.
You can even write the tool so that it creates two pipes, one to read, another to write.
But in the end, is this good or bad? Like it is said in the article, it can as easily be used to hide evidence as it can be to plant evidence.
What should we do? Write tools to use this to our advantage, or write tools to automatically wipe clean the slack area and render this inoperant?
Or should we do both?
If I give you a car, am I liable for the fact that it has no brakes? What if I sell you a car?
What if I give you a tool? Am I liable that it breaks and breaks whatever you were trying to fix with it, too? What if I sell you one? What if I sell you one and say that it's rated for the work you're trying to do, but it still breaks?
See the differences?
Now for software:
What if I give you a binary? Am I liable that it doesn't work? Am I liable that it has flaws?
What if I sell it to you? Am I liable then?
Now for something completely different: Source Code What if I give you source code? It's available for your inspection... Can we say that source code documents itself? If you are worried about what the code does, you can read it, compile it, debug it, step-trace it. Source code is NOT a program, it's closer to an algorithm than to a program. Can I be sued for giving you instructions on how to tell you computer to do something?
If source code if just instructions, directions for a computer, then source code starts to look like something different, and precedent must come not from binary-software but from things like legal advice.
And you know how that goes... IANAL, so I can say anything, you take my word if you want to. So, if IANAP (not a programmer), can I give you whatever source code I want, and I won't be liable?
And who defines what a programmer is? The ACM?
Hmm, could that be why the motherboard didn't turn out QUITE as small as they meant to??
The OS/2 file system had the beginning of an object orientation famework embedded into it. And yes, it worked. And yes, it was good. And yes, it was sort-of-backwards-compatible, too. And yes, now you mention it, it was 6 years ago.
I just want you to know, that this line is going in my quotes file.
Yes it does, lots of crap, and FAST, too!
Results 1 - 10 of about 1,830,000. Search took 0.09 seconds.
And at the top of the heap, this !
"Search will become much easier, and this should make it cheaper to build new systems because customers only have to learn one database."
If they were any funnier I'd die laughing.
Worse is that it scares me a bit instead.
Sorry if I have to point it out, but... :)
170 mm * 170 mm is NOT 170 mm^2
This motherboard is 28900 mm^2, or 289 cm^2.
Still a nice little board, at that
It was neither... Having read that poster before, it was just sarcasm... :)
The machine he's running in is a Sequent/IBM NUMA-Q, not just a bunch of PC servers...
I don't know what was meant by the submitter or the editor or whomever it was that was ranting about $500 machines, but this is not what it's about.
First of all, it's a porting project, making linux run on the platform. Only then, it's a feature project, making linux make good use of the NUMA capabilities.
So there. It's a work in progress, and no, you can't afford one of these for home. Maybe, in time, the lessons learned from here will help us build generic Fast-NOW clusters and have software-based NUMA on linux. Until then, keep dreaming, or start working on a project you can contribute to. Remember, the difference with open-source is that you can always do more than just complain.
Didn't you hear the man? He doesn't use Windows, so he's NOT his customer. Duh... :P
Wow, another platform for 1-2-1 marketing!
Don't be silly... Gibson wrote about it, these guys are actually trying to build the thing. Can you tell the difference?
So that means you'll have to change slashdot to be slashdot.com, right?
(yes, i know you already have the domain...)
Actually, the singular form is criterion , altough using criteria as both plural and singular is generally accepted.
Right, like phone numbers are tough to guess...
All it takes is a mass mailing, and you're in the spam loop...
Transmission Control protocol / Intellectual Property ?
Go around.
Hmmm. Maybe we should start a new distribution and call it BlackHat Linux?