Yes, it would make it easier in the sense that if every atom in the Universe were turned into the fastest computer known today, it would only take the lifetime of 10 Universes to crack the encryption, instead of 100. 256-bit encryption is hard to break, and AES has held up to a lot of scrutiny suggesting that a known-plaintext won't help you break anything very quickly.
> You won't be cc-less for a week or two as your credit company invalidates your existing card and mails you a new one.
Amex is a little different here. They send new cards via overnight UPS or FedEx, so you don't have to wait very long. Among other things, it's surprising how non-shitty of a credit card company they are.
That's not a good excuse. Why should my time be wasted because they can't hire cashiers that can ring things up properly? It shouldn't -- which is why I will shop elsewhere.
Yup, this is what happens when you buy a piece-of-suck hardware. My $500 dell laptop needs this to be able to use the *built in screen*, but hey... at least it was cheap.
1. How many text editors does it install by default
Ideally, one for GUI, one for not GUI, and it should NOT install both vi and emacs by default. If it installs vi, emacs, ed, joe, etc. by default, stay away.
vi is required by the POSIX specification (and general sanity). You are confusing vim with vi, probably.
2. How many GUI environments does it install by default
Ideally, only one - Gnome, KDE, or XFCE. If it installs even twm by default, it's too much. If it install 2 Window managers by default, stay away from this distro.
twm comes with the xserver. A system with XFree86 or XOrg without twm is broken./me thinks you're either braindead or very very new to UNIX.
That's not true; the Roomba has a vacuum in addition to the brushes. The stuff it sucks up is "stored" underneath the filter (and is why the Roomba needs a filter to begin with).
> Yeah, mod me down as a troll. That's what all you believers do isn't it? La la la, I can't hear you...
To be fair, I don't have any ties to organized (or disorganized) religion, and I would have modded you down. Your entire post seems to have been a rant about how you're better than everyone because you don't believe in God. That's great, but as you say -- keep it to yourself. Nobody cares. (i.e. keep your non-believing in private. believers and non-believers are equally annoying).
As for the troll mod, it was the best substitute for -1 STFU or -1 You're An Idiot.
Re:why does linux lag windows in features?
on
VMware Fusion goes Beta
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Parallels is pretty new to the market, so I doubt anyone is using it to run linux. VMWare doesn't have the clock skew problem. (And in fact, it makes a great server environment.)
> -Use the nifty new feature that eliminates the Windows desktop and instead just shows the application window on the OS X desktop
This is really a nasty hack-on-a-hack for Windows. With Linux + OS X, just fire up Apple's X server and tell your Linux image that the X server is at "yourmac:0", and then start up your X session. The windows will all appear on your OS X desktop. This is how X has worked since the 80s.:)
> So, it isn't technologically superior, then. You don't throw superior technology out and replace it with new tech borrowing all sorts of ideas from your competitors.
Well, it has the largest collection of good ideas in one place. Perl6's collection will be larger. That's not to say Lisp or Haskell or Ruby or Python has a small collection, though.
Perl has borrowed from other langauges too -- sh, awk, sed, C, lisp, etc. Since perl5, some interesting new languages have appeared, so it's time to integrate these into perl:) Perl is designed to be a one-stop-shop for solving your programming problem and getting on with your life, not to be a "real programmers only need xyz functionality".
Anyway, I don't understand why you think borrowing good ideas is admitting failure.
OH SHIT, THAT TOTALLY DIDN'T FIT INTO THE ORIGINAL DESIGN! Also: the syntax is ten times more elegant than your Perl example.
Oh good, positional arguments. Who decides the order? They're not positional in the database...
Yeah, it's so technically better that gradual extension of the language was stopped in favor of a full redesign and 10 years of labor on a new VM. OOPS. The new language features? Taken from Haskell. The only functional implementation at the moment? Written in Haskell. OOPS.
The internals of Perl are old. Over the years, they've come to be fairly full-featured and quite speedy... but they're 10 years old. Any piece of software that organically grows for 10 years is going to become a maintenance nightmare, and that's the state of perl right now. Hence it's time for a rewrite.
Perl 6 (the language) takes some features from Haskell. I don't see the problem -- Haskell has some good ideas. So does Ruby, so we're borrowing from there too. Perl6 is designed to be a language that anyone can use, regardless of whether they prefer functional or declarative syntax (this is partially true in Perl5; see map/grep).
As you note, Pugs is written in Haskell. Who cares? Is everything a rip off of C since it's implented in C? Pugs' purpose is to be a prototype of the real implementation. It's much easier to do the final implementation (on Parrot) when you've had somewhere to play with the concepts. You're welcome to start porting some of the complicated stuff to Parrot any time you want. This Saturday is "Parrot bug day", so why not stop by the IRC channel (irc.perl.org #parrot) and hang out?
Lastly, why is any of this stuff an "OOPS"? If you actually looked at these projects, then you'd be really excited about how easy programming is going to become in a year or two. Why criticize something that you can directly benefit from? Why not help us make it happen sooner instead?
As the linked article said, this is an experimental patch + hack. With DBIC, you just do find({key1 => $val1, key2 => $val2}), which is a natural extension of the simple single-key case: find({key1 => $val1}). This all works very well in practice, as opposed to the it-might-work approach of ActiveRecord. I'm not saying you shouldn't use ActiveRecord... but I wouldn't use it.
> I am hesitant to try any framework whose partisans routinely bash other frameworks.
Bashing? I said it was good. There are some places where Catalyst is better, and some places where it's not as good. In my experience, Catalyst's good points make more complex applications easier (frontend to an HR system is what I've done), whereas Rails full-stack approach is great for CRUD applications. You're allowed to like both, ya know!
> I'm used to getting this from Python; it's refreshing to see a Perl guy screaming at the wind.
These people (I'm one of them) get upset because their languages are technically better than the alternatives, but "nobody" uses them, and they're shunned for not using PHP. "Perl is so 1996, man, use PHP or Ruby now." Irritating. use Perl;;)
Really? I think the answer would be "writing code in functional langauges". Yes there is real production code written in Haskell -- darcs and pugs come to mind.
> working within an IDE that has built in context checking, has a help system loaded with code samples, and an internet connection that allows him to go out and find snippets made free to everyone when he's stuck on something.
There's a recipe for excellent code. Let the IDE write most of it, and fill in the gaps with stuff cut-n-pasted from the Internet. BRILLANT!
Call me in a few years when you need a highly-paid consultant to fix everything.
> This is a test to see how you handle string and array manipulation, not whether or not you happen to know the language or standard library.
Maybe you're not aware of this, but many languages don't have strings, arrays, or even variables that refer to "memory locations". (Lisp, haskell, etc.)
Anyway, I doubt any place is hiring you to write stdlib for them; they're hiring you to write applications. There's nothing wrong with knowing how to reverse a string with the good-old while *q-- = *p++ trick, but your daily work is going to be 99% interacting with the libraries that other people have built. Therefore, I suggest that you as a question that's actually relevant, instead of "I'm sooo cool because I remembered an example on the board from a CS class". You're hiring programmers to solve problems, not copy their CS textbooks.
Another, more recent sollution [sic] would be Ruby on Rails, which has some realy niffty [sic] features.
Rails is pretty cute. An more functional (but less "shiny") alternative is Catalyst. It's written in Perl, which means you get the benefit of over 10,000 extension libraries from the CPAN to draw upon. Perl also has some nice features that Ruby or PHP lack, like full native unicode support and automatic taint checking. It's also faster, because it's had 10 years to mature. Sadly people seem to be ignoring Perl these days, but with recent improvements it's nearly as cool as Ruby (check out "Moose").
Also, if you'd like to access a database with compound primary keys, ActiveRecord won't support that, but Catalyst's ORM (DBIx::Class) supports it fine.
Rails is good for quick apps like a wiki or a blog, but for more complicated internal applications, Catalyst is where it's at. Stop by the website, check out our advent calendar, or perhaps try the tutorial. Join us in #catalyst on irc.perl.org if you have any questions!
Slashdot Mirror
It does, which is why much effort (encryption) is required to keep it non-free.
Full-Disk encryption isn't slow. Performing the decryption is much faster than waiting for an IO buffer to be filled from disk.
Yes, it would make it easier in the sense that if every atom in the Universe were turned into the fastest computer known today, it would only take the lifetime of 10 Universes to crack the encryption, instead of 100. 256-bit encryption is hard to break, and AES has held up to a lot of scrutiny suggesting that a known-plaintext won't help you break anything very quickly.
> You won't be cc-less for a week or two as your credit company invalidates your existing card and mails you a new one.
Amex is a little different here. They send new cards via overnight UPS or FedEx, so you don't have to wait very long. Among other things, it's surprising how non-shitty of a credit card company they are.
That's not a good excuse. Why should my time be wasted because they can't hire cashiers that can ring things up properly? It shouldn't -- which is why I will shop elsewhere.
> 915resolution
Yup, this is what happens when you buy a piece-of-suck hardware. My $500 dell laptop needs this to be able to use the *built in screen*, but hey... at least it was cheap.
vi is required by the POSIX specification (and general sanity). You are confusing vim with vi, probably.
twm comes with the xserver. A system with XFree86 or XOrg without twm is broken.
That's not true; the Roomba has a vacuum in addition to the brushes. The stuff it sucks up is "stored" underneath the filter (and is why the Roomba needs a filter to begin with).
> Yeah, mod me down as a troll. That's what all you believers do isn't it? La la la, I can't hear you...
To be fair, I don't have any ties to organized (or disorganized) religion, and I would have modded you down. Your entire post seems to have been a rant about how you're better than everyone because you don't believe in God. That's great, but as you say -- keep it to yourself. Nobody cares. (i.e. keep your non-believing in private. believers and non-believers are equally annoying).
As for the troll mod, it was the best substitute for -1 STFU or -1 You're An Idiot.
Parallels is pretty new to the market, so I doubt anyone is using it to run linux. VMWare doesn't have the clock skew problem. (And in fact, it makes a great server environment.)
:)
> -Use the nifty new feature that eliminates the Windows desktop and instead just shows the application window on the OS X desktop
This is really a nasty hack-on-a-hack for Windows. With Linux + OS X, just fire up Apple's X server and tell your Linux image that the X server is at "yourmac:0", and then start up your X session. The windows will all appear on your OS X desktop. This is how X has worked since the 80s.
You trust the Mythbusters? They do stunts for movies, not actual science.
Here's an article from the IEEE Spectrum: http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/mar06/3069.
http://www.openbsd.org/
Well, it would probably be cheaper to just eat off of dirty dishes, right, so why bother with the dishwasher at all?
(Same thing with heating / cooling your house. It's just going to get hot after your turn off your air conditioning, so why bother using it all?)
> So, it isn't technologically superior, then. You don't throw superior technology out and replace it with new tech borrowing all sorts of ideas from your competitors.
Well, it has the largest collection of good ideas in one place. Perl6's collection will be larger. That's not to say Lisp or Haskell or Ruby or Python has a small collection, though.
> In essence, if they DID stamp out all proprietary drivers, in userspace and kernel space. Then what?
Then Linux would be like OpenBSD -- you wouldn't be reading about a remote root exploit in the NVidia drivers every week.
Perl has borrowed from other langauges too -- sh, awk, sed, C, lisp, etc. Since perl5, some interesting new languages have appeared, so it's time to integrate these into perl :) Perl is designed to be a one-stop-shop for solving your programming problem and getting on with your life, not to be a "real programmers only need xyz functionality".
Anyway, I don't understand why you think borrowing good ideas is admitting failure.
Oh good, positional arguments. Who decides the order? They're not positional in the database...
The internals of Perl are old. Over the years, they've come to be fairly full-featured and quite speedy... but they're 10 years old. Any piece of software that organically grows for 10 years is going to become a maintenance nightmare, and that's the state of perl right now. Hence it's time for a rewrite.
Perl 6 (the language) takes some features from Haskell. I don't see the problem -- Haskell has some good ideas. So does Ruby, so we're borrowing from there too. Perl6 is designed to be a language that anyone can use, regardless of whether they prefer functional or declarative syntax (this is partially true in Perl5; see map/grep).
As you note, Pugs is written in Haskell. Who cares? Is everything a rip off of C since it's implented in C? Pugs' purpose is to be a prototype of the real implementation. It's much easier to do the final implementation (on Parrot) when you've had somewhere to play with the concepts. You're welcome to start porting some of the complicated stuff to Parrot any time you want. This Saturday is "Parrot bug day", so why not stop by the IRC channel (irc.perl.org #parrot) and hang out?
Lastly, why is any of this stuff an "OOPS"? If you actually looked at these projects, then you'd be really excited about how easy programming is going to become in a year or two. Why criticize something that you can directly benefit from? Why not help us make it happen sooner instead?
Yup. In fact, slashdot stripped out my tags :)
> Bullshit
;)
As the linked article said, this is an experimental patch + hack. With DBIC, you just do find({key1 => $val1, key2 => $val2}), which is a natural extension of the simple single-key case: find({key1 => $val1}). This all works very well in practice, as opposed to the it-might-work approach of ActiveRecord. I'm not saying you shouldn't use ActiveRecord... but I wouldn't use it.
> I am hesitant to try any framework whose partisans routinely bash other frameworks.
Bashing? I said it was good. There are some places where Catalyst is better, and some places where it's not as good. In my experience, Catalyst's good points make more complex applications easier (frontend to an HR system is what I've done), whereas Rails full-stack approach is great for CRUD applications. You're allowed to like both, ya know!
> I'm used to getting this from Python; it's refreshing to see a Perl guy screaming at the wind.
These people (I'm one of them) get upset because their languages are technically better than the alternatives, but "nobody" uses them, and they're shunned for not using PHP. "Perl is so 1996, man, use PHP or Ruby now." Irritating. use Perl;
> I have to question what you've been doing.
Really? I think the answer would be "writing code in functional langauges". Yes there is real production code written in Haskell -- darcs and pugs come to mind.
> working within an IDE that has built in context checking, has a help system loaded with code samples, and an internet connection that allows him to go out and find snippets made free to everyone when he's stuck on something.
There's a recipe for excellent code. Let the IDE write most of it, and fill in the gaps with stuff cut-n-pasted from the Internet. BRILLANT!
Call me in a few years when you need a highly-paid consultant to fix everything.
> This is a test to see how you handle string and array manipulation, not whether or not you happen to know the language or standard library.
Maybe you're not aware of this, but many languages don't have strings, arrays, or even variables that refer to "memory locations". (Lisp, haskell, etc.)
Anyway, I doubt any place is hiring you to write stdlib for them; they're hiring you to write applications. There's nothing wrong with knowing how to reverse a string with the good-old while *q-- = *p++ trick, but your daily work is going to be 99% interacting with the libraries that other people have built. Therefore, I suggest that you as a question that's actually relevant, instead of "I'm sooo cool because I remembered an example on the board from a CS class". You're hiring programmers to solve problems, not copy their CS textbooks.
> /[ \.]/
No need to quote . inside character classes. Use [.] or \., but not both.
Rails is pretty cute. An more functional (but less "shiny") alternative is Catalyst. It's written in Perl, which means you get the benefit of over 10,000 extension libraries from the CPAN to draw upon. Perl also has some nice features that Ruby or PHP lack, like full native unicode support and automatic taint checking. It's also faster, because it's had 10 years to mature. Sadly people seem to be ignoring Perl these days, but with recent improvements it's nearly as cool as Ruby (check out "Moose").
Also, if you'd like to access a database with compound primary keys, ActiveRecord won't support that, but Catalyst's ORM (DBIx::Class) supports it fine.
Rails is good for quick apps like a wiki or a blog, but for more complicated internal applications, Catalyst is where it's at. Stop by the website, check out our advent calendar, or perhaps try the tutorial. Join us in #catalyst on irc.perl.org if you have any questions!
Goatse is how the wild speculation gets in our asses to begin with.