1. your OO is wring in this case. IF you have an addition parameter used in a base class that is only used in derived classes, then you should have a base class that has a pure virtual method. You then provide implementations in your derived classes, as before.
2. If you are conditionally compiling, conditionally exclude this variable too. Then you'll get errors for the places where you accidentally used that variable outside conditional sections.
Or just use the pragmas to disable the warning, but modifying the bad code that raises them is a better choice.
it was a 3 tier system.. web servers talked to app servers which talked to the DB server.
Each comms channel was secured so if an attacker exploited the web server (as happens too often) then the attacker had to get past the other layers of security to even reach the DB, let alone export any customer passwords. When you realise many of the modules running on the app servers had limited access to the DB too, you realise that it was as secure as you're likely to get.
It had a very well designed 3 tier architecture with a good set of security policies. One of which was that the web servers didn't have any connection tot he database servers, not even cabled.
Then the director of a acquired company was told his PHP website was to be put on the production servers, his attitude was one of "well, we'll put the web site on the webservers and just punch a hole in the firewall to the DB".
When he was told that couldn't physically be done... his attitude was "ok, we'll have to install the PHP website on the application servers then and route web requests to it".
its a n underrated point - why don't software engineers have to make products as reliable and good as more expensive engineering projects... and I think the clue in is that question.
Why can't a software engineer make something that is as reliable as a bridge? Because a bridge costs a flipping fortune and can't really be reworked after implementation, so there's a huge incentive to get the entire team together to get it right. And that means the people who really make the bridge are the architects and project managers. In software terms, we have few architects and they're usually crap ex-developers who think they know it all, and project managers who are incompetents who think it was a job they can hide their lack of skill in. Meanwhile you have a load of developers who think they are the only ones who can do the job.
A really good software project would require a technical architect who really understood what was happening and how things worked, and a project manager who understood timescales based on experience and managing the project deliveries and organisation.
It would also require a project based on old technologies - no-one really has time to get to grips with something like 'real' engineers have to do because the platform they stand on gets whipped out from under them all the damn time - which is also a problem as the idiots who don't know a thing use this as an excuse to hide their lack of talent too (how many times have you heard that someone wants to rewrite in cool new technology almost for the sake of it - you can guarantee its because they can't hack doing the boring work maintaining or improving the old stuff, a lack of skill they'd still have if they did get to rewrite - no rewrite ever is any good, its almost always an even worse PoS).
So all in all, there's a huge lack of professionalism in software caused by a lot of factors but I think the biggest one is the real lack of earned experience. We don't allow the good stuff to be built upon, we throw it away and start again with something else. We throw the good staff away and say they're not keeping up with technology. We hire kids because they have some buzzword on their CV.
Anyway, we don't hold software engineers to the same high standards because we refuse to accept old, working stuff. We only want cheap new shiny crap. Its no wonder the software world has turned out like it has.
not really - it has nothing to do with phones. Its all about the back-end services, and the advertising companies they can sell you to.
In the past, the software and the device was the product, you paid and you used it Now its different, the software is the hook and you're the fish. Sometimes they put some juicy tidbit on the end to attract you like 15Gb free storage.
Some people do pay the subs, but they're generally for old technology companies - like phone service providers. Everyone else is getting their money through more round-about ways, like advertising: we all pay extra for products that we buy, and that extra is given to the ad companies and service providers like Microsoft.
In short, they simply shifted the tax on us so we no longer notice we're paying it.
If they allow projects to float their rules,and yet still take pledges?
There's a lawsuit waiting to happen here, it could be as lucrative as posting a dodgy kickstarter campaign!
hmm..
1. post obviously crap kickstarter 2. pledge yourself 3. complain vigorously when you "lose" your money 4. start a class-action suit against kickstarter for not checking things out 5. profit!!!
for the specific purpose of making the US the only place to make high end chips
which is why all the x86 chips I've bought have "made in Malaysia" stamped on them.
I guess you have forgotten ARM that produces the designs for high end chips that are built by many others, and those guys also make SoC chips with all kinds of stuff on them.
the US which has a standard of living 20 times better than in Russia
do you refer to rich people, or poor? I think in both countries - if you're rich, your standard of living is awesome. If you're poor your standard is awful. The difference between the two countries is more like which one has the best culture within which to spend your time and money. And I have a feeling Russia beats the US on that one. Bolshoi or Bowling.. you choose:-)
you miss the point - its not about performance (though I think the native C++ compiler for C# code shows that Microsoft has stopped willy waving between their divisions and are actually going for stuff that works - performance will still be worse, all that GC going on means C# code tends to be less performant due to the way the language works. A C+ program that allocates and copies memory all the time would be slow too)
Anyway, its the fact that everyone else does it in C++ that matters. A bit like writing web code, you wouldn't do it in C++ (well,, I would, haha) but in a web-based scripting language like PHP. When you come to ask for help, there will be a lot of C++ based help available, not so much C#.
True - if you're going to write games in C#, you need Unity. Unfortunately Unity is really Mono so you will have some issues with the toolchain - ie its not as nice as native Visual Studio coding.
But even then, all the games I've seen written in Unity work, but they suck up your CPU like nothing else. If you really want to code games, stick to what most people in the industry use - C++.
There are plenty of engines that help you, like Irrlicht, or Ogre3d. Or go with a commercial engine like Unreal.
not to mention a -1 "just plain incorrect". for supposedly factual statements made that turn out to be misguided, common myth, or at worst deliberately intended to mislead.
meanwhile people are leaving Google's Chome in droves because they fear it's used to violate their privacy. And nobody is adopting Google's new products - which is why Google keeps cancelling them.
See, its easy to make generalised statements about something. Firefox is a good thing, although it makes some people get all bothered about UI changes that are pretty inconsequential (hell, the last set of UI changes made it look *more* like Chrome, yet you say they leaving *for* Chrome....)
Anyway, I think a "standardised" discussion system could be a handy thing, any web site gets comments instead of the crappy commenting system they currently use. And if it means fewer people use twitter, the better!
'tis true. And they do have to be energy efficient like that, or you get big old fines and told to do it right.
They made this mandatory a few years back when a similar article was kicking around complaining about the total power draw of all those tiny power chargers people leave plugged in, the old ones would just draw power all the time (you can tell - they get hot) and when you think how many everyone has, it adds up.
So the EU made legislation to fix it (and other standby power draws), as there was no reason no to apart from the manufacturers might have to spend half a cent more on a slightly better Chinese charger, which they wouldn't do unless forced. Shows how screwed up market forces can be sometimes.
No, 500 W on the backplate refers to the rating of the PSU, just like PC power supplies.
Then they do some adding up.
35 watts X 8760 hours a year X 224 million boxes equals 4 big nuke plants which is not just a lot of electricity generation required just so you can watch TV, but also to run your cable box while you sleep and it sits there heating up the air (and causing CO2 to spew out and kill your children when the climate really gets pissed at us)(I assume the nuke plants aren't really used for this electricity, as the generators prefer coal and gas as its cheaper for them)
It doesn't really matter how much the electricity costs the consumer, the point was the massive inefficiency of the things and how we could make them better, rather than stick our heads in the ground and say "la la la I'll consume as much resources as I like and screw the consequences".
But C is the new assembler, so if you had that in the browser, you could implement your ADA-level language using it. Or any other language you liked.
That I feel makes C (possibly with bounds-checking on all memory allocations) the best option all round. Speed and efficiency is important, otherwise we might as well just stick with javascript.
A browser could be good enough to replace a desktop app. You need a standard GUI that's a bit more responsive than a static HTML page - but we have that in terms of WebGL, and we need responsive communications, but we have that in WebSockets.
I think the problem is more one of tooling to make use of these things. Everybody makes a html page with a bit of javascript. If there was tools for a good GUI written in WebGL, and you could connect to a server that sends you data as you need it, and as long as the client processing is fast enough (ie not plain bloated javascript).
So its possible to get the web working really well, just not quite yet. And not ever if all Google can come up with is iterations of yet-another-javascript-language. I had high hopes for NaCl as it could be a good foundation for all kinds of things, but... looks like they're not pushing that properly as a web standard.
are they really? Just because the majority use-case for Cordova is a mobile app written as a bundled html application doesn't mean you can't use it as a desktop application too.
I doubt anyone would, there are better alternatives available - even sing-page-apps using Angular.js for example, let alone traditional thick client apps. But its not a proprietary ecosystem.
Of course UKIP got the majority vote in the UK EU elections, and so did the Front Nationale in the French. I think the Golden Dawn got a large vote in the Greek.
So if democracy is listening to the people, then it makes sense to get a different, reformist candidate. Though, I guess the established groupings that currently favour the EPP will get Juncker in, next time round things probably be very different, with an outright majority of nationalistic parties.... which isn't something we really want.
Incidentally, the PES have 191 to EPPs 213 MEPs. It wouldn't take much to shift alliances from some of the independents to give the PES the majority.
no, there are many in the EU commission who want to create a United States of Europe. One of the current political issues over Mr Junker is that he is one of these federalists.
Free trade.. that was so 70s. Things have moved on a lot more since the EEC was created.
Maybe the US has to say to each company, you have to pay 30% tax as that's our standard for US-based companies, but if you've already paid that elsewhere, show us and we'll give you a refund equal to what you paid. So they end up paying 30% to someone.
Trouble is, they just set up shell companies that are subsidiaries and say we made no money to pay tax on, because of all that IP we had to buy from shell-company-x, woe is us.
However, if shell-company-x had to pay tax at 30% too, the US would give it a refund of 0% (assuming it was based in the tax-dodge country of Bermuda or similar) and still have to pay 30%. The trouble then is that the US cannot claim taxation from a foreign company. At that point, they can introduce tax on imports (ie that IP the shell-company-x happens to own and sell to Apple, Google or whoever). Net result: 30% tax for the US to these US-based companies.
I guess there will be other loopholes to exploit though and this will turn into a massive tail-chasing exercise that will have knock-on effects for "tax legitimate" companies.
no, the job of the competition commissioner is to stifle competition amongst EU member states so the EU as a whole benefits. His job is to encourage competition amongst companies operating here.
Big difference between a company and a country, especially when those countries are supposed to be part of a single federal superstate (whoops, might have given away a secret known only to the EU commission there!)
But if the.com domins went away, the idiots would have to get used to the new naming system and you can guarantee there'd be a load of information on mainstream news sites telling people what has happened, why and what to do about it.
Generally, they use Google for the.coms anyway.
It would have an advantage of spreading the.co.xx domain names around anyway, rather than having the pretty poor arbitration and cybersquatting that goes on at the moment. Slashdot.co.us - no worries. Certainly better than Slashdot.com/uk or uk.Slashdot.com that some sites tend to use for country-specific sites.
Slashdot Mirror
1. your OO is wring in this case. IF you have an addition parameter used in a base class that is only used in derived classes, then you should have a base class that has a pure virtual method. You then provide implementations in your derived classes, as before.
2. If you are conditionally compiling, conditionally exclude this variable too. Then you'll get errors for the places where you accidentally used that variable outside conditional sections.
Or just use the pragmas to disable the warning, but modifying the bad code that raises them is a better choice.
it was a 3 tier system.. web servers talked to app servers which talked to the DB server.
Each comms channel was secured so if an attacker exploited the web server (as happens too often) then the attacker had to get past the other layers of security to even reach the DB, let alone export any customer passwords. When you realise many of the modules running on the app servers had limited access to the DB too, you realise that it was as secure as you're likely to get.
reminds me of a previous company.
It had a very well designed 3 tier architecture with a good set of security policies. One of which was that the web servers didn't have any connection tot he database servers, not even cabled.
Then the director of a acquired company was told his PHP website was to be put on the production servers, his attitude was one of "well, we'll put the web site on the webservers and just punch a hole in the firewall to the DB".
When he was told that couldn't physically be done... his attitude was "ok, we'll have to install the PHP website on the application servers then and route web requests to it".
I wasn't impressed.
its a n underrated point - why don't software engineers have to make products as reliable and good as more expensive engineering projects... and I think the clue in is that question.
Why can't a software engineer make something that is as reliable as a bridge? Because a bridge costs a flipping fortune and can't really be reworked after implementation, so there's a huge incentive to get the entire team together to get it right. And that means the people who really make the bridge are the architects and project managers. In software terms, we have few architects and they're usually crap ex-developers who think they know it all, and project managers who are incompetents who think it was a job they can hide their lack of skill in. Meanwhile you have a load of developers who think they are the only ones who can do the job.
A really good software project would require a technical architect who really understood what was happening and how things worked, and a project manager who understood timescales based on experience and managing the project deliveries and organisation.
It would also require a project based on old technologies - no-one really has time to get to grips with something like 'real' engineers have to do because the platform they stand on gets whipped out from under them all the damn time - which is also a problem as the idiots who don't know a thing use this as an excuse to hide their lack of talent too (how many times have you heard that someone wants to rewrite in cool new technology almost for the sake of it - you can guarantee its because they can't hack doing the boring work maintaining or improving the old stuff, a lack of skill they'd still have if they did get to rewrite - no rewrite ever is any good, its almost always an even worse PoS).
So all in all, there's a huge lack of professionalism in software caused by a lot of factors but I think the biggest one is the real lack of earned experience. We don't allow the good stuff to be built upon, we throw it away and start again with something else. We throw the good staff away and say they're not keeping up with technology. We hire kids because they have some buzzword on their CV.
Anyway, we don't hold software engineers to the same high standards because we refuse to accept old, working stuff. We only want cheap new shiny crap. Its no wonder the software world has turned out like it has.
not really - it has nothing to do with phones. Its all about the back-end services, and the advertising companies they can sell you to.
In the past, the software and the device was the product, you paid and you used it Now its different, the software is the hook and you're the fish. Sometimes they put some juicy tidbit on the end to attract you like 15Gb free storage.
Some people do pay the subs, but they're generally for old technology companies - like phone service providers. Everyone else is getting their money through more round-about ways, like advertising: we all pay extra for products that we buy, and that extra is given to the ad companies and service providers like Microsoft.
In short, they simply shifted the tax on us so we no longer notice we're paying it.
meh. The real kickstarters will have run off with all the cash if they have any sense whatsoever.#
No, much easier to go after the easy target.. that's what American justice is all about, right?
If they allow projects to float their rules,and yet still take pledges?
There's a lawsuit waiting to happen here, it could be as lucrative as posting a dodgy kickstarter campaign!
hmm..
1. post obviously crap kickstarter
2. pledge yourself
3. complain vigorously when you "lose" your money
4. start a class-action suit against kickstarter for not checking things out
5. profit!!!
no need for ??? on this one!
for the specific purpose of making the US the only place to make high end chips
which is why all the x86 chips I've bought have "made in Malaysia" stamped on them.
I guess you have forgotten ARM that produces the designs for high end chips that are built by many others, and those guys also make SoC chips with all kinds of stuff on them.
the US which has a standard of living 20 times better than in Russia
do you refer to rich people, or poor? I think in both countries - if you're rich, your standard of living is awesome. If you're poor your standard is awful. The difference between the two countries is more like which one has the best culture within which to spend your time and money. And I have a feeling Russia beats the US on that one. Bolshoi or Bowling.. you choose :-)
Unity is mono, not .NET. It uses Eclipse as its IDE.
So if you want to code games in C#, you can't use VS.
you miss the point - its not about performance (though I think the native C++ compiler for C# code shows that Microsoft has stopped willy waving between their divisions and are actually going for stuff that works - performance will still be worse, all that GC going on means C# code tends to be less performant due to the way the language works. A C+ program that allocates and copies memory all the time would be slow too)
Anyway, its the fact that everyone else does it in C++ that matters. A bit like writing web code, you wouldn't do it in C++ (well,, I would, haha) but in a web-based scripting language like PHP. When you come to ask for help, there will be a lot of C++ based help available, not so much C#.
True - if you're going to write games in C#, you need Unity. Unfortunately Unity is really Mono so you will have some issues with the toolchain - ie its not as nice as native Visual Studio coding.
But even then, all the games I've seen written in Unity work, but they suck up your CPU like nothing else. If you really want to code games, stick to what most people in the industry use - C++.
There are plenty of engines that help you, like Irrlicht, or Ogre3d. Or go with a commercial engine like Unreal.
Take a look at the list, count the number targeting the different languages.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...
re facebook posters... I always thought this quote was particularly apt:
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.
I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
But.. it turns out that they were just twats all along, which is depressing.
not to mention a -1 "just plain incorrect". for supposedly factual statements made that turn out to be misguided, common myth, or at worst deliberately intended to mislead.
meanwhile people are leaving Google's Chome in droves because they fear it's used to violate their privacy. And nobody is adopting Google's new products - which is why Google keeps cancelling them.
See, its easy to make generalised statements about something. Firefox is a good thing, although it makes some people get all bothered about UI changes that are pretty inconsequential (hell, the last set of UI changes made it look *more* like Chrome, yet you say they leaving *for* Chrome....)
Anyway, I think a "standardised" discussion system could be a handy thing, any web site gets comments instead of the crappy commenting system they currently use. And if it means fewer people use twitter, the better!
'tis true. And they do have to be energy efficient like that, or you get big old fines and told to do it right.
They made this mandatory a few years back when a similar article was kicking around complaining about the total power draw of all those tiny power chargers people leave plugged in, the old ones would just draw power all the time (you can tell - they get hot) and when you think how many everyone has, it adds up.
So the EU made legislation to fix it (and other standby power draws), as there was no reason no to apart from the manufacturers might have to spend half a cent more on a slightly better Chinese charger, which they wouldn't do unless forced. Shows how screwed up market forces can be sometimes.
No, 500 W on the backplate refers to the rating of the PSU, just like PC power supplies.
Then they do some adding up.
35 watts X 8760 hours a year X 224 million boxes equals 4 big nuke plants which is not just a lot of electricity generation required just so you can watch TV, but also to run your cable box while you sleep and it sits there heating up the air (and causing CO2 to spew out and kill your children when the climate really gets pissed at us)(I assume the nuke plants aren't really used for this electricity, as the generators prefer coal and gas as its cheaper for them)
It doesn't really matter how much the electricity costs the consumer, the point was the massive inefficiency of the things and how we could make them better, rather than stick our heads in the ground and say "la la la I'll consume as much resources as I like and screw the consequences".
But C is the new assembler, so if you had that in the browser, you could implement your ADA-level language using it. Or any other language you liked.
That I feel makes C (possibly with bounds-checking on all memory allocations) the best option all round. Speed and efficiency is important, otherwise we might as well just stick with javascript.
A browser could be good enough to replace a desktop app. You need a standard GUI that's a bit more responsive than a static HTML page - but we have that in terms of WebGL, and we need responsive communications, but we have that in WebSockets.
I think the problem is more one of tooling to make use of these things. Everybody makes a html page with a bit of javascript. If there was tools for a good GUI written in WebGL, and you could connect to a server that sends you data as you need it, and as long as the client processing is fast enough (ie not plain bloated javascript).
So its possible to get the web working really well, just not quite yet. And not ever if all Google can come up with is iterations of yet-another-javascript-language. I had high hopes for NaCl as it could be a good foundation for all kinds of things, but... looks like they're not pushing that properly as a web standard.
are they really? Just because the majority use-case for Cordova is a mobile app written as a bundled html application doesn't mean you can't use it as a desktop application too.
I doubt anyone would, there are better alternatives available - even sing-page-apps using Angular.js for example, let alone traditional thick client apps. But its not a proprietary ecosystem.
Of course UKIP got the majority vote in the UK EU elections, and so did the Front Nationale in the French. I think the Golden Dawn got a large vote in the Greek.
So if democracy is listening to the people, then it makes sense to get a different, reformist candidate. Though, I guess the established groupings that currently favour the EPP will get Juncker in, next time round things probably be very different, with an outright majority of nationalistic parties.... which isn't something we really want.
Incidentally, the PES have 191 to EPPs 213 MEPs. It wouldn't take much to shift alliances from some of the independents to give the PES the majority.
no, there are many in the EU commission who want to create a United States of Europe. One of the current political issues over Mr Junker is that he is one of these federalists.
Free trade.. that was so 70s. Things have moved on a lot more since the EEC was created.
Maybe the US has to say to each company, you have to pay 30% tax as that's our standard for US-based companies, but if you've already paid that elsewhere, show us and we'll give you a refund equal to what you paid. So they end up paying 30% to someone.
Trouble is, they just set up shell companies that are subsidiaries and say we made no money to pay tax on, because of all that IP we had to buy from shell-company-x, woe is us.
However, if shell-company-x had to pay tax at 30% too, the US would give it a refund of 0% (assuming it was based in the tax-dodge country of Bermuda or similar) and still have to pay 30%. The trouble then is that the US cannot claim taxation from a foreign company. At that point, they can introduce tax on imports (ie that IP the shell-company-x happens to own and sell to Apple, Google or whoever). Net result: 30% tax for the US to these US-based companies.
I guess there will be other loopholes to exploit though and this will turn into a massive tail-chasing exercise that will have knock-on effects for "tax legitimate" companies.
no, the job of the competition commissioner is to stifle competition amongst EU member states so the EU as a whole benefits. His job is to encourage competition amongst companies operating here.
Big difference between a company and a country, especially when those countries are supposed to be part of a single federal superstate (whoops, might have given away a secret known only to the EU commission there!)
But if the .com domins went away, the idiots would have to get used to the new naming system and you can guarantee there'd be a load of information on mainstream news sites telling people what has happened, why and what to do about it.
Generally, they use Google for the .coms anyway.
It would have an advantage of spreading the .co.xx domain names around anyway, rather than having the pretty poor arbitration and cybersquatting that goes on at the moment. Slashdot.co.us - no worries. Certainly better than Slashdot.com/uk or uk.Slashdot.com that some sites tend to use for country-specific sites.