when things go well, the CEO gets a huge bonus and says how his vision enabled all this to happen.
when things go wrong, its not his fault, its those stupid engineers and other people who actually do things, or its the consumer for being too stupid to realise what a great vision the great leader has.
I wouldn't accept that its only Ballmer's fault, you can add the senior leadership team to the list.
your answer was to install VLC rather than take it back and complain to the shop what a PoS is was and demand a Windows 7 laptop. And when they refuse (as they won't have any W7 machines) return it, nip round the corner and got her a iPad or a macbook.
that's true - I remember when MS paid Apache and Zend lots of money to make sure PHP and Apache web server was easy to install and worked well with Windows.
I'm sure those guys took the cash and said "stupid Microsoft, our stuff already works well on those platforms" and then built nice installers and walked away.... leaving Microsoft able to say that you can run all your PHP-style webapps on Windows. Around the same time they made Windows for Web (ie a cut-down version that web hosts could use instead of Linux) and the number of webhost servers with Windows OS increased dramatically.
the only kind of tunnelling you want is the NAT64 set up on your router - you don't really want IPv4 in the external internet coming into your home network once you have IPv6, but you'll still have a fair few devices internally (eg your TV) that only speak IPv4.
If they exist on the router, the average guy shouldn't have any worries except to enable the "IPv4 legacy mode" switch.
Sun?! the people who made Java so bad its still got massive security holes in it today.
No-one makes perfect code, its as simple as that. But if you recognise that the real world and imperfect humans are involved then any code that is maintainable and working can be considered both good and high-quality.
depends, when Windows 8 gets more popular and people realise there's no apps available for it - because Microsoft charges 30% for a platform with few users and all the devs have jumped ship to making games for iOS.... maybe then we'll see Linux as the gaming platform for the PC.
'course they have to get good graphics drivers easily available first, and I doubt the ideology will be junked before Linux on the PC desktop goes. The steambox might save things, we'll have to see.
One thing Microsoft has done with Windows is to pinch all the great ideas in Linux, so today you have package managers and partition tools and all the other fancy things that a few years ago were Linux only.
One of the ideas they stole is the powerful command line, only they made it slightly less like an inbuilt scripting language and made it into a full-blown scripting language. Then they relented and made it into a full-blown scripting language built into a command line. Its called Powershell and you might like to check it out. Of course there's still a few bits of crap floating in the clear waters, like the abysmal implementation of WMI and the fact its mainly VB (but I suppose VB is a good language for easy accessibility) accessing a load of badly integrated.NET objects, but hey - you can't have everything.
VM dude. That old Windows PC that runs windows95 games just runs in a little virtual sandbox with more RMA than you could ever imagine existing back in 95. Or those old DOS games (of which there are many with excellent gameplay) run happily in either a DOS VM, or in an emulator like Dosbox.
This is why you don't see 2 PCs connected to the same monitor.
not really - you sell at the peak, and xbox division is there now. To maintain its position it'll have to maker a new xbox and we all know how much that costs!
So, get rid of it while you can really. And besides, since when did Uncle Fester do anything sensible? Really think he wouldn't sacrifice xbox at the altar of the twin Microsoft gods Windows and Office?
surely this a public service for burglars - now they know which homes *not* to target because they stand a chance of getting shot by the homeowner when they go to in take his valuables.
you're looking at it wrong - the compiler knows your code exists, what its structure is, and its that that matters - that you can create objects and populate them with data sourced from the JSON data stream is exactly what you should be doing.
Using reflection to take a data source and turn it into code is just the security problem that has already happened.
Also I found that generated code made debugging much easier - you can see the code that has been generated, step through it in the debugger. Runtime code creation is quite the opposite, mostly blackboxes of looping reflection and recursive functions.
its a poor way of achieving what a compiler should do for you - from the class definition, it should be able to generate the boilerplate so that you can pass in the json and have it nicely accessible, you don't need reflection to do that and the results are considerably more performant.
Nearly all uses of reflection should be replaced with some up-front thought for a different way of approaching the problem.
na, they say that the market for 3D printing will be driven by items that are uneconomical to manufacture due to small print runs.. and the Lumia phone is certainly the ideal target for that:)
I'm not, I assume that once the DMZ is opened up and the internet is allowed access to that 1 device with no firewall protection, all the other devices will quickly be in as corrupted as that 1 device.
It would really suck to be under an ISP that shows every customer coming from a single IP
not necessarily.... I'm waiting for the RIAA to come down hard against this carrier-grade NAT concept... Maybe someone should tell them they're trying to sneak this pirates free-pass in...:-)
I would hope that NAT64 is enabled by default on all home routers, so I can still stream from my IPv6 PC to my TV and whatever other old device still uses IPv4.
However, I wouldn't want, or care, if my legacy devices could see the real internet - if they could, that's a bonus, and I certainly do not want them addressable from outside my router. Considering these are the devices least likely to be upgrades, it would seem that NAT64 in my home would be the best option. The second best is just to run a dual stack on my PC.
Now, if only I can get a home dsl router and an ISP that supports IPv6:)
when you enable the "DMZ" option in the NAT configuration. Turn that on, and still think NAT = firewalled? Of course not. Well, you and I don't think that, but everyone who doesn't know the difference between a firewall and NAT will. And they're the ones we need to look out for.
Now if routers came "with a free, advanced firewall enabled by default", people would think twice before "turning the firewall off" when they'll switch DMZ on without hesitation.
Britain does have a competitive marketplace for broadband, there are hundreds of ISPs, and you can get fibre in several places (with more being rolled out all the time).
Sure you get better service if you live in a place where there are lots of other people who want broadband (as opposed to that lovely secluded farmhouse in the middle of fecking nowhere) but what else do you expect?
Prices are low too, so its only you guys in America who have a problem. But then, what else do you expect when you have such mega corporations holding you all to ransom.
I think the other reason was that the BB messaging stuff was secure so the cops couldn't intercept the messages you send to your mates when you were planning to go out and riot (the London riots were apparently inflamed massively because of BBM. It also has some nifty group features in it apparently. (I've not used it).
This is also why it was a hit with corporates - you email about the meeting you go to would be unavailable to people snooping on the wireless comms. (I make no comment about the value of the contents of these emails).
C#, for example, lets you write a case statement with strings, I don't think that gets implemented as a jump-table.
Anyway, never underestimate the ability of a compiler to optimize a bunch of if statements (assuming a single variable) into a lookup. If you compare a bunch of if-else statements using different variables in the expression to a single case statement then you're obviously not comparing like with like and sure, if won't be faster except for the case where you match the first if statement. Then I can see if outperforming a switch, and if you can make that call with known data, do it. I wouldn't want the above set of posts to be used to justify someone's stupid coding standards that mandate "always use switch as its faster".
So all in all, the generic question "is an if-else slower than a switch" is meaningless. If you do refine it it mean something more sensible such as comparing a bunch of if statements using the same integer variable to a case, then it can be faster or slower depending on the data you expect to get and the sparseness of the switch values.
Ultimately though, even if you're running a million if-else statements, the overall time taken will measured in a few ms anyway. That was my main point, if you're rewriting code to use switch statements "to make it faster" you're going to be disappointed.
case statements are not faster than if-else statements. Often a case statement will be turned into a load of if-else's by the compiler anyway (and a set of if-else statements could be turned a lookup table too!)
In any case, "far faster" is not true, the machine statements generated are tiny compared to every other inefficiency in a codebase. Thinking a case statement makes your code faster is like painting your car red to improve its speed when you've got a load of heavy junk in the boot.
Slashdot Mirror
when things go well, the CEO gets a huge bonus and says how his vision enabled all this to happen.
when things go wrong, its not his fault, its those stupid engineers and other people who actually do things, or its the consumer for being too stupid to realise what a great vision the great leader has.
I wouldn't accept that its only Ballmer's fault, you can add the senior leadership team to the list.
your answer was to install VLC rather than take it back and complain to the shop what a PoS is was and demand a Windows 7 laptop. And when they refuse (as they won't have any W7 machines) return it, nip round the corner and got her a iPad or a macbook.
that's true - I remember when MS paid Apache and Zend lots of money to make sure PHP and Apache web server was easy to install and worked well with Windows.
I'm sure those guys took the cash and said "stupid Microsoft, our stuff already works well on those platforms" and then built nice installers and walked away.... leaving Microsoft able to say that you can run all your PHP-style webapps on Windows. Around the same time they made Windows for Web (ie a cut-down version that web hosts could use instead of Linux) and the number of webhost servers with Windows OS increased dramatically.
the only kind of tunnelling you want is the NAT64 set up on your router - you don't really want IPv4 in the external internet coming into your home network once you have IPv6, but you'll still have a fair few devices internally (eg your TV) that only speak IPv4.
If they exist on the router, the average guy shouldn't have any worries except to enable the "IPv4 legacy mode" switch.
Sun?! the people who made Java so bad its still got massive security holes in it today.
No-one makes perfect code, its as simple as that. But if you recognise that the real world and imperfect humans are involved then any code that is maintainable and working can be considered both good and high-quality.
depends, when Windows 8 gets more popular and people realise there's no apps available for it - because Microsoft charges 30% for a platform with few users and all the devs have jumped ship to making games for iOS.... maybe then we'll see Linux as the gaming platform for the PC.
'course they have to get good graphics drivers easily available first, and I doubt the ideology will be junked before Linux on the PC desktop goes. The steambox might save things, we'll have to see.
not really - do try to keep up.
One thing Microsoft has done with Windows is to pinch all the great ideas in Linux, so today you have package managers and partition tools and all the other fancy things that a few years ago were Linux only.
One of the ideas they stole is the powerful command line, only they made it slightly less like an inbuilt scripting language and made it into a full-blown scripting language. Then they relented and made it into a full-blown scripting language built into a command line. Its called Powershell and you might like to check it out. Of course there's still a few bits of crap floating in the clear waters, like the abysmal implementation of WMI and the fact its mainly VB (but I suppose VB is a good language for easy accessibility) accessing a load of badly integrated .NET objects, but hey - you can't have everything.
VM dude. That old Windows PC that runs windows95 games just runs in a little virtual sandbox with more RMA than you could ever imagine existing back in 95. Or those old DOS games (of which there are many with excellent gameplay) run happily in either a DOS VM, or in an emulator like Dosbox.
This is why you don't see 2 PCs connected to the same monitor.
not really - you sell at the peak, and xbox division is there now. To maintain its position it'll have to maker a new xbox and we all know how much that costs!
So, get rid of it while you can really. And besides, since when did Uncle Fester do anything sensible? Really think he wouldn't sacrifice xbox at the altar of the twin Microsoft gods Windows and Office?
surely this a public service for burglars - now they know which homes *not* to target because they stand a chance of getting shot by the homeowner when they go to in take his valuables.
you're looking at it wrong - the compiler knows your code exists, what its structure is, and its that that matters - that you can create objects and populate them with data sourced from the JSON data stream is exactly what you should be doing.
Using reflection to take a data source and turn it into code is just the security problem that has already happened.
Also I found that generated code made debugging much easier - you can see the code that has been generated, step through it in the debugger. Runtime code creation is quite the opposite, mostly blackboxes of looping reflection and recursive functions.
Oracle tells you how (scroll down)
its a poor way of achieving what a compiler should do for you - from the class definition, it should be able to generate the boilerplate so that you can pass in the json and have it nicely accessible, you don't need reflection to do that and the results are considerably more performant.
Nearly all uses of reflection should be replaced with some up-front thought for a different way of approaching the problem.
na, they say that the market for 3D printing will be driven by items that are uneconomical to manufacture due to small print runs.. and the Lumia phone is certainly the ideal target for that :)
shame then that there are no security holes in html5 (as it does little) compared to the "modern" language that is full of them.
qmail. I understand the author offered a security bounty that's never been paid out.
I'm not, I assume that once the DMZ is opened up and the internet is allowed access to that 1 device with no firewall protection, all the other devices will quickly be in as corrupted as that 1 device.
It would really suck to be under an ISP that shows every customer coming from a single IP
not necessarily.... I'm waiting for the RIAA to come down hard against this carrier-grade NAT concept... Maybe someone should tell them they're trying to sneak this pirates free-pass in... :-)
I would hope that NAT64 is enabled by default on all home routers, so I can still stream from my IPv6 PC to my TV and whatever other old device still uses IPv4.
However, I wouldn't want, or care, if my legacy devices could see the real internet - if they could, that's a bonus, and I certainly do not want them addressable from outside my router. Considering these are the devices least likely to be upgrades, it would seem that NAT64 in my home would be the best option. The second best is just to run a dual stack on my PC.
Now, if only I can get a home dsl router and an ISP that supports IPv6 :)
How would NAT be implemented without a firewall?
when you enable the "DMZ" option in the NAT configuration. Turn that on, and still think NAT = firewalled? Of course not. Well, you and I don't think that, but everyone who doesn't know the difference between a firewall and NAT will. And they're the ones we need to look out for.
Now if routers came "with a free, advanced firewall enabled by default", people would think twice before "turning the firewall off" when they'll switch DMZ on without hesitation.
Britain does have a competitive marketplace for broadband, there are hundreds of ISPs, and you can get fibre in several places (with more being rolled out all the time).
Sure you get better service if you live in a place where there are lots of other people who want broadband (as opposed to that lovely secluded farmhouse in the middle of fecking nowhere) but what else do you expect?
Prices are low too, so its only you guys in America who have a problem. But then, what else do you expect when you have such mega corporations holding you all to ransom.
then you're rubbing the habanero extract on the wrong part of your body...
I think the other reason was that the BB messaging stuff was secure so the cops couldn't intercept the messages you send to your mates when you were planning to go out and riot (the London riots were apparently inflamed massively because of BBM. It also has some nifty group features in it apparently. (I've not used it).
This is also why it was a hit with corporates - you email about the meeting you go to would be unavailable to people snooping on the wireless comms. (I make no comment about the value of the contents of these emails).
I assume you're talking about C code.
C#, for example, lets you write a case statement with strings, I don't think that gets implemented as a jump-table.
Anyway, never underestimate the ability of a compiler to optimize a bunch of if statements (assuming a single variable) into a lookup. If you compare a bunch of if-else statements using different variables in the expression to a single case statement then you're obviously not comparing like with like and sure, if won't be faster except for the case where you match the first if statement. Then I can see if outperforming a switch, and if you can make that call with known data, do it. I wouldn't want the above set of posts to be used to justify someone's stupid coding standards that mandate "always use switch as its faster".
So all in all, the generic question "is an if-else slower than a switch" is meaningless. If you do refine it it mean something more sensible such as comparing a bunch of if statements using the same integer variable to a case, then it can be faster or slower depending on the data you expect to get and the sparseness of the switch values.
Ultimately though, even if you're running a million if-else statements, the overall time taken will measured in a few ms anyway. That was my main point, if you're rewriting code to use switch statements "to make it faster" you're going to be disappointed.
case statements are not faster than if-else statements. Often a case statement will be turned into a load of if-else's by the compiler anyway (and a set of if-else statements could be turned a lookup table too!)
In any case, "far faster" is not true, the machine statements generated are tiny compared to every other inefficiency in a codebase. Thinking a case statement makes your code faster is like painting your car red to improve its speed when you've got a load of heavy junk in the boot.