Hate to say it but I have infinitely more respect for the aerospace people. Yes, their stuff occasionally ends up like expensive fireworks but they do get a lot of things right.
I often wonder if it weren't better to chuck out the compiler and sit down and THINK about how this piece of code should work. Seriously think about whether the stuff is right, then when I am convinced bet with my colleagues that I did get it right. Then compile, then test. Being ready to take the well-deserved ridicule if it did not compile and run at first; loose the bet.
Mindless writing, compiling, testing, debugging is incredibly wasteful. What if I spent four times as much time on getting it the first time? Wouldn't that give me an overall gain in time&money?
A femtogram is a billionth of a billionth of a gram, or roughly the mass of 122 gold atoms.
This is a misunderstanding on the part of the article's author, I am sure. There are 10^15 femtograms to a gram in my book?
I am time and time again confused by the meaning of the word "billion" on either side of the North Atlantic but I take that the Usonian value is 10^9, right?
I just went to the US last week and brought with me a 8890. I love that phone. It is one of the best looking mobilephones of all times if you ask me (which - of course - you didn't:-). I worked fine in Southern California. Too bad that the newer models taking over the 8890 segment aren't as nice. Nice to have both the features and the looks.
My next phone is going to be the 6610 which is tri-band. Otherwise go for the better Ericsson models. They are all tri-band now. One can get trouble with a dual-band 900/1900 phone in urban areas in Europe due to scarce bandwidth. With a combined 900/1800/1900 that isn't a problem I am told.
O(n) is linear time, O(1) is constant time. So, no, it can't take longer as the number of processes increases. An O(1) implementation must have exactly the same complexity regardless of how much data is presented. Thats why this is the holy grail of algorithm design.
Actually, O(1) means that it is bounded by a constant so that the time can keep increasing as the input size increases.
Or look at Ada 95 next time you need to design a piece of multithreaded software. Ada has threading capabilities build into the language, and has proper array datatypes so there is no need to fiddle with pointers and worry about checking of boundaries.
Ada rights many of the wrongs of Pascal and has a strong and rich type system build in.
I am amazed that so many insist on staying away from modern languages that make it easy to find bugs at compile time. Oh well.
The GNAT compiler is GPL'ed and available for Win32 and Linux and quite a number of other platforms.
Slashdot Mirror
Hate to say it but I have infinitely more respect for the aerospace people. Yes, their stuff occasionally ends up like expensive fireworks but they do get a lot of things right.
I often wonder if it weren't better to chuck out the compiler and sit down and THINK about how this piece of code should work. Seriously think about whether the stuff is right, then when I am convinced bet with my colleagues that I did get it right. Then compile, then test. Being ready to take the well-deserved ridicule if it did not compile and run at first; loose the bet.
Mindless writing, compiling, testing, debugging is incredibly wasteful. What if I spent four times as much time on getting it the first time? Wouldn't that give me an overall gain in time&money?
Just a provocation, anyway
A femtogram is a billionth of a billionth of a gram, or roughly the mass of 122 gold atoms.
This is a misunderstanding on the part of the article's author, I am sure. There are 10^15 femtograms to a gram in my book?
I am time and time again confused by the meaning of the word "billion" on either side of the North Atlantic but I take that the Usonian value is 10^9, right?
Sorry, just confused.
I just went to the US last week and brought with me a 8890. I love that phone. It is one of the best looking mobilephones of all times if you ask me (which - of course - you didn't :-). I worked fine in Southern California. Too bad that the newer models taking over the 8890 segment aren't as nice. Nice to have both the features and the looks.
My next phone is going to be the 6610 which is tri-band. Otherwise go for the better Ericsson models. They are all tri-band now. One can get trouble with a dual-band 900/1900 phone in urban areas in Europe due to scarce bandwidth. With a combined 900/1800/1900 that isn't a problem I am told.
Cheers,
RiF
Actually, O(1) means that it is bounded by a constant so that the time can keep increasing as the input size increases.
Think a-b/n for n->infty
[stuff about writing in Kylix]
Or look at Ada 95 next time you need to design a piece of multithreaded software. Ada has threading capabilities build into the language, and has proper array datatypes so there is no need to fiddle with pointers and worry about checking of boundaries.
Ada rights many of the wrongs of Pascal and has a strong and rich type system build in.
I am amazed that so many insist on staying away from modern languages that make it easy to find bugs at compile time. Oh well.
The GNAT compiler is GPL'ed and available for Win32 and Linux and quite a number of other platforms.