You *may* be wrong. I've been able to run a toolchain of doxygen|latex|ps2pdf and end up with a hyperlinked pdf with a bookmared index. But I have no comprehension of how this works. I don't know why I didn't use pdflatex, but I very clearly remember this working.
Man, MS really could stand to take a page from apple when it comes to designing their hardware gadtes. Or from anyone else, really - why would I want to string up a little antenna with an ethernet cord and its own power source? I'd much rather plug something into the side of my console or even the back. How hard would it have been to put a couple of usb ports on the back of the xbox for the purpose of integrating little gadgets like this?
I just switched to it from outlook today. Exchange server does imap, and my corporation has an ldap directory too. So I really don't even miss it besides a two or three minute email delay. And plus, I can leave outlook running in the background with mail notification turned off to just give me my appointments.
Weak != Dynamic. Python is strongly, dynamically typed. Perl's is just wierd, I wouldn't call it strong or weak.
The killer feature of ML derivatives is type inference, which in theory gives you the benefits of declaritve static typing (like C or Java) without the hassle and those of dynamic typing without the uncertainty.
A "rich palette of languages"? Let's see, three statically typed object-oriented languages and one dynamically typed object-oriented half language. I seem to remember there being MORE to programming than objects.
In this same sense, functions are useless because you can just write the code inline and use GOTOs. Using macros can add another level of abstraction to your code and can make it more expressive. The perceived cost of that it reduces readability for people not familiar with a particular set of macros.
Caveat: I know very little about email in the real world. These are just my thoughts.
What are your requirements? Do you have very limited hardware to work with? Do you need a particularly low latency for delivery? How many messages do you need to process per minute? (or per second)
If it's possible, having a seperate spam filtering box might be a good idea. If that gets loaded down you could even make a cluster of them. I'm not sure that high-level spam filtering really takes as much cpu time as you're implying, but even so it should be pretty simple to set up something like this.
Another possibility is to limit the amount of cpu time that the spam filitering process takes and simply bypass it when it can't be done. Perhaps a mail can wait a maximum of 10 seconds before being automatically sent on. This could even be combined with a seperate server or cluster approach. I have no idea how this would be implemented, though I have a hunch that qmail or exim would be at least extensible enough to allow it. I think it's worth jumping through hoops to keep the high level spam filitering.
Thirdly, you could try turning the mail filter into a "server" program itself, so you don't have to start a new process for each email you filter.
Mono is not complete. It is not even yet comparable to the "Shared Source" version, which is less complete than the windows verison.
Though I've had limited experience with.NET, and only then with C# on BSD, it's pretty obvious that a lot of the standard library was designed around COM and Windows in general. Many parts of the standard library are crippled to the least-common denominator of the.NET platform: visual basic. What does this mean? No interoperability with unsigned data types, for one.
Incidentally, the article's claims that there are no equivalences to ".class" files in.NET is completely false. They have these things called "netmodules" which are just that, as far as I can tell. There is very little documentation on the subject.
To finish ranting, any claims that.NET is an "open" platform are for the most part just false.
I wouldn't be so certain. I've been keeping an eye out for blatent product-central postings, and there's usually one almost every day. I wouldn't be surprised if they were paid.
Slashdot Mirror
Give it a dumb knock-off name ending in -ster. This will ensure that your users think it's hip and that using it makes them badasses.
You *may* be wrong. I've been able to run a toolchain of doxygen|latex|ps2pdf and end up with a hyperlinked pdf with a bookmared index. But I have no comprehension of how this works. I don't know why I didn't use pdflatex, but I very clearly remember this working.
Are you kidding? I can imagine no better bug.
And then call it by its symbol: a little steaming pile of shit.
Yet the dissapate more heat when they're busier, somehow....
Sounds to me like our favorite Hipster, Johnny Deep.
If you shop at the right place you can get a whole carton for 2 bucks.
Yeah whatever - research also suggest that eating eggs, bacon, and screwing goats 3 times per day also has health benefits.
Man, MS really could stand to take a page from apple when it comes to designing their hardware gadtes. Or from anyone else, really - why would I want to string up a little antenna with an ethernet cord and its own power source? I'd much rather plug something into the side of my console or even the back. How hard would it have been to put a couple of usb ports on the back of the xbox for the purpose of integrating little gadgets like this?
Depends. Who wrote it?
I just switched to it from outlook today. Exchange server does imap, and my corporation has an ldap directory too. So I really don't even miss it besides a two or three minute email delay. And plus, I can leave outlook running in the background with mail notification turned off to just give me my appointments.
Yes, they cheat.
> The most important is changing the deviant
> desires of rob malda for young boys, not only
> approving pro-free software laws
C'mon, can't you even READ it before moderating?
*sigh*
Weak != Dynamic.
Python is strongly, dynamically typed. Perl's is just wierd, I wouldn't call it strong or weak.
The killer feature of ML derivatives is type inference, which in theory gives you the benefits of declaritve static typing (like C or Java) without the hassle and those of dynamic typing without the uncertainty.
A "rich palette of languages"? Let's see, three statically typed object-oriented languages and one dynamically typed object-oriented half language. I seem to remember there being MORE to programming than objects.
But that's just me.
It should probably read "for those for whom the GPL is not suitable."
In this same sense, functions are useless because you can just write the code inline and use GOTOs. Using macros can add another level of abstraction to your code and can make it more expressive. The perceived cost of that it reduces readability for people not familiar with a particular set of macros.
I will.
Related game: Marble Blast. It's quite a lot of fun for only 15 bucks.
Caveat: I know very little about email in the real world. These are just my thoughts.
What are your requirements? Do you have very limited hardware to work with? Do you need a particularly low latency for delivery? How many messages do you need to process per minute? (or per second)
If it's possible, having a seperate spam filtering box might be a good idea. If that gets loaded down you could even make a cluster of them. I'm not sure that high-level spam filtering really takes as much cpu time as you're implying, but even so it should be pretty simple to set up something like this.
Another possibility is to limit the amount of cpu time that the spam filitering process takes and simply bypass it when it can't be done. Perhaps a mail can wait a maximum of 10 seconds before being automatically sent on. This could even be combined with a seperate server or cluster approach. I have no idea how this would be implemented, though I have a hunch that qmail or exim would be at least extensible enough to allow it. I think it's worth jumping through hoops to keep the high level spam filitering.
Thirdly, you could try turning the mail filter into a "server" program itself, so you don't have to start a new process for each email you filter.
Mono is not complete. It is not even yet comparable to the "Shared Source" version, which is less complete than the windows verison.
.NET, and only then with C# on BSD, it's pretty obvious that a lot of the standard library was designed around COM and Windows in general. Many parts of the standard library are crippled to the least-common denominator of the .NET platform: visual basic. What does this mean? No interoperability with unsigned data types, for one.
.NET is completely false. They have these things called "netmodules" which are just that, as far as I can tell. There is very little documentation on the subject.
.NET is an "open" platform are for the most part just false.
Though I've had limited experience with
Incidentally, the article's claims that there are no equivalences to ".class" files in
To finish ranting, any claims that
ooh! shiny! *poing*
I played the alto sax in high school. My mother ran over it with the minivan. Grr.
Except that this is an interview.
I wouldn't be so certain. I've been keeping an eye out for blatent product-central postings, and there's usually one almost every day. I wouldn't be surprised if they were paid.