Programming in assembly lose you all your flexibility when dealing with data.
You might. A competent assembler programmer won't. Low level programming isn't right for everything, but sometimes you need the level of control it provides. True, it's *harder* to use assembler well, but it's nowhere near impossible.
Thank you for posting that - people using effect when they mean affect is one of my pet hates.
I wonder if the person who wrote the email realises that they said that the new restrictions will magically create competitors out of thin air. Hmm, wait a minute...
Maybe something up north a tad would be better? Near Northgate?
Fremont might be worth considering. There are a few spacious bars (the Dubliner in particular is a great meeting spot), it's easy to get to by bus and there's plenty of on-street parking.
Wish I could have made it to this one but work intervened...
Dunno about the ARM specifically, but on some processors the operating frequency is derived indirectly from the crystal via a PLL (phase locked loop) which can be programmatically set to a multiplier. At full speed the multiplier will be something like 4x but it can be set lower.
The trick is usually to put the CPU in standby mode while the PLL stabilises to the new frequency, after which it can be started up again. One problem is that the stabilisation time is relatively long - tens of milliseconds - so the CPU speed can't be changed during any time-sensitive operations. Another problem is that any code which relies on the CPU speed for time calculations will break (although code like that is, IMO, broken in the first place).
In summary, it can probably be done but it's not trivial and might have unexpected consequences.
Did you ever consider MS's other responses at face value, ie, they did not recompile for V5 because it would render incompatible all their partners and clients applications
Yes I did, and they don't hold any water. I suggest you read your response above and consider why it doesn't make any sense (hint - the OS is not an application). Like I said, this has to have been a business decision.
Having said that, your point about MS not liking multiplatform support is spot on. MS has some very competent programmers - that's not at issue. The problem is at the corporate decision making level.
As to solving all their problems with a tarted up p-code system, well, if that's going to work at any sort of acceptable speed then they'll *really* need to optimise for the processor.
MS : "Moving to ARM V5 would break upgrade compatibility."
Translation : "We can't or won't write portable code."
There's absolutely no technical reason they can't take advantage of the V5 enhancements while still retaining support for ARM V4 and a common code base. This must have been a business decision, but I can't fathom the thought processes which led to it.
INSTRUCTIONS: For results that can be the finest, it is our advising that: Never to hold these buttons two times!! Except the battery. Next, taking the (something) earth section may cause a large occurrence! However. If this is not a trouble, such rotation is a very maintenance action, as a kindly (something) viewpoint from Drawing B.
>I would assume that the embedded and high-security markets would be the biggest proponents of microkernel design
In a word, yes, at least in the embedded world. However, the usual philosophy there is the opposite to what you might be used to: you start with the smallest functional kernel and add things as they're needed instead of trying to shrink a larger system down to fit.
For example, a kernel based on (for example) the ITRON spec can start out at 30K or less for a multitasking preemptive system with "soft" real-time characteristics. Adding virtual memory and other bells and whistles increases the size, but for an embedded system these often aren't needed.
Those are the SL-5000 developer versions, which cost at most $399 in the first place. They were being sold even more cheaply at Java One, so those auction prices are actually pretty reasonable.
I pronounce it the way it's spelled : "vi" (like the abbreviation of the name "Violet"). So does everyone else I've heard say it. One syllable vs. two, so it's easier and faster that way. I'm not religious about it though - if they passed a pronunciation law I could always switch to emacs.
Slashdot Mirror
'Nuff said.
I knew I shouldn't have tried deadpan on /.
Oh well, live and learn.
Ypu're supposed to be reviewing the facts, thinking for yourself and drawing your own conclusions.
I just hope the humour was intentional.
In the private sector, everything is based upon relative merit.
Quite true. For example, if you're a relative of the CEO then you're bound to go far.
Programming in assembly lose you all your flexibility when dealing with data.
You might. A competent assembler programmer won't. Low level programming isn't right for everything, but sometimes you need the level of control it provides. True, it's *harder* to use assembler well, but it's nowhere near impossible.
Alright then, how about wear and tear on the keyboard. Not to mention the huuuge bandwidth saving. ;)
:wq
:x and save yourself a keystroke.
Use
Thank you for posting that - people using effect when they mean affect is one of my pet hates.
I wonder if the person who wrote the email realises that they said that the new restrictions will magically create competitors out of thin air. Hmm, wait a minute...
I'll second what the AC said, and as a special one-time offer you get a free link to it. LyX is truly the best word processor I've come across.
Maybe something up north a tad would be better? Near Northgate?
Fremont might be worth considering. There are a few spacious bars (the Dubliner in particular is a great meeting spot), it's easy to get to by bus and there's plenty of on-street parking.
Wish I could have made it to this one but work intervened...
Dunno about the ARM specifically, but on some processors the operating frequency is derived indirectly from the crystal via a PLL (phase locked loop) which can be programmatically set to a multiplier. At full speed the multiplier will be something like 4x but it can be set lower.
The trick is usually to put the CPU in standby mode while the PLL stabilises to the new frequency, after which it can be started up again. One problem is that the stabilisation time is relatively long - tens of milliseconds - so the CPU speed can't be changed during any time-sensitive operations. Another problem is that any code which relies on the CPU speed for time calculations will break (although code like that is, IMO, broken in the first place).
In summary, it can probably be done but it's not trivial and might have unexpected consequences.
Did you ever consider MS's other responses at face value, ie, they did not recompile for V5 because it would render incompatible all their partners and clients applications
Yes I did, and they don't hold any water. I suggest you read your response above and consider why it doesn't make any sense (hint - the OS is not an application). Like I said, this has to have been a business decision.
Having said that, your point about MS not liking multiplatform support is spot on. MS has some very competent programmers - that's not at issue. The problem is at the corporate decision making level.
As to solving all their problems with a tarted up p-code system, well, if that's going to work at any sort of acceptable speed then they'll *really* need to optimise for the processor.
MS : "Moving to ARM V5 would break upgrade compatibility."
Translation : "We can't or won't write portable code."
There's absolutely no technical reason they can't take advantage of the V5 enhancements while still retaining support for ARM V4 and a common code base. This must have been a business decision, but I can't fathom the thought processes which led to it.
That is a sweet little script (and prompted me to finally get CGI properly set up on this machine). Thanks for posting it.
No, they won't want to do that. Remember the "teach a man to fish" principle and consider how it applies to a fishmonger.
>the same two plots stretched out to 13 shows
Ok, I give up. What was the other plot?
I found a copy of the full version here.
My favourite bit :
INSTRUCTIONS: For results that can be the finest, it is our advising that: Never to hold these buttons two times!! Except the battery. Next, taking the (something) earth section may cause a large occurrence! However. If this is not a trouble, such rotation is a very maintenance action, as a kindly (something) viewpoint from Drawing B.
From the article :
:)
"[...] a spokesman for SuSE, the German company supplying the version of Linux involved in the deal [...]"
You were saying?
Let me guess, you're a salesman who writes poetry, yes?
>I would assume that the embedded and high-security markets would be the biggest proponents of microkernel design
In a word, yes, at least in the embedded world. However, the usual philosophy there is the opposite to what you might be used to: you start with the smallest functional kernel and add things as they're needed instead of trying to shrink a larger system down to fit.
For example, a kernel based on (for example) the ITRON spec can start out at 30K or less for a multitasking preemptive system with "soft" real-time characteristics. Adding virtual memory and other bells and whistles increases the size, but for an embedded system these often aren't needed.
Arrgh! And here's me without any mod points ;p
Hmm, GNU/Peru. Has a nice ring to it and it even rhymes.
Those are the SL-5000 developer versions, which cost at most $399 in the first place. They were being sold even more cheaply at Java One, so those auction prices are actually pretty reasonable.
I pronounce it the way it's spelled : "vi" (like the abbreviation of the name "Violet"). So does everyone else I've heard say it. One syllable vs. two, so it's easier and faster that way. I'm not religious about it though - if they passed a pronunciation law I could always switch to emacs.