When I was in charge of government laptops, we disabled booting off of anything but the hard drive and locked the BIOS with a password. Sure, the user could reset it, but we'd know that they did so.
The point isn't whether you think that what you're doing is OK. The point is that you aren't authorized to make that decision.
The site where US military personnel manage their pay information uses a system like that. It's fucking annoying. It would be worth it if it were effective, but I've heard that modern "keyloggers" also take a snapshot around every mouse click specifically to defeat those kinds of schemes.
The site also uses smartcard-based client certificate authentication. Too bad card readers aren't ubiquitous (not to mention sites that accept client certs for authentication).
We had an Internet Cafe (through a commercial ISP) at two locations inside the fence. It served two purposes -- first, we had a lot of folks visiting us who might need to access blocked sites. Second, it could be used by visiting foreign nationals who weren't cleared to use NIPRNet (we also had a classified LAN for them to use). We periodically re-imaged the cafe, but we didn't really care enough to do it frequently.
The point is that people who work in classified environments can't bring camera phones/smartphones to work (even to leave in their car)
I've seen a lot of secure government facilities, and I've *never* seen a secure parking lot. Hell, you'd have to ban cars with GPS and Onstar (which pretty much rules out any rental cars that a DV might have). Also, having a cell phone available during trips is a safety issue.
If it's anything like the secure facilities I've worked in, they have cell phone detectors all over the place. Turn your phone on, and a klaxon starts blaring...
That said, the grandparent is probably misunderstanding policy. It's a common misconception due to being told to remove the battery immediately if you find that you've accidentally snuck a cell phone onto the compound.
Information Systems? Sounds like a step down from Underwater Basketweaving. You took a mickey mouse class in a mickey mouse major. What did you expect?
Both of those features were added to C after C++ was standardized. In particular, C99 VLAs were invented after C++ vectors (which were mostly solidified as part of the STL by the time of the C95 library update). As for your comparison, it would be interesting to know the specifics of your measurements (code, etc).
The current C++ folks are more interested in fixing the mess they made with templates. Designated initializers would be mostly unnecessary if the language supported named argument mapping a la Ada and ColdFusion. I believe the general feeling is that C++ doesn't need more support for PODs.
C++ was never a superset of C, and it was never intended to be such. Trivially,
int main(void) {
int class = 0;
return 0;
}
was never a valid C++ or Cfront program, but it has always been (and probably will always be) a valid C program.
I'm not an expert on Cfront, but I do know that there are quite a few major differences between C and ARM C++ (sizeof character literals, meaning of empty argument list, type conversions), so your characterization of C++ as having diverged from a superset of C recently is off the mark.
I'll see your 5 on the A and the AB, and I'll raise you a 5 in two different languages (Pascal for the A, C++ for the AB). Interestingly, the case study was the same in both languages (a BigNum library).
As far as the switch to Java from C++ goes, manual memory deallocation issues are just a red herring. There's no use of polymorphism in the AP curriculum, and they proscribed the use of their own "apvector" template container instead of arrays (basically a clone of std::vector, but this was back in '99 when a lot of folks were still using horribly pre-standard compilers).
The switch to C++ had been in the works for years, and then the year it happened, they announced that they would be switching again to Java. My teacher told us that at the conference where they made the announcement, they stated it was because colleges were more frequently using Java. ETS had always had a problem with the AP CS exam getting accepted -- the usual excuse was that it was in the wrong language (like that matters). So they were trying to jump languages to try to get more folks to accept the exam for credit (and hence entice more students to take the exam).
No one needs to know about memory management by hand
Unfortunately, no matter what language you use, you MUST learn to deal with resource management. True, garbage collection nicely solves a subset of the resource management problem, but it's a depressingly incomplete solution that, IMO, encourages a false sense of security.
Oh, how I long for scoped object lifetime and the power of the RAII idiom in Java! Finally blocks are a poor substitute.
Far from being a "nice thing", GUI is nothing but a distraction in the context of an introductory algorithms course (which is what the AP CS course is). Learning how to deal with asynchronous user interaction has its place -- but when you're trying to learn big-Oh, trees, and the trade-offs between the well-known sorting algorithms, dealing with a GUI is just a waste of time.
The insurance limit is 130 klicks (85 MPH). I lived there from 2004-2007, so maybe things were different when you were there. In my experience, "flow of traffic" is usually about 120.
The C++ language spec doesn't make that distinction. The standard library is part of the language.
You could just as well say that is really the stream insertion operator, and that its use with integers is the overload. Only historical accident lends any credence to one view over the other.
Slashdot Mirror
When I was in charge of government laptops, we disabled booting off of anything but the hard drive and locked the BIOS with a password. Sure, the user could reset it, but we'd know that they did so.
The point isn't whether you think that what you're doing is OK. The point is that you aren't authorized to make that decision.
The site where US military personnel manage their pay information uses a system like that. It's fucking annoying. It would be worth it if it were effective, but I've heard that modern "keyloggers" also take a snapshot around every mouse click specifically to defeat those kinds of schemes.
The site also uses smartcard-based client certificate authentication. Too bad card readers aren't ubiquitous (not to mention sites that accept client certs for authentication).
We had an Internet Cafe (through a commercial ISP) at two locations inside the fence. It served two purposes -- first, we had a lot of folks visiting us who might need to access blocked sites. Second, it could be used by visiting foreign nationals who weren't cleared to use NIPRNet (we also had a classified LAN for them to use). We periodically re-imaged the cafe, but we didn't really care enough to do it frequently.
The point is that people who work in classified environments can't bring camera phones/smartphones to work (even to leave in their car)
I've seen a lot of secure government facilities, and I've *never* seen a secure parking lot. Hell, you'd have to ban cars with GPS and Onstar (which pretty much rules out any rental cars that a DV might have). Also, having a cell phone available during trips is a safety issue.
If it's anything like the secure facilities I've worked in, they have cell phone detectors all over the place. Turn your phone on, and a klaxon starts blaring...
That said, the grandparent is probably misunderstanding policy. It's a common misconception due to being told to remove the battery immediately if you find that you've accidentally snuck a cell phone onto the compound.
Information Systems? Sounds like a step down from Underwater Basketweaving.
You took a mickey mouse class in a mickey mouse major. What did you expect?
What part of any curriculum is that information in?
It was in my high school US history book.
My text-mode interface to Sybase is called tsql. Oracle ships with a web interface called iSQL, though.
Both of those features were added to C after C++ was standardized. In particular, C99 VLAs were invented after C++ vectors (which were mostly solidified as part of the STL by the time of the C95 library update). As for your comparison, it would be interesting to know the specifics of your measurements (code, etc).
The current C++ folks are more interested in fixing the mess they made with templates. Designated initializers would be mostly unnecessary if the language supported named argument mapping a la Ada and ColdFusion. I believe the general feeling is that C++ doesn't need more support for PODs.
C++ was never a superset of C, and it was never intended to be such. Trivially,
int main(void) {
int class = 0;
return 0;
}
was never a valid C++ or Cfront program, but it has always been (and probably will always be) a valid C program.
I'm not an expert on Cfront, but I do know that there are quite a few major differences between C and ARM C++ (sizeof character literals, meaning of empty argument list, type conversions), so your characterization of C++ as having diverged from a superset of C recently is off the mark.
"How many Libraries of Congress can I process in a fortnight with one hand?"
The LoC has pr0n?
Now, if they were making this list in Java, I don't really think they'd have much of a problem...
Consider a linked list where each node contains an open file handle. Memory isn't the only resource you have to manage.
I'll see your 5 on the A and the AB, and I'll raise you a 5 in two different languages (Pascal for the A, C++ for the AB). Interestingly, the case study was the same in both languages (a BigNum library).
As far as the switch to Java from C++ goes, manual memory deallocation issues are just a red herring. There's no use of polymorphism in the AP curriculum, and they proscribed the use of their own "apvector" template container instead of arrays (basically a clone of std::vector, but this was back in '99 when a lot of folks were still using horribly pre-standard compilers).
The switch to C++ had been in the works for years, and then the year it happened, they announced that they would be switching again to Java. My teacher told us that at the conference where they made the announcement, they stated it was because colleges were more frequently using Java. ETS had always had a problem with the AP CS exam getting accepted -- the usual excuse was that it was in the wrong language (like that matters). So they were trying to jump languages to try to get more folks to accept the exam for credit (and hence entice more students to take the exam).
No one needs to know about memory management by hand
Unfortunately, no matter what language you use, you MUST learn to deal with resource management. True, garbage collection nicely solves a subset of the resource management problem, but it's a depressingly incomplete solution that, IMO, encourages a false sense of security.
Oh, how I long for scoped object lifetime and the power of the RAII idiom in Java! Finally blocks are a poor substitute.
Far from being a "nice thing", GUI is nothing but a distraction in the context of an introductory algorithms course (which is what the AP CS course is). Learning how to deal with asynchronous user interaction has its place -- but when you're trying to learn big-Oh, trees, and the trade-offs between the well-known sorting algorithms, dealing with a GUI is just a waste of time.
None of those are forks of Glibc. They are all C library implementations
So what? We're talking about division of effort -- a fork and an alternative ground-up implementation have the same effect.
and all of the ones you list are minimal implementations aimed at embedded systems.
Exactly. Wouldn't it suck if glibc were the only choice?
Let's have multiple forks of glibc then!
You mean like uClibc, klibc, dietlibc, etc?
And the kernel!
You mean like all those various kernel patches people use? Or maybe the BSDs vs Darwin vs Linux vs Solaris?
and coreutils!
You mean like BusyBox?
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.
Kudos to the Census people, and to House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Neb) for supporting and encouraging their wise decision.
That's former Speaker. Also, he was from Illinois (which the article got wrong).
You have to include (unless having your hand held by Visual Studio or similar). You don't have to include !
So what?
That's exactly what I did until I was 25.
The insurance limit is 130 klicks (85 MPH). I lived there from 2004-2007, so maybe things were different when you were there. In my experience, "flow of traffic" is usually about 120.
The C++ language spec doesn't make that distinction. The standard library is part of the language.
You could just as well say that is really the stream insertion operator, and that its use with integers is the overload. Only historical accident lends any credence to one view over the other.
Yeah, I guess you're just a better person than me.
Nah, I don't mind it, so long as I don't use VBScript.