Because, some of us simply have preferences? Otherwise, I'd easily say, why Konq? It's a piece of crap blah blah blah, which is both wrong and unfair, 'cause somebody likes it.
So why Mozilla/Qt? (vs gnu?:) 'cause someone is interested and are trying to get the other people who are interested to wake up. That's why not.:)
Screw shortest.. i want a way to use my laces that are too long for the shoes i have without buying new ones. Cutting them will only give me frayed eneds.
But aren't they, the radio companies, paying royalty fees in the first place? Double dipping it seems.. or am i gonna have to start charging royalty fees for my family.. c'mmon...
It's just syntax and organization that's new. With concept programming, things don't look like objects anymore.. just verbs.. kinda freaky. I think it the concept looks more... lispish.. where you can take a function, throw anything at it and "do something" with what is passed.
Your base. You are still based on objects with nouns that have the abilities. Reverse it where you have abilities or qualities and depending on what you throw at it, they get evaluated differently.
It's not to say you can't do it with OOP or AOP, it's just the syntax that is different. Just like you can do procedural or AOP within OOP.. typically you don't.
The default install of sendmail is as easy to admin as qmail. A lot of the simple features are enabled by default, like virtualhosts, access lists, etc..
In terms of speed, for a machine that's not churning millions of mail a day, it's "good enough". Don't need a club to kill mosquitos:)
Problem is, in OOP, everything is an object, or a thing.
In AOP (aspect object programming) everything is a verb and a matter of flow. I.e. after doing one thing, you do another. Of if this action is taken, this must be taken. Sorta trigger driven.
In concept, everything seems to be more verb/adjective like. I.e. you wouldn't create a Max object or a Drive object or a Smell object in OOP. You'd create things that have a max() method, or a drive() or smell() method. You'd create the concept of smell() and prolly return something that describes the result of finding the max(), or driving() or smelling().
I mean the prover of the audio. They charge you 9 bux for a cd, 660 or so megs for a full cd, assuming. That's a lot of data for the provider to pump through...
Slashdot Mirror
We should learn from Microsoft. It shouldn't me ADSL2... but ADSL2002. It's not just twice better, but 2002 times. :)
Because, some of us simply have preferences? Otherwise, I'd easily say, why Konq? It's a piece of crap blah blah blah, which is both wrong and unfair, 'cause somebody likes it.
:) 'cause someone is interested and are trying to get the other people who are interested to wake up. That's why not. :)
So why Mozilla/Qt? (vs gnu?
Did he just compare Windows to FreeBSD to Linux?
:)
I never could understand art
Consider it a metric conversion error :)
Screw shortest.. i want a way to use my laces that are too long for the shoes i have without buying new ones. Cutting them will only give me frayed eneds.
-s
Well, the source would be in assembler ;) Just need a good assembly editor and the binary. :)
Remember, it has to be done as an ELF binary. So you have to write a minimal header, then print a string :)
-s
Heh, don't get me wrong, but the idea of using a cable as a network medium is older than Windows.
Ethernet, serial cables, RS-232, SCSI..
Then maybe they should take your first sentence a little more literal and just shoot him :)
But aren't they, the radio companies, paying royalty fees in the first place? Double dipping it seems.. or am i gonna have to start charging royalty fees for my family.. c'mmon...
Yeah, but DOS'ing a DHCP server over wireless means your internal network can't even get an IP... which can screw up some bootups.
Because your DHCP server becomes vulnerable, since it does everything in a non-encrypted protcol, where as with PPP, everything is encrypted.
'sides, you can DOS a dhcp server by taking all IP's possible.
It's been done.. it's called a cup of sugar. Imagine a cake of these would be .. tasty :)
Me too.
I want replication too.
Thanks in advance.
But it's not a resource hog. Works quiet well at that.
It's just syntax and organization that's new. With concept programming, things don't look like objects anymore.. just verbs.. kinda freaky. I think it the concept looks more... lispish.. where you can take a function, throw anything at it and "do something" with what is passed.
Know what I mean?
Your base. You are still based on objects with nouns that have the abilities. Reverse it where you have abilities or qualities and depending on what you throw at it, they get evaluated differently.
It's not to say you can't do it with OOP or AOP, it's just the syntax that is different. Just like you can do procedural or AOP within OOP.. typically you don't.
Didn't Star Trek, TNG, coin it?
;P
Or was it the game Simon... the memory game..
or maybe it was the 70's?
I doubt XP did it first
Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one. :)
:)
The default install of sendmail is as easy to admin as qmail. A lot of the simple features are enabled by default, like virtualhosts, access lists, etc..
In terms of speed, for a machine that's not churning millions of mail a day, it's "good enough". Don't need a club to kill mosquitos
Problem is, in OOP, everything is an object, or a thing.
In AOP (aspect object programming) everything is a verb and a matter of flow. I.e. after doing one thing, you do another. Of if this action is taken, this must be taken. Sorta trigger driven.
In concept, everything seems to be more verb/adjective like. I.e. you wouldn't create a Max object or a Drive object or a Smell object in OOP. You'd create things that have a max() method, or a drive() or smell() method. You'd create the concept of smell() and prolly return something that describes the result of finding the max(), or driving() or smelling().
I mean the prover of the audio. They charge you 9 bux for a cd, 660 or so megs for a full cd, assuming. That's a lot of data for the provider to pump through...
How much cost in bandwidth, monetary, will that be again?
No.. not like that. 8 is a power of 2, 12 isn't :P
Emergency bugfix release? :)
If only companies worked this quick...
Far cry nothing. Load balancers do use the roundrobin and hash algorithms.