C++ still requires some undestanding of hand optimizations specific to the language.
I don't think compilers optimize this construct.
for(;;) {
MatrixClass C(3,3);//do something with class. }
The C++ compiler will call the constructor/destructor every loop when it probably isn't needed. C++ and the "hidden" memory allocation, constructor, destructor calls can be a problem without arranging the code properly by hand.
Passengers know when to pause the conversation so the driver can concentrate more when needed. I've even heard of women who help their husbands drive with real-time driving tips.
The person on the other end of the cell phone doesn't know when to shutup to let the driver concentrate.
Banning babies from cars might be ok. I've seen way too many women driving while looking backwards.
Our understanding of gravity is not complete. There is still research being done. http://www.mrelativity.net/InertiaGravity/I nertia& Gravity1.htm
It is possible that the gravitational force could be foud to be a subset of another force, so maybe gravity as its own entity doesn't exist. http://arxiv.org/html/physics/9908024
I am in agreement with the grandparent. It is worry some that little research seems to be done on alternative theories.
I've tried to get details on the models used for global warming. The problem is, all the papers that seem to go into detail require me to pay more than I can affort to read them. I don't want to read the stupid analysis done by beurocrats, I want to read the real studies.
Given I can't read them, can someone elighten me as to wether or not my conception of model development is correct.
1. See that temperatures have raised ~.8C in the last 100 years from mostly terrestrial weather measurments, with satellite
2. Hypothesize why this is happeneing. One hypothesis, increase in some gases my cause heat to be trapped.
3. No good way to test hypothesis on a large enough scale prove hypothesis as it relates to the whole earth.
4. Create model instead of direct experiment. Measure amount of greenhouse gases in air for some period of time.
5. Make a mathmatical model that gives the correct temperature for past measurments of greenhouse gases.
6. If there are times where temperature decreases when greenhouse gases increased, add other causes, such as solar variations, or volcanic activity. Use satellites to measure solar irradience, make educated guess at solar irradience pre-1978.
7. With addition of solar variations, volcanic activity and possibly other factor, the model matches history closely.
8. Keep other factor constant in model, increase greenhouse gases, see increase in temperature.
9. Proof that increased greenhouse gases causes increased temperatures.
I would hope the models are more complete than this, but I don't know, I can't afford to know. Do they take into account all the sources and sinks of greenhouse gases? How well do they account for sources and sinks? Is it really known what causes the earth's cold/warm cycles? If not, how can the models seperate natural long term cooling/warming trends from those caused by greenhouse gases? Is there some poorly understood warming trend in the background, so the actual warming preduced by greenhouse gases is small?
Does a good physical model exist for the trapping of thermal energy by greenhouse gases? I know certain wavelengths of visible energy are absorbed and retransmitted as thermal energy by certain molecules, such as water. We have to account for it when doing radiometry measurements from spacecraft. What wavelengths of energy are absorbed by greenhouse gases, and what wavelenghts are retransmitted? Would most of that energy just be reflected and not converted to thermal wavelengths if the gases were not there?
Does the increased amount of these gases increase Rayleigh or Mei scattering? Does that have any impact on temperature? I guess the sulfates put in the air by volcanoes cause cooling because of scatering, but I can only guess.
I've tried to search for information, but I always end up sifting through politicized crap with no real numbers or methods.
Given all the questions I have, and not really enough time or money to dig through all the crap, to possible get answers, people might be able to undestand my sceptisicm with regards to global warming. Just too many unknowns for me to make a good decision, so I'll just stick with the status quo.
My first CS class actually had us generating machine code, in hex, by hand. It was machine code for a simplified virtual machine, but it was very insightful into how a computer worked at a lower level.
DIAMOND v. DIEHR, 450 U.S. 175 (1981) Argued October 14, 1980. Decided March 3, 1981.
Judges and who nominated them. For Renquist -- Nixon Burger -- Nixon White -- Kennedy Stewart -- Eisenhower Powell -- Nixon
Against Stevens -- Ford Blackmun -- Nixon Marshall -- Johnson Brennen -- Eisenhower
Nice jab at the Reagan administration, but wrong as alway lib. He was in office a whole 2 months when the opinion was given. Why didn't that lib White dissent? Why didn't all the repulican nominated justices agree? This is hardly political.
Everytime we try to upgrade Irix we just find more and more bugs. We currently use 6.5.12 and if we try to go any higher our applications start breaking. Upgrading to 6.5.16 broke xemacs for us even. Then we just get a run around for weeks when we report the bugs and they are always "fixed" in the new version but never are. -- Disgruntled SGI Customer
I've recently ported some image analysis software from SGI Onyx2s to Linux PCs. The Onyx2s had dual 300Mhz R10000 processors, 512MB of ram, and Infinitreality2 graphics board, and a five disk external RAID over fibre. The new PCs have dual 1.7Ghz P4s, 2GB ram, Nvidia or Wildcat II graphics cards, and a single U160 scsi disk.
The PCs blow away the Onyx2s in every performance test we have. For the Onyx2s we need dedicated hardware for some image processing for the system to be usable. On the PCs we can get by without them since the CPUs are so much faster.
Looking at the price/performance, I don't see why anyone still buys SGI or Sun hardware.
Written language is very different than spoken language. If you want written language to be understandable there has to be standards. All the rules for grammer are important in writting. If you follow grammer rules your writting will be much more understandable. These rules aren't just for snobbish english teachers to throw around. Now if I could just nail down the all the grammer rules myself.
Speech is very different since the speaker can clarify what they want to convey by using gestures or realizing that the person they are speaking to didn't understand and rephrasing their comments.
Spoken language evolves very fast. Written language does not. If written language changed with the quirks for every generation of spoken language documents just 20 years old would be difficult to read.
My secret to not getting overweight. I eat when I'm hungry and stop eatting when I'm not. The 5-10 hours of exercise a week probably helps a little also.
I suspect that the EQ engine is spaghetti by now with all the quick patches that have been applied to it. When they make seemingly small changes to the game it seems to cause numerous bugs in areas unrelated to the change.
Also, why would another company want to make an exact clone of a game. The EQ engine doesn't seem to be flexable enough to allow a lot of changes to game play. All games would be the mostly the same except for graphics I would think.
Slashdot Mirror
C++ still requires some undestanding of hand optimizations specific to the language.
//do something with class.
I don't think compilers optimize this construct.
for(;;)
{
MatrixClass C(3,3);
}
The C++ compiler will call the constructor/destructor every loop when it probably isn't needed. C++ and the "hidden" memory allocation, constructor, destructor calls can be a problem without arranging the code properly by hand.
Passengers know when to pause the conversation so the driver can concentrate more when needed. I've even heard of women who help their husbands drive with real-time driving tips.
The person on the other end of the cell phone doesn't know when to shutup to let the driver concentrate.
Banning babies from cars might be ok. I've seen way too many women driving while looking backwards.
That's my theory.
I just wish those little bastards that shine their laser pointers on the movie screens in the theater would get 25 years.
Ok, maybe just a good caning.
Our understanding of gravity is not complete. There is still research being done.I nertia& Gravity1.htm
http://www.mrelativity.net/InertiaGravity/
It is possible that the gravitational force could be foud to be a subset of another force, so maybe gravity as its own entity doesn't exist.
http://arxiv.org/html/physics/9908024
I am in agreement with the grandparent. It is worry some that little research seems to be done on alternative theories.
I've tried to get details on the models used for global warming. The problem is, all the papers that seem to go into detail require me to pay more than I can affort to read them. I don't want to read the stupid analysis done by beurocrats, I want to read the real studies.
Given I can't read them, can someone elighten me as to wether or not my conception of model development is correct.
1. See that temperatures have raised ~.8C in the last 100 years from mostly terrestrial weather measurments, with satellite
2. Hypothesize why this is happeneing. One hypothesis, increase in some gases my cause heat to be trapped.
3. No good way to test hypothesis on a large enough scale prove hypothesis as it relates to the whole earth.
4. Create model instead of direct experiment. Measure amount of greenhouse gases in air for some period of time.
5. Make a mathmatical model that gives the correct temperature for past measurments of greenhouse gases.
6. If there are times where temperature decreases when greenhouse gases increased, add other causes, such as solar variations, or volcanic activity. Use satellites to measure solar irradience, make educated guess at solar irradience pre-1978.
7. With addition of solar variations, volcanic activity and possibly other factor, the model matches history closely.
8. Keep other factor constant in model, increase greenhouse gases, see increase in temperature.
9. Proof that increased greenhouse gases causes increased temperatures.
I would hope the models are more complete than this, but I don't know, I can't afford to know. Do they take into account all the sources and sinks of greenhouse gases? How well do they account for sources and sinks? Is it really known what causes the earth's cold/warm cycles? If not, how can the models seperate natural long term cooling/warming trends from those caused by greenhouse gases? Is there some poorly understood warming trend in the background, so the actual warming preduced by greenhouse gases is small?
Does a good physical model exist for the trapping of thermal energy by greenhouse gases? I know certain wavelengths of visible energy are absorbed and retransmitted as thermal energy by certain molecules, such as water. We have to account for it when doing radiometry measurements from spacecraft. What wavelengths of energy are absorbed by greenhouse gases, and what wavelenghts are retransmitted? Would most of that energy just be reflected and not converted to thermal wavelengths if the gases were not there?
Does the increased amount of these gases increase Rayleigh or Mei scattering? Does that have any impact on temperature? I guess the sulfates put in the air by volcanoes cause cooling because of scatering, but I can only guess.
I've tried to search for information, but I always end up sifting through politicized crap with no real numbers or methods.
Given all the questions I have, and not really enough time or money to dig through all the crap, to possible get answers, people might be able to undestand my sceptisicm with regards to global warming. Just too many unknowns for me to make a good decision, so I'll just stick with the status quo.
My first CS class actually had us generating machine code, in hex, by hand. It was machine code for a simplified virtual machine, but it was very insightful into how a computer worked at a lower level.
The nut bag might just be nature.
DIAMOND v. DIEHR, 450 U.S. 175 (1981)
Argued October 14, 1980.
Decided March 3, 1981.
Judges and who nominated them.
For
Renquist -- Nixon
Burger -- Nixon
White -- Kennedy
Stewart -- Eisenhower
Powell -- Nixon
Against
Stevens -- Ford
Blackmun -- Nixon
Marshall -- Johnson
Brennen -- Eisenhower
Nice jab at the Reagan administration, but wrong as alway lib. He was in office a whole 2 months when the opinion was given. Why didn't that lib White dissent? Why didn't all the repulican nominated justices agree? This is hardly political.
Everytime we try to upgrade Irix we just find more and more bugs. We currently use 6.5.12 and if we try to go any higher our applications start breaking. Upgrading to 6.5.16 broke xemacs for us even. Then we just get a run around for weeks when we report the bugs and they are always "fixed" in the new version but never are.
--
Disgruntled SGI Customer
I've recently ported some image analysis software from SGI Onyx2s to Linux PCs. The Onyx2s had dual 300Mhz R10000 processors, 512MB of ram, and Infinitreality2 graphics board, and a five disk external RAID over fibre. The new PCs have dual 1.7Ghz P4s, 2GB ram, Nvidia or Wildcat II graphics cards, and a single U160 scsi disk.
The PCs blow away the Onyx2s in every performance test we have. For the Onyx2s we need dedicated hardware for some image processing for the system to be usable. On the PCs we can get by without them since the CPUs are so much faster.
Looking at the price/performance, I don't see why anyone still buys SGI or Sun hardware.
Written language is very different than spoken language. If you want written language to be understandable there has to be standards. All the rules for grammer are important in writting. If you follow grammer rules your writting will be much more understandable. These rules aren't just for snobbish english teachers to throw around. Now if I could just nail down the all the grammer rules myself.
Speech is very different since the speaker can clarify what they want to convey by using gestures or realizing that the person they are speaking to didn't understand and rephrasing their comments.
Spoken language evolves very fast. Written language does not. If written language changed with the quirks for every generation of spoken language documents just 20 years old would be difficult to read.
My secret to not getting overweight.
I eat when I'm hungry and stop eatting when I'm not.
The 5-10 hours of exercise a week probably helps a little also.
I suspect that the EQ engine is spaghetti by now with all the quick patches that have been applied to it. When they make seemingly small changes to the game it seems to cause numerous bugs in areas unrelated to the change.
Also, why would another company want to make an exact clone of a game. The EQ engine doesn't seem to be flexable enough to allow a lot of changes to game play. All games would be the mostly the same except for graphics I would think.