Makes you wonder who Congress works for, doesn't it? No. Congress works for itself, its members have their re-election as their primary concerns, and this has been the way for centuries (though the fine details have varied). If this surprises you, you're not realistic enough.
Modern carriers are effective against backwards countries like Iraq who has no considerable air defence and navy. Some Patriots or S-300 anti air missiles render a carrier useless. Just shoot down those pesky planes and the carrier is a sitting duck. Not really. Ships are large platforms, and hence can have good close-defence anti-air weapons that make it very hard to actually hit with a missile or bomb (they don't like flying through clouds of high-speed lead, and a million rounds per minute is possible). It's probably easier to hit a carrier with the modern equivalent of a cannonball; it's too stupid and too massive to be deflected.
No telling what has caused the turnabout. Well, I bet it's called "money". If each reckons they can make more profit (or possibly just increase turnover) by tolerating the other, that's a strong incentive to grin and bear it. The details? They'll become clear over time.
I regularly see posts on the mailing list helping to make Parrot friendlier for other languages (particularly TCL) as people develop using parrot. Interesting, especially as I don't follow ParTcl (Tcl on Parrot) closely. Care to point us to any performance figures? A comparison of the speed of Perl5 with this release of Perl6-on-Parrot would also be interesting, since Perl5 is a reasonably well-known quantity.
And before anyone else points this out, yes, I do know that all benchmarks are misleading. Those of us who are language developers are allowed to use them despite their flaws.
Cheap shot at the parent's PhD: if all your research can be done on Google in a few minutes, what value are you adding? If all your research can be done just by reading other people's articles and books, you're not adding very much either, are you?
The cool thing about Google Scholar is that it lets me find citations fast (for me, it's especially useful when I know part of the info needed for the citation but need enough for a full bib entry) and in some very obscure journals indeed. I can then either use those to find the article or, often, click on a link that lets me read a digitized copy of the journal article directly from my local academic library's collection. It doesn't mean that it's doing your research for you at all; often it's just pointing out the articles that you'd want to read anyway.
And if you're doing this at the start of your research (as opposed to when writing up) then it sure beats waiting a month for an inter-library loan just to find out that the requested book isn't relevant anyway.
(dc would just lock your muscles, AC makes you twitch) In my experience, dc tends to also make you twitch (once, often breaking the circuit). I think this is because the current doesn't normally flow equally through all muscles (if this seems odd, as yourself why the currents would be equal). Since that means you get differential contraction forces, you get net movement.
* Focused mainly on one or two technology stacks (e.g. everything to do with developing a java application), with no experience outside of it Nonsense; depth of knowledge is as important as breadth of knowledge. Ability to justify 50 different buzzwords on one's resume doesn't make someone a good programmer. It is a lot better to talk about the problems the candidate has solved, than the technology used to solve them. Of course, in reality you need some of both to be a good programmer. You need depth from really knowing your tools, and you need the breadth to know when those tools you know well are the wrong ones anyway. The good programmer strikes a balance between these extremes.
thus use Java or.NET, because it's faster to deploy The big advantage in the business application world of both Java and.NET alike is that they are managed code systems. A bug typically doesn't bring down everything else on the system or blow a massive hole through your security. Trading a little speed (and both of those languages are actually pretty fast when server-side) for a whole chunk more safety is a good trade-off for that application domain. (Desktop apps are a whole 'nother ball of wax.)
The FOSS world is making a big fuss about C - and coding GUIs in C (like GTK) has to be the worst idea I've ever seen While coding a widget in C is OK (better than C++ for code stability/portability reasons) writing a whole GUI in C is crazy. Better to use some other language to script together the component widgets. (I go for Tcl, others like Ruby or Python or Perl or...) Writing a whole application in one language is a bit like building a car with only one tool.
C++'s main advantage is the same as Microsoft's: it's everywhere, there are just so many libs out there and there exist language bindings for just about everything. There are a few problems with C++ though. In particular, it's harder than it should be to support a stable ABI, so users of libraries have to recompile more often, which brings us to the second problem. It's far slower to compile than it really ought to be; there's really no good reason for any source file to take more than microseconds to compile on modern hardware. This is largely a consequence of the very large number of complex features that the language supports (and the standard library mandates the use of) which are extremely hard to compile correctly (the third biggie).
Bah. I remember C++ back when it was "C plus classes" and was a nice language (except for the way it didn't force all methods to be virtual). But it's been totally disfigured by featuritis. I blame operators.
a) I for one welcome our new programming tools.
b) In Soviet Russia the programmers didn't quite understand the benefits of a single encoding scheme per OS installation. Roll on an all UTF-8 world...
c) 1. Hire programmer 2. ????? 3. Downsize programmer, hire 5 in Bangalore.
Hong Kong dollars are still bank issued. The bills have different logos for the bank they came from. British Pounds issued in Scotland are also bank-issued.
I always took "Alpha" to imply feature-complete. Where I come from, an alpha software release is one where the devs are saying "here's some interesting stuff you might want to try; feedback welcome, but we know it's not finished yet, OK?" You must be thinking about beta releases, which is where the feature set is pretty-much locked down and everyone's trying to locate and eliminate the bugs.
Why aren't both networks physically completely seperated from each other? You want some kind of bridge from one to the other - lots of aircraft can show a whole range of flight data to passengers ("ooh, we've got a headwind over Greenland today! Guess we won't be early after all.") - but that should be strictly one-way. Which is probably the problem; there shouldn't be any way for anyone in the passenger cabin to issue instructions to the plane contrary to those from the flight deck, but I bet they found they couldn't prove it...
OpenBSD code is by far the best C code that has ever been written. And that's not just because of the many code reviews that they perform, but also because the OpenBSD developers are among the best there are. Nope. Just read a few files out of the OBSD sources (read for yourself if you want) and there's definitely code that's nicer to read and better written out there. Though their code might be the best-written OS, outside that area there are things that are even nicer (well, to my eyes)...
it's also not as though [The Daily Show has] actors playing Bush, Cheney, Rice, Craig, etc. in skits. Now that would be a sight to see indeed, and would no doubt improve all their poll ratings too. Bush in a long gown, Cheney in a miniskirt (but nothing too revealing), Rice in... wait, she wears skirts already.
Erlang is good, and is an example of a language that is very usable in some of the niches that are under-developed. There are a few projects written in Erlang, and I would expect that to increase over time as Erlang technology improves and as more people become aware of it. It would probably help if there was more reference to it on Slashdot, LWN and Freshmeat. All that takes is writing good articles about news that people want to read. Really.
If ping was badly written to not drop any privileges, and a malicious user overflowed, he'd still only be able to create raw sockets, and nothing more. You are aware just how much mischief they'd be able to do like that? For example, synthesizing ARP packets...
In fact, the President of the USA is much weaker than most heads of government of systems in which a president is given a personal mandate. In France and Germany, for example, the President (or Chancellor in Germany) has greater influence over the process of legislation both formally (various recommendation systems, and stronger vetos) and through the power of patronage appointments. The German post of Chancellor is approximately that of Prime Minister; there is also a President. Power primarily resides with the Chancellor though.
In fact, I can think of no area in which the President of the United States is formally more powerful than a Prime Minister in any European state other than Liechtenstein. It's just that the exercise of his or her restricted set of powers can be formidable, since the United States is such a large economic, political and military superpower internationally and domestically, so the President seems much more powerful than other executive heads of government. An important difference between the US post of President and, say, the UK post of Prime Minister, is that the US President has a direct mandate and set term. By contrast, the UK Prime Minister serves at the whim of his or her party; if they can't keep their own supporters, they're kicked out without any need for a formal impeachment. (I can't think of any case in recent history where someone was PM who wasn't also leader of his or her party.) An example of this was when Margaret Thatcher was replaced by John Major. This sort of thing means that PMs dare not become as unpopular as a President can become, and helps to moderate any tendency to extremism.
Don't know about Mac, but I suspect wx is ahead of GTK in terms of not sticking out like a sore thumb there too. The big problem on Macs is that apps behave differently there. There are different conventions about accelerator keys, different ways of using menus, different expectations of you interact with dialogs, etc. And OSX users are much more likely to be picky too. Porting apps from either Linux or Windows to OSX involves rewriting a bunch of stuff; making the widgets look right isn't the worst part.
Upvar/Uplevel are fantastic when you understand what they're used for. Uplevel enables tcl to be completely extensible - you can write new tcl language elements within tcl. For example, one can write a brand new transaction command which wraps its contents in a db transaction open/close pair, and catches errors to abort transactions. I really miss that when I have to code in other languages.Sounds a lot like Perl's Ties. Are you familiar with them? If so, how do they compare? They're not at all the same. Tcl actually does provide facilities very much like a Perl tie (i.e. traces and linked variables) but uplevel and upvar are something else. The uplevel command is actually much more closely related to the 'sub foo(&)' syntax of Perl as normally used (though of course each is different to the other in important ways) and the upvar command is rather like passing a reference to a variable (except again not the same except in how normally used).
BTW, Perl ties aren't suitable for transaction handling really, because it's often a good idea to process multiple operations on a database within one transaction, and a tie doesn't capture that notion. Instead, you should wrap a transaction round the outside and use the tie inside the body. Easy! As it happens, this notion of a transaction command is already used by the Tcl binding to SQLite (and is more elegant than the equivalent code in Perl DBI...)
Frankly for the vast majority of web sites Im kinda tired of the "artist" being involved at all. Most web sites are not supposed to be be works of art... they are supposed to deliver me information in a well designed out format. That's an engineer speaking, not an artist. OK, I agree with you, but then I'm also an engineer...
It works well with MacOS X and Windows, but what about Linux? Most Linux apps use GTK, or gtk bindings to some other language, or the GTK theme (like Swing in Java 6). And these screenshots show nothing more than a nicer theme on Linux. And no font antialiasing or hinting! There's a Qt theme done so integrating with a KDE desktop should be fairly easy. It's not bundled in the standard release due to licensing issues, but would be a superb addon in a Linux vendor customization. I've no idea why nobody's done a GTK one yet (I've been marooned in Windows-land for the past few years and so have focussed on the Tcl scripting side of things; that's my excuse for not doing it myself...)
The font engine in use should now be the same one as used by everything else on your desktop, i.e. Xft (assuming things are configured right). If you've got antialiased fonts turned on elsewhere, Tk should just pick it up. If there's a problem, it's a reportable bug and we'll want to fix it in a patch release ASAP. (If the problem is just the screenshots, bug someone to do better ones. D'uh!)
Poisoned distributions? Nasty indeed. Anyone got any idea how it happened? I'd imagine that targeting a specific developer just when he's doing a release, and being able to make a change to that release that causes a hole to be opened up, is quite challenging. Doing it twice is very nasty indeed; someone worked hard at this.
Actually, I think I know one way of doing this that doesn't require the distribution builder's machine to be compromised and which also means that matching even simple signatures like an MD5 hash is very hard. If it's that, SourceForge has a very serious problem...
Slashdot Mirror
And before anyone else points this out, yes, I do know that all benchmarks are misleading. Those of us who are language developers are allowed to use them despite their flaws.
The cool thing about Google Scholar is that it lets me find citations fast (for me, it's especially useful when I know part of the info needed for the citation but need enough for a full bib entry) and in some very obscure journals indeed. I can then either use those to find the article or, often, click on a link that lets me read a digitized copy of the journal article directly from my local academic library's collection. It doesn't mean that it's doing your research for you at all; often it's just pointing out the articles that you'd want to read anyway.
And if you're doing this at the start of your research (as opposed to when writing up) then it sure beats waiting a month for an inter-library loan just to find out that the requested book isn't relevant anyway.
if it can't also protect copyleft.
Bah. I remember C++ back when it was "C plus classes" and was a nice language (except for the way it didn't force all methods to be virtual). But it's been totally disfigured by featuritis. I blame operators.
1. Hire programmer
2. ?????
3. Downsize programmer, hire 5 in Bangalore.
Oh, you said skits? Ooops. Never mind me...
BTW, Perl ties aren't suitable for transaction handling really, because it's often a good idea to process multiple operations on a database within one transaction, and a tie doesn't capture that notion. Instead, you should wrap a transaction round the outside and use the tie inside the body. Easy! As it happens, this notion of a transaction command is already used by the Tcl binding to SQLite (and is more elegant than the equivalent code in Perl DBI...)
The font engine in use should now be the same one as used by everything else on your desktop, i.e. Xft (assuming things are configured right). If you've got antialiased fonts turned on elsewhere, Tk should just pick it up. If there's a problem, it's a reportable bug and we'll want to fix it in a patch release ASAP. (If the problem is just the screenshots, bug someone to do better ones. D'uh!)
Poisoned distributions? Nasty indeed. Anyone got any idea how it happened? I'd imagine that targeting a specific developer just when he's doing a release, and being able to make a change to that release that causes a hole to be opened up, is quite challenging. Doing it twice is very nasty indeed; someone worked hard at this.
Actually, I think I know one way of doing this that doesn't require the distribution builder's machine to be compromised and which also means that matching even simple signatures like an MD5 hash is very hard. If it's that, SourceForge has a very serious problem...