Well, as has been said many a time before, this would not be a good thing for microsoft or any other vendor. The GPL is the agreement that grants you the right to use the code in your product and distribute it. If the GPL should fail, then vendors would have NO right to distribute software based on GPL'ed source. The GPL is not a restriction on public domain, it is a set of rights granted by the holder of the copyright.
SML is a functional programming language, not a logic programming language.
While it would be nice, I afraid the general case of the question you want to answer (if memory is freed etc.) is undecideable, being easily reducible to the Halting Problem.
Of cause special cases can be decided, and any tool which does so would be great. But it is definately non-trivial to write for interesting cases.
So your second option, review/audit is a much better solution.
While your selection of tools is nice (though I've only tried mpatrol, not EF), your macro will only catch a certain class of double free bugs. In case you have two or more pointers to the same malloc'ed block, you would still have an invalid non-NULL pointer after the macro-free.
Now this is just wrong! Just because the web makes up something like half the Internet, depending on how you measure it, does not mean that "Internet ads" == "web ads". Or would you also like to buy only http connectivity from your isp, no mail/news/p2p/...??? They may mean what you say, but spam IS a form of internet ads.
Maybe it would be possible to have/. pay some amount (percentage of subscriptions) to pay sites that are linked, and in return get some form of limited access. This way sites get publicity on/. and we get to see the stuff they link to, even on paysites.
I might be way off base here... But how does your scenario work? As far as I know, the license is not applied to the individual files, but to the program as a whole. Thus once linked and distributed, the whole of the program would be under the LGPL, making the source available to all customers, anyone of whom may then modify/distribute/share it. The only protected part would be any seperate programs, that utilize the WINE fork. Or am I missing something?
And just to add: Cygwin really does go a long way in making Win2k liveable. Not to mention an X-server, mousefocus and multible desktops... ups got carried away again;-)
Stop to think I'm an idiot? No why should I? I tried to make a JOKE (you did see the smiley?), which, based on my experiences (note that I have used windows since it was still a shell on DOS), has some grain of truth in it.
And just to make things crystal-clear:
It was a JOKE!
I've seen problems with MANY versions of both Linux and Windows.
I never mentioned Win2k (which never ran on my own machine, and sucks somewhat at work (developer)).
I never said Linux was better, just that Windows didn't work
IT WAS A JOKE!
And to the rest of/. please bear with me, I just don't like being called an idiot in "public".
I totally agree, but from time to time I have been in need of something (at least partly) "edible", and McD has been the only option. But it has been long time.... Boy how I do not miss it.
Well seeing as I never buy coffee at Mickey D's, it doesn't really concern me. I was just trying to make a point: Coffee is hot and should be treated as such.
Well, I prefer to get the coffee fresh, so I can drink it at whatever temperature I find to be acceptable. If the coffee has to be half cold before being served, not only are you depriving me of my choice of temperature, if I have to wait a few moments before drinking it (find a nice place to sit/whatever) I risk getting it cold!
True. I work as a programmer on a research project, at a danish university. Though I have had neither need, cause or indeed any wish to see the code (or sign any NDA's (or my soul to the devil)), I know that we have access to the source code (how much has not been stated exactly, but a substantiel part at least), of cause only for legitimate purposes.
I wonder if they would have the position on the market that they have today, if millions (guessing...) of private users hadn't copied windows/office/... and made it the de facto standard for PC software???
The point is, it is not feasible to put the entire infrastructure in place, only enough to handle what you plan for. That doesn't mean you can't oversubscribe, to get utilisation/efficiency up. One part of that is putting nice fat pipes on the last mile (or whatever), and then join them together in relatively smaller pipes. Thats how the economy works.
Well, I'm not sure what you are missing (onless you can't find a *nix machine on your network to run the app), but I find that X-Win32 does quite nicely (I have to use windows at work, but, work being the CS department of a university, unix machines are not too far away and always ready to run my programs). It has free floating windows, managed by Windows, the clipboard works (though going from X to Windows must be explicit), and the only thing that bugs me is a slight delay on heavy graphical apps like mozilla (yes I could run it locally, but due to some issues pertaining to our rather wierd network setup of Windows 2000 I don't).
A if you would really like to run X apps locally, I think you could compile Xfree86 on cygwin and use that.
Well, in my view VNC and X cover different areas.
If I want to have a remote desktop, over a crappy line, in a window I would use VNC. On the other hand, X works very well on a LAN (or other high bandwidth connection), where it might be useful to run apps on several machines (different architechtures, different sizes, different i/o-hardware etc.).
But that aside, I have on many an occation run a few xterms or emacs' on a 256/256 DSL line, and I will admit that it does not improve the responsetime. But it is usable, and I find, that systems like VNC can be set up in two ways: I have it all over my desktop, so basicly I might as well be sitting at the other machine (except for the physics of being somewhere else), or if you make the window or the remote desktop small, and suddenly you have a small window of clutter. In X any window is under the control of your local server/wm/.../etc. combo, and behaves like if it was running locally (I do admit that some X apps have very nonstandard look and feel, and mixing toolkits doesn't help, but I don't really care, it's my choice).
Well, it's not much, but I once made an (95%) automatic conversion from m3u playlists to cd covers for mp3 cds (the macro was lost in a system crash). That was fairly easy, since I could record the actions needed and then fix it to bee general.
Slashdot Mirror
They release sourcecode (if I remember correctly they have cds of it)
Well, as has been said many a time before, this would not be a good thing for microsoft or any other vendor. The GPL is the agreement that grants you the right to use the code in your product and distribute it. If the GPL should fail, then vendors would have NO right to distribute software based on GPL'ed source. The GPL is not a restriction on public domain, it is a set of rights granted by the holder of the copyright.
So your second option, review/audit is a much better solution.
While your selection of tools is nice (though I've only tried mpatrol, not EF), your macro will only catch a certain class of double free bugs. In case you have two or more pointers to the same malloc'ed block, you would still have an invalid non-NULL pointer after the macro-free.
But don't get me wrong, any improvement is nice.
Now this is just wrong! Just because the web makes up something like half the Internet, depending on how you measure it, does not mean that "Internet ads" == "web ads". Or would you also like to buy only http connectivity from your isp, no mail/news/p2p/...??? They may mean what you say, but spam IS a form of internet ads.
How about translating it to Klingon and NOT publishing it? You are confusing two isssues here.
Maybe it would be possible to have /. pay some amount (percentage of subscriptions) to pay sites that are linked, and in return get some form of limited access. This way sites get publicity on /. and we get to see the stuff they link to, even on paysites.
Only people you choose to give it to (and whoever they give it to...). But they could all help make it better!
I might be way off base here... But how does your scenario work? As far as I know, the license is not applied to the individual files, but to the program as a whole. Thus once linked and distributed, the whole of the program would be under the LGPL, making the source available to all customers, anyone of whom may then modify/distribute/share it. The only protected part would be any seperate programs, that utilize the WINE fork. Or am I missing something?
I know... Just listed what I use every day ;-)
And of cause... EMACS
Accepted.
;-)
And just to add: Cygwin really does go a long way in making Win2k liveable. Not to mention an X-server, mousefocus and multible desktops... ups got carried away again
And just to make things crystal-clear:
And to the rest of
Just as long as you don't want both at the same time, you'll be fine ;-)
I totally agree, but from time to time I have been in need of something (at least partly) "edible", and McD has been the only option. But it has been long time.... Boy how I do not miss it.
Well seeing as I never buy coffee at Mickey D's, it doesn't really concern me. I was just trying to make a point: Coffee is hot and should be treated as such.
Well, I prefer to get the coffee fresh, so I can drink it at whatever temperature I find to be acceptable. If the coffee has to be half cold before being served, not only are you depriving me of my choice of temperature, if I have to wait a few moments before drinking it (find a nice place to sit/whatever) I risk getting it cold!
True. I work as a programmer on a research project, at a danish university. Though I have had neither need, cause or indeed any wish to see the code (or sign any NDA's (or my soul to the devil)), I know that we have access to the source code (how much has not been stated exactly, but a substantiel part at least), of cause only for legitimate purposes.
I wonder if they would have the position on the market that they have today, if millions (guessing...) of private users hadn't copied windows/office/... and made it the de facto standard for PC software???
The point is, it is not feasible to put the entire infrastructure in place, only enough to handle what you plan for. That doesn't mean you can't oversubscribe, to get utilisation/efficiency up. One part of that is putting nice fat pipes on the last mile (or whatever), and then join them together in relatively smaller pipes. Thats how the economy works.
The Peacemaker? Been a while, but wasn't the bomb in that one set off using it's detonator (or some kind of bypass circuit)?
> Perl - $Just @when->$you ${thought} s/yn/tax &couldn\'t %get $worse;
." hsfbu wj"
would s/yn/tax/ not be the proper syntax? Don't make it worse than it is.
@a=(Lbzjoftt,Inqbujfodf,
Hvcsjt); $b="Lbssz Wbmm"
;$b =~ y/b-z/a-z/ ; $c =
" Tif ". @a
."suvft pg b qsphsbnnfs"
. ":\n";$c =~y/b-y/a-z/;
print"\n\n$c ";for($i=0;
$i<@a; $i++) { $a[$i] =~
y/b-y/a-z/;if($a[$i]eq$a
[-1]){print"and $a[$i]."
;}else{ print"$a[$i], ";
}}print"\n\t\t--$b\n\n";
check out This site. OE is not the only app, that speaks HTTP ;-) This little piece of perl makes hotmail look like a POP3 server.
Well, I'm not sure what you are missing (onless you can't find a *nix machine on your network to run the app), but I find that X-Win32 does quite nicely (I have to use windows at work, but, work being the CS department of a university, unix machines are not too far away and always ready to run my programs). It has free floating windows, managed by Windows, the clipboard works (though going from X to Windows must be explicit), and the only thing that bugs me is a slight delay on heavy graphical apps like mozilla (yes I could run it locally, but due to some issues pertaining to our rather wierd network setup of Windows 2000 I don't).
A if you would really like to run X apps locally, I think you could compile Xfree86 on cygwin and use that.
Well, in my view VNC and X cover different areas.
If I want to have a remote desktop, over a crappy line, in a window I would use VNC. On the other hand, X works very well on a LAN (or other high bandwidth connection), where it might be useful to run apps on several machines (different architechtures, different sizes, different i/o-hardware etc.).
But that aside, I have on many an occation run a few xterms or emacs' on a 256/256 DSL line, and I will admit that it does not improve the responsetime. But it is usable, and I find, that systems like VNC can be set up in two ways: I have it all over my desktop, so basicly I might as well be sitting at the other machine (except for the physics of being somewhere else), or if you make the window or the remote desktop small, and suddenly you have a small window of clutter. In X any window is under the control of your local server/wm/.../etc. combo, and behaves like if it was running locally (I do admit that some X apps have very nonstandard look and feel, and mixing toolkits doesn't help, but I don't really care, it's my choice).
Well, it's not much, but I once made an (95%) automatic conversion from m3u playlists to cd covers for mp3 cds (the macro was lost in a system crash). That was fairly easy, since I could record the actions needed and then fix it to bee general.