If there's a fundamental design goal of C++, it is not to force anything on the programmer. C++ supports procedural (C), OOP (many C++ programs), interface/component-based (COM, XPCOM, and CORBA), and aspect-oriented programming (not widely used yet). It's flexible enough to allow all these and more that are to come.
Java is a great example of a language that forces OOP on programmers. Most universities are starting students on Java because there are a lot fewer ways to get things done in the language. But experts know how to use the parts of the language that they need, and if C++0x took that power away from them they'd look elsewhere.
Making small changes to C++ to do things like get it closer to merging with C and improve weaknesses in the library like smart pointers are worthwhile and will directly benefit programmers. I don't understand your logic that any changes have to be large and basically change the nature of the language.
After reading the article (quickly) I still have some questions:
1) What kind of certificate is being given? X.509?
2) What private information is kept by the user to be used to encrypt or sign data? In PGP you have a key that's usually thousands of bits long. I just read that X.509 certificates only use a password. If this is true, wouldn't it be a lot easier to crack? For example, by encrypting data with tiny passwords until a browser or e-mail program accepts it?
3) How is the private info given to the user? If it's in person when the user signs up, then it has to be randomly generated since no one at the office should see it. If it's sent in the e-mail notice for downloading the certificate, that can't be secure can it? So it must be given at sign-up in a sealed envelope right?
HomeSec sounds like it's straight out of Orwell's NewSpeak dictionary. Did the poster just make it up or is the Department of Homeland Security actually calling itself that?
Awesome, thanks. It's been running for about 45 minutes now and it's found a few interesting ones. I was about to paste the "subscribe" links, but they look long and I'm not sure if there's any personal info in them. Are they safe to post? Here's the link for k2b_recommend with the keys starred out:
"...in 1978, back when a "hand-held" was a transistor radio, computers were immobile mainframes..."
The Apple II came out in 1977. If you can't call that a computer then this publication must be written at people who are pretty out of the loop. But it's a Silicon Valley publication; apparently they need new writers.
If they were talking about 1976 (Apple I) or 1975 (Altair) it might be excusable. Heck some people say we had PCs back in 1950. But 1978? The revolution was on.
I know OSS people usually don't care about GUIs, but the Googlebar is hideous and unusable. Have you tried it? I don't have the time or skills to sit down and write an essay about why, but I know it is.
Ephraim takes GM's decision to use smart phones over PDAs because they're "not threatening", that will be part of a "field-force management application" for their "noncomputer-savvy workforce", and extends that to "farewell to handhelds"? First, the largest screen Nextel's smart phones have is 1.9 inches, and that's on the $399 model. I imagine their application simply displays data, since it "responds to a few presses of the keypad". If data display and a few bits of data in response is all you're doing then by all means stay with a smart phone. And second, I doubt if these noncomputer-savvy people are buying PDAs today, so there's no loss there.
Full PDAs teamed with a portable keyboard can do some pretty useful things and still fit in your pocket that smart phones can't replace because of their screen size and limited input:
E-mail
Web browsing (real web pages, not super-slim versions tailor made for phones)
Instant messaging (for serious corporate use, not I <3 U JEN TTYL K)
Document editing
Reading more than a paragraph of text
In the article, even Ephraim admits he's stretching it to say PDAs are really in danger. "Many white collar workers also struggle with handheld operating systems...". He provides no basis for this claim, and even if he did it obviously wouldn't apply to techies, probably something closer to secretaries.
And I don't think we needed a summary for such a tiny article.
I don't know if it's intrinsic to being human. American, or capitalist, yes. But humans got along without worrying every day about amassing capital for a long time.
The example that comes to mind is the Native American civilizations that were doing fine until Europeans came and told them land should be owned, not shared. And they'd do the owning.
I thought it was interesting when I learned how long humans have known the Earth is round. In relatively modern (non-prehistoric) history, Eratosthenes measured the circumference of the Earth as 25,000 miles, which is basically correct. He did this in 230 B.C. He also used the fact that the sun is really far away, so the rays coming from it could be treated as parallel.
Another test you can do is to stand at about sea level and observe a ship. Then travel away from the ship on the ground and it will slowly go over the horizon. Then keep moving away but go up a mountain, and it will reappear. The simplicity of this experiment suggests people have known the Earth is round for as long as they could reason well enough to come up with this experiment.
Of course, maybe the Earth is rounded on top but flat on the bottom, like a Nilla(tm) wafer? You could argue this wasn't known for sure until Magellan circumnavigated the globe in 1524.
These reviews are like teaser trailers for LOTR or Reloaded that came out six months before the movie. Except if you pay $100 a ticket you can see it early. Most people will wait, but it's still interesting to see what we're waiting for.
Right. I made this mistake a few years ago, and I had a sort of cult of people on my college campus who followed me around and told each other when they saw me, where, what I was doing, etc.
But my journal now is just programming and hobby stuff, and I do lock my personal entries. I don't mind who sees my public entries. I just think it's good that people don't waste their time on my journal if they're not interested in journals. When I have a concrete, well thought out idea, I take time to write a page on my web site.
I write my journal for friends, but I make my entries public. I want people who know me to be able to find my journal and read it. But it's not written for the masses, and those interested in the content will definitely use the Google Blog search instead of the standard one.
I welcome the change, and I'm glad people won't be seeing my journal that don't want to.
That reminds me of Japanese toilets, which are headed in that direction. I've even seen some with full-color LCD panels, but I can't find a picture of one right now. But these electronic toilets focus on the task at hand, not putting internet access in unpleasant portable toilets.
And if you want to pick up an inexpensive book to get started, this one is great. I've seen it in both Borders and Barnes and Noble for ten bucks. I've heard over and over that you can't start out drawing anime-style people, because copying a style that is already a heavy exaggeration of real people won't give good results. You need to start with solid people-drawing skills and then develop your style from there, using basic anime rules like big eyes, shiny hair, etc.
I liked reading this article because lately I've started to work on my drawing skills. It's very humbling to do something I'm skilled at (coding) and then move to something where people can barely tell what I'm trying to draw.
One commonality I've seen so far is that you just have to jump in and do what you can before anyone can help you. Posting questions like "how do I write an OS?" or "how do I draw such-and-such?" will yield theory but not get you far. On your first tries it's going to look like a bunch of scribbles (or spaghetti code that is far from compilable), but you have to put something down for others to critique. And of course coding and art both take tons of practice time. This goes along with just trying and not worrying about the results. If I didn't code unless I was sure each line was perfectly bug free.. well, that's impossible.
I've been working on realistic and anime-style people. Humans are the most rewarding subjects and also one of the hardest to draw, but I wouldn't want to draw anything else. For anyone else wanting to start in this direction, I recommend the PolyKarbon BBS. There are some amazingly talented people there that are very helpful. This site with anatomy books is a good reference. If you have more helpful links, like a newsgroup for new artists (I haven't found any that are good), please post them.
You're just saying what the effects of being locked out are. Today most R&D goes to building machines that eventually run Windows, but that's not a problem except for weird cases like Winmodems.
I'm still interested in the OP's question: How will they lock Linux out? The only thing that comes to mind is making them require "trusted" OSs (read: only Windows). Would Linux have a way around this?
Do any of these comic book stores sell manga? I don't go for American comics, but I love manga. Even my local Barnes and Noble devotes a shelf to them now, though at $10 they're twice as expensive as the original Japanese versions that I get at Mitsuwa.
Of course it will work. VC7 is a plain old C/C++ compiler and has nothing to do with.NET, except that you can turn on managed C++ extensions if you choose. VC7's C++ compiler also has big improvements, and VC2003 (VC7.1?) is even closer to the standard. The only reason to stick with VC6 is if you can't afford VC7 or you don't want to make the minimal effort to port your code.
Nothing right now, because the speed hit you take with managed code is very noticable at today's hardware speeds. But in ten years, it will be worth it. If you've done serious C++ programming, you know what the ability to modify any memory within your application does to debugging time. Given the same talented developer, his managed code will have less bugs than his unmanaged code because the runtime can tell him more and catch more things.
.NET is the future, but it's not here yet. It's great for writing small applications quickly, like those corporations use internally. The earliest Microsoft would switch over large applications like Office to fully managed code will be around 2007, because only then will most PCs be able to handle it. 3D games will wait at least a few more years. Right now 95%+ of professional game development is done in C++. COM interfaces aren't going anywhere.
In 2010 when we might see a serious move to managed code even in games, then COM might start to quietly go away. But thanks to COM interop via COM-callable wrappers, there will continue to be options for C++ developers for the forseeable future.
And if you utter the words "COM is dead" to any Microsoft-employed programmer, they'll tell you to stop being spoon fed by their awesome marketing division. Even Don Box, father of COM and star.NET evangelist, would answer with "a resounding no".
Slashdot Mirror
If there's a fundamental design goal of C++, it is not to force anything on the programmer. C++ supports procedural (C), OOP (many C++ programs), interface/component-based (COM, XPCOM, and CORBA), and aspect-oriented programming (not widely used yet). It's flexible enough to allow all these and more that are to come.
Java is a great example of a language that forces OOP on programmers. Most universities are starting students on Java because there are a lot fewer ways to get things done in the language. But experts know how to use the parts of the language that they need, and if C++0x took that power away from them they'd look elsewhere.
Making small changes to C++ to do things like get it closer to merging with C and improve weaknesses in the library like smart pointers are worthwhile and will directly benefit programmers. I don't understand your logic that any changes have to be large and basically change the nature of the language.
After reading the article (quickly) I still have some questions:
1) What kind of certificate is being given? X.509?
2) What private information is kept by the user to be used to encrypt or sign data? In PGP you have a key that's usually thousands of bits long. I just read that X.509 certificates only use a password. If this is true, wouldn't it be a lot easier to crack? For example, by encrypting data with tiny passwords until a browser or e-mail program accepts it?
3) How is the private info given to the user? If it's in person when the user signs up, then it has to be randomly generated since no one at the office should see it. If it's sent in the e-mail notice for downloading the certificate, that can't be secure can it? So it must be given at sign-up in a sealed envelope right?
If you prefer to buy software without trying it first, there's nothing stopping you from doing that with shareware.
HomeSec sounds like it's straight out of Orwell's NewSpeak dictionary. Did the poster just make it up or is the Department of Homeland Security actually calling itself that?
C: printf("%i",a+b);
C++: cout << a+b;
Java: System.out.println(a+b);
Perl: print ($a+$b)
Python: print(a+b)
C#: Console.WriteLine(a+b);
Awesome, thanks. It's been running for about 45 minutes now and it's found a few interesting ones. I was about to paste the "subscribe" links, but they look long and I'm not sure if there's any personal info in them. Are they safe to post? Here's the link for k2b_recommend with the keys starred out:
* *? channel=k2b_recommend&keyFilePath=caught_receiver_ keys%******_**********_*****%2Ekey&keySourceURL=/c atcher**********_**********
http://localhost:8085/keyAdd**********_********
Good question. I was about to post this too. Anyone know?
"...in 1978, back when a "hand-held" was a transistor radio, computers were immobile mainframes..."
The Apple II came out in 1977. If you can't call that a computer then this publication must be written at people who are pretty out of the loop. But it's a Silicon Valley publication; apparently they need new writers.
If they were talking about 1976 (Apple I) or 1975 (Altair) it might be excusable. Heck some people say we had PCs back in 1950. But 1978? The revolution was on.
I know OSS people usually don't care about GUIs, but the Googlebar is hideous and unusable. Have you tried it? I don't have the time or skills to sit down and write an essay about why, but I know it is.
Full PDAs teamed with a portable keyboard can do some pretty useful things and still fit in your pocket that smart phones can't replace because of their screen size and limited input:
- E-mail
- Web browsing (real web pages, not super-slim versions tailor made for phones)
- Instant messaging (for serious corporate use, not I <3 U JEN TTYL K)
- Document editing
- Reading more than a paragraph of text
In the article, even Ephraim admits he's stretching it to say PDAs are really in danger. "Many white collar workers also struggle with handheld operating systems...". He provides no basis for this claim, and even if he did it obviously wouldn't apply to techies, probably something closer to secretaries.And I don't think we needed a summary for such a tiny article.
I don't know if it's intrinsic to being human. American, or capitalist, yes. But humans got along without worrying every day about amassing capital for a long time.
The example that comes to mind is the Native American civilizations that were doing fine until Europeans came and told them land should be owned, not shared. And they'd do the owning.
I thought it was interesting when I learned how long humans have known the Earth is round. In relatively modern (non-prehistoric) history, Eratosthenes measured the circumference of the Earth as 25,000 miles, which is basically correct. He did this in 230 B.C. He also used the fact that the sun is really far away, so the rays coming from it could be treated as parallel.
Another test you can do is to stand at about sea level and observe a ship. Then travel away from the ship on the ground and it will slowly go over the horizon. Then keep moving away but go up a mountain, and it will reappear. The simplicity of this experiment suggests people have known the Earth is round for as long as they could reason well enough to come up with this experiment.
Of course, maybe the Earth is rounded on top but flat on the bottom, like a Nilla(tm) wafer? You could argue this wasn't known for sure until Magellan circumnavigated the globe in 1524.
These reviews are like teaser trailers for LOTR or Reloaded that came out six months before the movie. Except if you pay $100 a ticket you can see it early. Most people will wait, but it's still interesting to see what we're waiting for.
Right. I made this mistake a few years ago, and I had a sort of cult of people on my college campus who followed me around and told each other when they saw me, where, what I was doing, etc.
But my journal now is just programming and hobby stuff, and I do lock my personal entries. I don't mind who sees my public entries. I just think it's good that people don't waste their time on my journal if they're not interested in journals. When I have a concrete, well thought out idea, I take time to write a page on my web site.
I write my journal for friends, but I make my entries public. I want people who know me to be able to find my journal and read it. But it's not written for the masses, and those interested in the content will definitely use the Google Blog search instead of the standard one.
I welcome the change, and I'm glad people won't be seeing my journal that don't want to.
That reminds me of Japanese toilets, which are headed in that direction. I've even seen some with full-color LCD panels, but I can't find a picture of one right now. But these electronic toilets focus on the task at hand, not putting internet access in unpleasant portable toilets.
Thanks for the recommendation. I'm on my way to Barnes and Noble with a gift card today, so I'll definitely check out the Betty Edwards book.
- PolyKarbon tutorials - These are awesome
- How To Draw Manga
- BakaNeko tutorials
And here are some on drawing game art:- Pixelation BBS
- Pixel Tutorial
- Animation-related tutorials
- Pixel-art bible
And if you want to pick up an inexpensive book to get started, this one is great. I've seen it in both Borders and Barnes and Noble for ten bucks. I've heard over and over that you can't start out drawing anime-style people, because copying a style that is already a heavy exaggeration of real people won't give good results. You need to start with solid people-drawing skills and then develop your style from there, using basic anime rules like big eyes, shiny hair, etc.I liked reading this article because lately I've started to work on my drawing skills. It's very humbling to do something I'm skilled at (coding) and then move to something where people can barely tell what I'm trying to draw.
One commonality I've seen so far is that you just have to jump in and do what you can before anyone can help you. Posting questions like "how do I write an OS?" or "how do I draw such-and-such?" will yield theory but not get you far. On your first tries it's going to look like a bunch of scribbles (or spaghetti code that is far from compilable), but you have to put something down for others to critique. And of course coding and art both take tons of practice time. This goes along with just trying and not worrying about the results. If I didn't code unless I was sure each line was perfectly bug free.. well, that's impossible.
I've been working on realistic and anime-style people. Humans are the most rewarding subjects and also one of the hardest to draw, but I wouldn't want to draw anything else. For anyone else wanting to start in this direction, I recommend the PolyKarbon BBS. There are some amazingly talented people there that are very helpful. This site with anatomy books is a good reference. If you have more helpful links, like a newsgroup for new artists (I haven't found any that are good), please post them.
You're just saying what the effects of being locked out are. Today most R&D goes to building machines that eventually run Windows, but that's not a problem except for weird cases like Winmodems.
I'm still interested in the OP's question: How will they lock Linux out? The only thing that comes to mind is making them require "trusted" OSs (read: only Windows). Would Linux have a way around this?
I totally understand, and I know I'm lucky to be so close to a large collection of $5 Japanese mangas.
Do any of these comic book stores sell manga? I don't go for American comics, but I love manga. Even my local Barnes and Noble devotes a shelf to them now, though at $10 they're twice as expensive as the original Japanese versions that I get at Mitsuwa.
Of course it will work. VC7 is a plain old C/C++ compiler and has nothing to do with .NET, except that you can turn on managed C++ extensions if you choose. VC7's C++ compiler also has big improvements, and VC2003 (VC7.1?) is even closer to the standard. The only reason to stick with VC6 is if you can't afford VC7 or you don't want to make the minimal effort to port your code.
Nothing right now, because the speed hit you take with managed code is very noticable at today's hardware speeds. But in ten years, it will be worth it. If you've done serious C++ programming, you know what the ability to modify any memory within your application does to debugging time. Given the same talented developer, his managed code will have less bugs than his unmanaged code because the runtime can tell him more and catch more things.
.NET is the future, but it's not here yet. It's great for writing small applications quickly, like those corporations use internally. The earliest Microsoft would switch over large applications like Office to fully managed code will be around 2007, because only then will most PCs be able to handle it. 3D games will wait at least a few more years. Right now 95%+ of professional game development is done in C++. COM interfaces aren't going anywhere.
.NET evangelist, would answer with "a resounding no".
In 2010 when we might see a serious move to managed code even in games, then COM might start to quietly go away. But thanks to COM interop via COM-callable wrappers, there will continue to be options for C++ developers for the forseeable future.
And if you utter the words "COM is dead" to any Microsoft-employed programmer, they'll tell you to stop being spoon fed by their awesome marketing division. Even Don Box, father of COM and star