Re:Anything you say will be taken down and used ..
on
Darl Goes to Harvard
·
· Score: 1
It might compile, but it wouldn't do what you want it to. You're comparing the pointer, not the contents; this will always return false. It has nothing to do with the vintage of the compiler; C just doesn't work the way you think it does.
Perhaps you're thinking of Java?
Re:Anything you say will be taken down and used ..
on
Darl Goes to Harvard
·
· Score: 1
I think you should have continued to learn C.
Re:Anything you say will be taken down and used ..
on
Darl Goes to Harvard
·
· Score: 1
#define is a macro. It's processed before the compiler sees it.
I know of no compiler that would store two strings in the same location just because their contents are identical, except possibly for an Intercal compiler. Is that the one you mean?
Re:Anything you say will be taken down and used ..
on
Darl Goes to Harvard
·
· Score: 1
I don't think so. The comparison is between two pointers, one of which has been created on the fly. This would work, but it wouldn't be very much use:
The first problem with equating junk mail with spam is that you don't know how much junk mail you'd get if postage and printing were free. I imagine it would be a lot. Like a tree's worth of paper every day.
This is why your junk mail is qualitatively different to your spam; the price hurdle means that a business has to have something viable going on to make it worthwhile. With the stamp scheme you'd probably start to see paid-for spam, but not like the depressingly offensive stuff that is being delivered to your inbox right now.
Had you taken the time to read the article you would know the answer to your question.
The idea is that unstamped email would be filtered and forwarded as usual. Stamped email would not be filtered, so you wouldn't lose real messages in the filter. The stamp fees are miniscule for normal users (but not for spammers) and would probably be part of your ISP bill, since the ISP is, on balance, nearly breaking even on the cost of stamps.
Since you are probably already losing notifications in people's spam filters you would not be in a worse position.
While an iPod in itself is a huge thief magnate, it inspires more casual theft from lax owners than attracting the eye of a more determined, professional thief.
I mean, who would get suspicious of a bunch of movie types walking around with iPods?
On one of the TT documentaries they mentioned that the flunky who had to carry the iPod to Jackson's place - they didn't use a courier for security reasons, I guess - nearly got mugged by two guys. He ended up running down the street.
I don't think the would-be muggers knew he had an iPod; he was just wandering around a dodgy part of town.
There is absolutely no technical reason why they should use macs over wintel boxes - none whatsoever.
Well, software is a big deal; many publishers rely on Mac-specific Quark XTensions.
During the 90s I remember Quark XPress on Windows being the absolutely worst piece of software I'd ever used. Since then Quark has realized that there was a quality gap between their PC and Mac versions and has made the Mac version equally unusable.
I think you are thinking of Visual Basic for Applications, which suffers the same problem the AppleScript does - it is implemented differently (if at all) in different applications, including the way that actions are recorded.
That's not necessarily the CPU's fault. When the 601 was considered sexy, PowerMacs were running MacOS 7.5 (or thereabouts) and executing toolbox calls through the 68K emulator (including some of the calls that the emulator itself used), so there was a performance hit.
So you are saying you can't take an industry standard laptop drive from a Dell laptop and drop it into the industry standard laptop slot of an IBM thinkpad?
That's the beauty of standards - there are so many to choose from!
You could use a generated image for the captcha; something that composites two or three parts of the image. It would make copying it much harder, and your system doesn't have to be the best, it just has to be the least worst.
The slightly unnerving thing is the obvious reason why BAe Systems - which makes the business end of the Eurofighter - would need to develop expertise in radiation-hardened computer components.
Spirit uses Wind River's RTOS, VxWorks. The main computer (the Rover Electronics Module) uses a 20MHz 32-bit Rad 6000 CPU, a radiation-hardened PowerPC variant manufactured by BAe in England. The computer has 128M of ECC RAM and a 3M EEPROM. It connects with hardware via a Versa Module Europa (VME) bus.
The software was compiled with a compiler from Green Hills' MULTI development environment, but the developers coded using the Wind River Tornado IDE.
I've worked for Apple and I can tell you just about all the new core stuff is being done or being converted to C or C++.
If you've worked for Apple you'd know that all the CoreFoundation classes have always been written in C/C++ and are (mostly) "toll-bridged" with their corresponding Objective-C Foundation classes.
If you are writing in Objective-C and discover a performance hit from the dynamic binding there is nothing to prevent you from using the CF classes (other than having to write C/C++) and including it in your Objective-C code.
From my own inexhaustive observations, Apple gives consumer stuff "i" and geeky stuff "X", hence iPod, iApps, iMac, iLife etc against XServe, XCode, XGrid, etc.
To be frank I've always wondered about Apple's name syntaxes. When the Mac IIx and the SE/30 came out - improvements of the Mac II and the SE with then top-of-the-line 68030 processors - it seems they really should have gone with Mac II/30 or SEx. Mac II/30 sounds like a third grade joke about chinese dentists but the Macintosh SEx would have probably made them billions.
Not only are you wrong in the classical sense of being wrong, the are extra-wrong because there were two versions of NT for PPC, one from Microsoft and one from IBM.
Furthermore, since NT was also available on MIPS you are super-wrong.
Re:Spidering Google Illegal?
on
Spidering Hacks
·
· Score: 1
If an application sends a request to Google (or any useful site) and receives a string in return, how does the site know that it's being used by a spider?
All of these 'problems' can be advantages for Microsoft.
Suppose Longhorn dies in the same way Apple's Copland did. Microsoft looks around for a unix to base a replacement (perhaps called 'OS Z'). They wouldn't go for Linux as that would be a tacit endorsement of OSS, so instead they either go for BSD, SCO or - perhaps as part of a fat deal for Apple - Darwin.
They include an XP compatibility box, much like OS X Classic. As developers release native drivers, MS ensures that these drivers work through OS Z, not through the kernal. OS Z allows MS to abandon considerable legacy hardware - floppy drives, ports, bios and further cement its grip on commodity PC architecture.
I'm not saying this would be a good thing, but I can imagine it happening if Longhorn goes off the rails.
Slashdot Mirror
It might compile, but it wouldn't do what you want it to. You're comparing the pointer, not the contents; this will always return false. It has nothing to do with the vintage of the compiler; C just doesn't work the way you think it does.
Perhaps you're thinking of Java?
I think you should have continued to learn C.
#define is a macro. It's processed before the compiler sees it.
I know of no compiler that would store two strings in the same location just because their contents are identical, except possibly for an Intercal compiler. Is that the one you mean?
I don't think so. The comparison is between two pointers, one of which has been created on the fly. This would work, but it wouldn't be very much use:
// etc
char * user_name = "DarlMcB";
char * current_user;
current_user = user_name;
if(user_name == current_user)
The first problem with equating junk mail with spam is that you don't know how much junk mail you'd get if postage and printing were free. I imagine it would be a lot. Like a tree's worth of paper every day.
This is why your junk mail is qualitatively different to your spam; the price hurdle means that a business has to have something viable going on to make it worthwhile. With the stamp scheme you'd probably start to see paid-for spam, but not like the depressingly offensive stuff that is being delivered to your inbox right now.
Had you taken the time to read the article you would know the answer to your question.
The idea is that unstamped email would be filtered and forwarded as usual. Stamped email would not be filtered, so you wouldn't lose real messages in the filter. The stamp fees are miniscule for normal users (but not for spammers) and would probably be part of your ISP bill, since the ISP is, on balance, nearly breaking even on the cost of stamps.
Since you are probably already losing notifications in people's spam filters you would not be in a worse position.
While an iPod in itself is a huge thief magnate, it inspires more casual theft from lax owners than attracting the eye of a more determined, professional thief.
I mean, who would get suspicious of a bunch of movie types walking around with iPods?
On one of the TT documentaries they mentioned that the flunky who had to carry the iPod to Jackson's place - they didn't use a courier for security reasons, I guess - nearly got mugged by two guys. He ended up running down the street.
I don't think the would-be muggers knew he had an iPod; he was just wandering around a dodgy part of town.
There is absolutely no technical reason why they should use macs over wintel boxes - none whatsoever.
Well, software is a big deal; many publishers rely on Mac-specific Quark XTensions.
During the 90s I remember Quark XPress on Windows being the absolutely worst piece of software I'd ever used. Since then Quark has realized that there was a quality gap between their PC and Mac versions and has made the Mac version equally unusable.
I think you are thinking of Visual Basic for Applications, which suffers the same problem the AppleScript does - it is implemented differently (if at all) in different applications, including the way that actions are recorded.
Adobe stopped supporting Premiere on Macintosh. The business decision was "Premiere meets Final Cut Pro. Game over."
That's not necessarily the CPU's fault. When the 601 was considered sexy, PowerMacs were running MacOS 7.5 (or thereabouts) and executing toolbox calls through the 68K emulator (including some of the calls that the emulator itself used), so there was a performance hit.
I agree though, the 601 was kind of primitive.
So you are saying you can't take an industry standard laptop drive from a Dell laptop and drop it into the industry standard laptop slot of an IBM thinkpad?
That's the beauty of standards - there are so many to choose from!
That sounds like a testament to Dell's ability to piss people off.
You could use a generated image for the captcha; something that composites two or three parts of the image. It would make copying it much harder, and your system doesn't have to be the best, it just has to be the least worst.
The slightly unnerving thing is the obvious reason why BAe Systems - which makes the business end of the Eurofighter - would need to develop expertise in radiation-hardened computer components.
Mars is still Microsoft-free.
Spirit uses Wind River's RTOS, VxWorks. The main computer (the Rover Electronics Module) uses a 20MHz 32-bit Rad 6000 CPU, a radiation-hardened PowerPC variant manufactured by BAe in England. The computer has 128M of ECC RAM and a 3M EEPROM. It connects with hardware via a Versa Module Europa (VME) bus.
The software was compiled with a compiler from Green Hills' MULTI development environment, but the developers coded using the Wind River Tornado IDE.
This is what Lewis and Clark did. They weren't really looking for anything specific as much as they were simply exploring the great western spaces.
Dude, what did you do at school? Eat paste all day? Lewis and Clark were looking for the Northwest passage.
They would do well to pick up on the current Metrosexual fad and steer the show towards a more Will & Grace kind of gay banter.
After all, the best way to solve a problem is to reverse the polarity.
I've worked for Apple and I can tell you just about all the new core stuff is being done or being converted to C or C++.
If you've worked for Apple you'd know that all the CoreFoundation classes have always been written in C/C++ and are (mostly) "toll-bridged" with their corresponding Objective-C Foundation classes.
If you are writing in Objective-C and discover a performance hit from the dynamic binding there is nothing to prevent you from using the CF classes (other than having to write C/C++) and including it in your Objective-C code.
From my own inexhaustive observations, Apple gives consumer stuff "i" and geeky stuff "X", hence iPod, iApps, iMac, iLife etc against XServe, XCode, XGrid, etc.
To be frank I've always wondered about Apple's name syntaxes. When the Mac IIx and the SE/30 came out - improvements of the Mac II and the SE with then top-of-the-line 68030 processors - it seems they really should have gone with Mac II/30 or SEx. Mac II/30 sounds like a third grade joke about chinese dentists but the Macintosh SEx would have probably made them billions.
If you're going to troll, at least make an effort to hide the hook.
Hello?
Napster? STRIKE ONE!
DOJ v MS? STRIKE TWO!
Al Gore v Florida? STRIKE THREE!
No wonder he's reduced to this.
Not only are you wrong in the classical sense of being wrong, the are extra-wrong because there were two versions of NT for PPC, one from Microsoft and one from IBM.
Furthermore, since NT was also available on MIPS you are super-wrong.
If an application sends a request to Google (or any useful site) and receives a string in return, how does the site know that it's being used by a spider?
Google doesn't check referring urls, btw.
All of these 'problems' can be advantages for Microsoft.
Suppose Longhorn dies in the same way Apple's Copland did. Microsoft looks around for a unix to base a replacement (perhaps called 'OS Z'). They wouldn't go for Linux as that would be a tacit endorsement of OSS, so instead they either go for BSD, SCO or - perhaps as part of a fat deal for Apple - Darwin.
They include an XP compatibility box, much like OS X Classic. As developers release native drivers, MS ensures that these drivers work through OS Z, not through the kernal. OS Z allows MS to abandon considerable legacy hardware - floppy drives, ports, bios and further cement its grip on commodity PC architecture.
I'm not saying this would be a good thing, but I can imagine it happening if Longhorn goes off the rails.