My favorite web hosting heisenbug was a user who claimed that while his desktop was turned on, he was getting email just fine -- but when he turned off his computer he started bouncing mail.
Of course we thought he was crazy -- the mail was being delivered to the server and should have been totally decoupled from if his computer was booted or not... but upon looking into it we found he was totally right! He was using POP and deleting when he downloaded it. However, he had some large files which made his user account be very close to quota. So as soon as he stopped constantly downloading his email (when his computer was on) he'd get 1 or 2 more emails and then would be over quota, and viola, start bouncing messages.
Really, it is very very rare that a professor or grader could care less if you have correct syntax or even correct function names. As anyone who's tried writing code in a editor which doesn't balance parentheses (after being used to one which does) knows, today's editors (vim/emacs/IDEs) make it easy to lose simple syntax skills. That's not what they are testing you for.
What you are being tested on is your ability to pull, from your own head Algorithms, Data Structures skills, etc. (Can you sort without cutting and pasting code from somewhere else? Can you create a good linked list in 10 minutes on paper?) You are also being tested on your ability to do a design (in this case, a VERY SIMPLE design most likely) and execute it. If you, as the poster mentioned, feel the need to erase "large blocks" of code, you probably didn't think the program out well enough ahead of time.
Can you create new ideas/code? Or are you a 'clay pusher' -- one who can make any 1 block of code do any other thing, but has a hard time creating it from scratch.
As previously mentioned, these skills are, more importantly than on exams, used during job interviews. I've yet to have an interview where I didn't at least write some code. And you think it's hard to do it in a lecture hall where you have 2 hours to finish the whole test? Try doing it in an interview with the interviewer sitting across the table from you watching you think, and you have a 5 minute time limit:)
There are a few tactics which make this a lot less painful. (1) Whip out a design before you start writing code. This could be anything from a flowchart to a picture of the memory buffer you'll be modifying.
(2) Remember the old 'Basic' trick of line numbering? (Start by numbering things 10, 20, 30, 40... -- then if you have to edit code later, instead of re-entering the whole program just add a 'line 11, 12 and 13.') Apply that to paper. Space things reasonably widely, write small. You can also write blocks of code and 'insert it' into the correct place with arrows. As long as its readable, graders usually could care less.
(3) When you write your own code, try to practice coding it without refering to any other code. Pull what you can out of your own head without referring to that marvelous brain-extension, the internet (Hard discipline to keep if typing 'google.com' is as natural for you as it is for me!) or referring back to already-written code.
My biggest problem with handwritten tests is irrespective of having to write code or not . . . after all these years on a keyboard, my handwriting SUCKS.:)
My younger brother's been beating his way through AP computer science this year, so I've had a chance to think about this issue quite a bit.
The best way to make people (moderate geeks at least) excited about the programs they write is when they are excited about the output they produce. There are a few ways to get those results:
A very easy graphical library. Perhaps a simple physics-with-visualization library, or a stripped down 2d sprite manipulator. People would much rather write 'pong' if it's a GUI app than writing pong thats played in a little gimpy text window. If you make it as easy or easier to do the former than the latter, they'll be more excited with/proud of the results.
Provide a program which filters their output. You wouldn't want people to have to deal with learning (let alone generating/outputting) something like HTML or flash files or DXF files or whatever you can think of. They have other classes for that. But if you can define a simple 'language' which, in turn, generates one of those more complicated file formats, they can again be proud of their output. For example, I wrote a small program for my brother which would parse his input files and spew out POV RAY files. A very limited set of scenes were possible (specifically, it was a logo generator -- you chose fonts, colors, textures, lighting etc) but his program was able to generate very simple '.logo' files to drive it. So his ~100 line C++ program had cool 3d rendered output. Beyond graphical things (which I've focused on so far) you could create tiny languages which, for example, created animations -- or midi files, or wavs, or...
In essence what you are trying to avoid is the "I'm embarrassed to be proud of this" factor. The first time you pick up a musical instrument and haltingly jam out "mary had a little lamb" it's a huge moment. But you can't stroll into class the next day and say "dude, check it out. Last night I was playing Mary Had a Little Lamb. Oh yeah, I'm serious." If you can avoid the analagous situation, make programming fun while teaching fundamental skills, then even for non-geeks the 'ugh I don't want to do -that-' inerta factor is easier to overcome, hence making teaching fundamentals (and grading, no doubt) easier and more fun as well.
But what do I know . . . I took all my intro courses with hardcore CS majors. We were excited about spewing out ASCII UI's:)
6 weeks?!?! I walked into the dealer and was bummed to find none with options I liked (WHO THE HELL BUYS a WRX w/ AN AUTOMATIC?!?!), but they dealer-dealer traded for me and I had one w/in 24 hours.
Actually, if you pay any creedence to Moore's Law (and assuming there won't be any major hops as we jump from Silicon to ???) it won't be 17 years at all -- if computing power doubles every year, then the same percentage increase in PC power we saw between 1985 and 2001 should appear by ~2004.
Just think about what the games you played 4 years ago looked like . . . mmmmm, Quake with big jaggies. And in the less than a year we've gone from 1Ghz to 2Ghz machines, and who knows how to measure the increase in Gfx card l33tness.
Of course, that assumes we'll be able to develop games like that, but throw enough power at it and you can do almost anything you can see on a screen.:)
I agree. Fights should be avoided. However, if you're going to get into a fight, make sure that the other guy never, ever, fights you again. Fight to win all future fights.
Thanks Ender. This is hardly the time nor the place to be quoting Orson Scott Card's juvenile philosophies.
I have a webcam, printer, and for the strangest device I've seen up here yet, a
laser pointer.
It's hooked up through a solid-state relay so you can switch it on and off . . . it doesn't get used much now, I had it blinking net traffic on the wall at one point, but the original reason it got hooked up was for some experiments in ultra-low-cost direct datalinks between apartments. (After a fellow geek and I realized our rooms had line of sight.) We got some basic comms working with a $9 laser pointer and a simple light sensor, but it was tooo  slow for any kind of real use. Plus those 'N' batteries go quick with all that switching (and aren't cheap!) Kind of cool though.
Right, the "real" machine is based on a 733 P3. But OTOH the video cards in these machines, whatever they are, are inferior to the ones that will be used in the actual product.
So it might be a wash . . .
I have to say, out of all the games I did play, only one really looked *fun* -- it's called "Cel Damage" and it uses that cool Cel Shading technique, which isn't even really 3D! But other than that, visually etc the system wasn't very impressive. We'll have to see post-beta games I guess.
I played several games on the Xbox at E3. However, the only actual "box" to be seen was one sealed up in a big plexiglass case, you couldn't actually see the consoles you were playing on. That's because (according to one of the developers there) they were playing on not much more than modified PC's! (Gighz Athalons, etc.)
I was initially really surprised to see "playable Xboxes" on the show floor because I'd just read in Wired that Nvidia was nowhere near ready to start fabbing the chips, and wouldn't be ready until mid or late summer. So these machines (whatever they have inside) don't have either the right processor or the right graphics card -- so however they look (and crash:) has really nothing to do with what the production Xbox will be.
The guy who sits next to me in lab (we are CS&E Seniors) managed even more than that, -46 I think . . . He was hired by Sapient and subsequently laid off several months before starting. And not only did he get to keep the signing bonus but also got a nice severance package! What a deal . . . now he still has >3months to get a job and a fat wad of cash too.
Ahhh, I love the internet economy . . .
It's pretty much meant "Fat VC's giving us geeks cool toys and too much cash" for the last 2 years. Ah well, it had to end sometime!
There are loads of temp agencies out there (Manpower comes to mind) that are a) international and b) have a stock in trade of 3 week to 3 month jobs. You just show up there, they eval your skills, and give you some options of where to go (or call you when something comes up.)
I'll never forget when I was 17 getting a job at one of those places -- and putting floppies in computers and turning them on (as part of y2k testing for a whole building) and getting paid $25 an hour for it!!! And free pizza:) Anyway, very much worth looking at.
If he's looking for a switch with support for both ps/2 and USB I doubt he's planning on using the USB port for kbd/mouse. The reason you wouldn't want multiple USB ports on each machine is the same reason you want a KVM switch in the first place: so you can share one device btwn 2 machines without unplugging/plugging in. So if he's talking about a scanner, printer, camera, cdwriter, etc etc. then having the kvm switch do the switching means the active machine can get to use those peripherals. Without crawling under the desk:)
I talked to someone from Australia who developed this for the Defense Dept and places like that . . . you basically plug the IDE cable for a device you want to encrypt into this thing, plug it into the drive, and boom. They had various ways of ensuring only those with permission could access the encrypted parts . . . smartcards etc. Also, the device could selectively encrypt only portions of the disk address space -- this meant a "secure computer" could be used by people without clearance without fear. If you put in a priv. smartcard on boot, the thing would boot to it's own romfs you could use to configure the device. Very smart stuff, he said they were costing about $40 in volume. (Of course, that's not what they charged dept. def.):)
On most systems root does get a lot of mail but it's forwarded to some user (the admin usually)'s account, possibly on another machine. Otherwise you'd have to send the root passwd across the wire for pop or imap . . . or log in as root and get only primitive command line mailreaders. (so far.) I use procmail to sort the mail I get from my 8 admined servers which all deliver to my account . . . works really well.
Slashdot Mirror
You can download/run mplayer on pretty much any platform you can run "real" quicktime... I don't get any popups other than my video starting :)
My favorite web hosting heisenbug was a user who claimed that while his desktop was turned on, he was getting email just fine -- but when he turned off his computer he started bouncing mail.
Of course we thought he was crazy -- the mail was being delivered to the server and should have been totally decoupled from if his computer was booted or not... but upon looking into it we found he was totally right! He was using POP and deleting when he downloaded it. However, he had some large files which made his user account be very close to quota. So as soon as he stopped constantly downloading his email (when his computer was on) he'd get 1 or 2 more emails and then would be over quota, and viola, start bouncing messages.
>It's for java, but I don't see any reason why the
>concept couldn't be ported to C++.
It has been. Several times.
http://log4c.sourceforge.net/
http://sourcefor
http://log4cplus.sourcef
It's also been ported to a number of other languages.
(See the 'ports to other languages' section.)
http://jakarta.apache.org/log4j/docs/d
Really, it is very very rare that a professor or grader could care less if you have correct syntax or even correct function names. As anyone who's tried writing code in a editor which doesn't balance parentheses (after being used to one which does) knows, today's editors (vim/emacs/IDEs) make it easy to lose simple syntax skills. That's not what they are testing you for.
:)
... -- then if you have to edit code later, instead of re-entering the whole program just add a 'line 11, 12 and 13.') Apply that to paper. Space things reasonably widely, write small. You can also write blocks of code and 'insert it' into the correct place with arrows. As long as its readable, graders usually could care less.
:)
What you are being tested on is your ability to pull, from your own head Algorithms, Data Structures skills, etc. (Can you sort without cutting and pasting code from somewhere else? Can you create a good linked list in 10 minutes on paper?) You are also being tested on your ability to do a design (in this case, a VERY SIMPLE design most likely) and execute it. If you, as the poster mentioned, feel the need to erase "large blocks" of code, you probably didn't think the program out well enough ahead of time.
Can you create new ideas/code? Or are you a 'clay pusher' -- one who can make any 1 block of code do any other thing, but has a hard time creating it from scratch.
As previously mentioned, these skills are, more importantly than on exams, used during job interviews. I've yet to have an interview where I didn't at least write some code. And you think it's hard to do it in a lecture hall where you have 2 hours to finish the whole test? Try doing it in an interview with the interviewer sitting across the table from you watching you think, and you have a 5 minute time limit
There are a few tactics which make this a lot less painful.
(1) Whip out a design before you start writing code. This could be anything from a flowchart to a picture of the memory buffer you'll be modifying.
(2) Remember the old 'Basic' trick of line numbering? (Start by numbering things 10, 20, 30, 40
(3) When you write your own code, try to practice coding it without refering to any other code. Pull what you can out of your own head without referring to that marvelous brain-extension, the internet (Hard discipline to keep if typing 'google.com' is as natural for you as it is for me!) or referring back to already-written code.
My biggest problem with handwritten tests is irrespective of having to write code or not . . . after all these years on a keyboard, my handwriting SUCKS.
The best way to make people (moderate geeks at least) excited about the programs they write is when they are excited about the output they produce. There are a few ways to get those results:
In essence what you are trying to avoid is the "I'm embarrassed to be proud of this" factor. The first time you pick up a musical instrument and haltingly jam out "mary had a little lamb" it's a huge moment. But you can't stroll into class the next day and say "dude, check it out. Last night I was playing Mary Had a Little Lamb. Oh yeah, I'm serious." If you can avoid the analagous situation, make programming fun while teaching fundamental skills, then even for non-geeks the 'ugh I don't want to do -that-' inerta factor is easier to overcome, hence making teaching fundamentals (and grading, no doubt) easier and more fun as well.
But what do I know . . . I took all my intro courses with hardcore CS majors. We were excited about spewing out ASCII UI's
6 weeks?!?! I walked into the dealer and was bummed to find none with options I liked (WHO THE HELL BUYS a WRX w/ AN AUTOMATIC?!?!), but they dealer-dealer traded for me and I had one w/in 24 hours.
Just think about what the games you played 4 years ago looked like . . . mmmmm, Quake with big jaggies. And in the less than a year we've gone from 1Ghz to 2Ghz machines, and who knows how to measure the increase in Gfx card l33tness.
Of course, that assumes we'll be able to develop games like that, but throw enough power at it and you can do almost anything you can see on a screen.
Thanks Ender. This is hardly the time nor the place to be quoting Orson Scott Card's juvenile philosophies.
laser pointer.
It's hooked up through a solid-state relay so you can switch it on and off . . . it doesn't get used much now, I had it blinking net traffic on the wall at one point, but the original reason it got hooked up was for some experiments in ultra-low-cost direct datalinks between apartments. (After a fellow geek and I realized our rooms had line of sight.) We got some basic comms working with a $9 laser pointer and a simple light sensor, but it was tooo  slow for any kind of real use. Plus those 'N' batteries go quick with all that switching (and aren't cheap!) Kind of cool though.
Tap THIS, echelon! :)
So it might be a wash . . .
I have to say, out of all the games I did play, only one really looked *fun* -- it's called "Cel Damage" and it uses that cool Cel Shading technique, which isn't even really 3D! But other than that, visually etc the system wasn't very impressive. We'll have to see post-beta games I guess.
I was initially really surprised to see "playable Xboxes" on the show floor because I'd just read in Wired that Nvidia was nowhere near ready to start fabbing the chips, and wouldn't be ready until mid or late summer. So these machines (whatever they have inside) don't have either the right processor or the right graphics card -- so however they look (and crash :) has really nothing to do with what the production Xbox will be.
He was hired by Sapient and subsequently laid off several months before starting. And not only did he get to keep the signing bonus but also got a nice severance package! What a deal . . . now he still has >3months to get a job and a fat wad of cash too.
Ahhh, I love the internet economy . . .
It's pretty much meant "Fat VC's giving us geeks cool toys and too much cash" for the last 2 years.
Ah well, it had to end sometime!
I'll never forget when I was 17 getting a job at one of those places -- and putting floppies in computers and turning them on (as part of y2k testing for a whole building) and getting paid $25 an hour for it!!! And free pizza :) Anyway, very much worth looking at.
If he's looking for a switch with support for both ps/2 and USB I doubt he's planning on using the USB port for kbd/mouse. The reason you wouldn't want multiple USB ports on each machine is the same reason you want a KVM switch in the first place: so you can share one device btwn 2 machines without unplugging/plugging in. So if he's talking about a scanner, printer, camera, cdwriter, etc etc. then having the kvm switch do the switching means the active machine can get to use those peripherals. Without crawling under the desk :)
I talked to someone from Australia who developed this for the Defense Dept and places like that . . . you basically plug the IDE cable for a device you want to encrypt into this thing, plug it into the drive, and boom. They had various ways of ensuring only those with permission could access the encrypted parts . . . smartcards etc. Also, the device could selectively encrypt only portions of the disk address space -- this meant a "secure computer" could be used by people without clearance without fear. If you put in a priv. smartcard on boot, the thing would boot to it's own romfs you could use to configure the device. Very smart stuff, he said they were costing about $40 in volume. (Of course, that's not what they charged dept. def.) :)
On most systems root does get a lot of mail but it's forwarded to some user (the admin usually)'s account, possibly on another machine. Otherwise you'd have to send the root passwd across the wire for pop or imap . . . or log in as root and get only primitive command line mailreaders. (so far.) I use procmail to sort the mail I get from my 8 admined servers which all deliver to my account . . . works really well.