"Well, it really depends on what you're developing, doesn't it?"
It really should not. The language ought to be useful enough to develop just about anything.
"No, in many cases we need to take off the 'straightjacket' of static typing (not for everything, of course) and breathe the sweet smell of freedom."
freedom is great if you are a single developer. For teams I think it's better to enforce a stricter code of conduct, style, and implementation.
"Not sure that's possible. Both SmallTalk and Objective-C have dynamic typing (of course it's optional in Obj C) and that's one of their best features. Java is statically typed and that leads to all manner of typecasts which defeat the purpose of static typing - the idea that static typing was supposed to save you from all kinds of mistakes."
Yes I agree. No one language on my list does what I want. I want a language that is highly dynamic and at the same time typesafe. PHP5 believe or not might come closer to that goal then anything else. Of course it still lacks a lot of other features I would like.
I think both high level languages like ruby and python and very low level languages like C are wrong for OSS development.
What is needed is a typesafe language that is compiled, has garbage collection, and kind of straightjackets the programmers so that they don't make foolish mistakes that end up as security holes.
Java is a good choice, so is eiffel. Too bad neither one is open source.
I hate to say this but I really wish somebody would make a new language. One with strong design by contract, pre and post conditions, forced error handling (like the throws in java) etc.
take the best aspects of java, objective-c, eiffel and maybe some smalltalk like elements and roll them up into one language.
It's not they are illegal it's that the authors of the software may be able to sue the installers. Since this will never happen in reality the installers can sleep in peace.
"But you don't believe in selling the things *you produce* for money, which, if anything, is the real bedrock of capitalism."
Again that's not true. I sell some stuff I produce, I get paid for other things I produce, and I GPL some stuff I produce. It's all according to the marketplace. If I can compete and have a chance in hell of winning then I'll ask for money, If I have no chance to win then I'll GPL (which is winning!).
"I.e. If you can't make the blind people see, poke out everyone's eyes so they can all compete on the same level."
Bzzzzzt wrong again. I harm no one by releaseing my code under the GPL. I could have not released it at all, I could have simply retained the copyright. Nobody has to accept the GPL. If they want to use my code then can PAY ME. So you can pay me with the GPL or you can pay me with cash. Either way I want to get paid for my code.
"My intent is to make enough money to live a comfortable life"
I already make enough money to live a comfortable life. My employer compensates me generously for my labors.
"There's enough room out there for more than one person out there to make money, although OSS has significantly reduced my chances."
OSS only hurts you if you are too stupid to write your own code. If you are too lazy to write your own code, too stupid to ride on the backs of BSD coders and exploit their labors then you don't deserve to make money. Capitalism is not a handout, nobody owes you code, nobody owes yoy anything.
"You view competition as a game and you are willing to cut off your nose to spite your face."
I don't hurt myself at all by GPLing my code. I win. I get better code (other people help me) yet at the same time Bill Gates is too afraid to touch my code and ruin it for everybody.
"there is strong evidence of a correlation between guns and murder, so to say that guns and murder are "unrelated" is simply willful ignorance."
You are seeing a causation where none exists. People murder with guns because guns are an effective tool for killing. Before guns people murdered with knives, arrows and swords. Guns are just a tool.
"But you don't believe in selling things for money, which, if anything, is the real bedrock of capitalism. "
I have said repeatedly that I have no objection to anybody selling anything. I really don't know where you are getting this stuff from. You can't just make shit up and then draw a conclusion from it.
Not only do I believe in selling things for money, I also believe in an expanded definition of currency. In a rapidly evolving world we need to expand our ways of looking at wealth and currency. The GPL is but one way of refining currency. It's a way of converting labor to wealth that effectively allows you to compete with Bill Gates the richest man in the world. In the old economy BIll Gates gets to fuck you in ass while making your mother watch just for fun and because he owns the world. In the new economy (by exploring new kinds of currency and wealth) you can hope to compete with him.
"Face it: you are perfectly willing to relinquish your labours to others"
You are truly misinformed. When I release my code under the GPL I retain ownership of the code. I also retain a degree of control over what happens to that code forever.
See my comment above why in some ways GPLing code is better then selling it. When you sell your code you are competing with Bill Gates. That's a fight you are going to lose because he is the richest, most powerful person on the planet. You are just wasting your money and time by fighting a 400 pound gorilla.
It's better the enter a fight you at least have a chance of winning.
"However, if you do feel like releasing your software under terms that allow redistribution of the source code without renumeration paid to the original author as cash or cash equivalents, I would rather you released it under a BSD license rather than GPL so that if someone else thinks they could make money from it, they aren't likely to be disuaded by the terms of the license."
It's apparent to me that your value system is very narrowly defined. You define value and worth (and cost and price) strictly in terms of cash. I guess that's what makes us different.
"Sure, if you want to be naive. I should also point out that guns have nothing to do with murder. You can have murder without guns and you can have guns without murder."
Absolutely. That is dead on. COngratulations, you now get it.
"The real question is why you care that someone is reusing your code without permission."
Because I am not a communist. I believe in ownership and property. Those things are the bedrock of capitalism.
"The BSD license doesn't deprive you of your code. If someone extends your software without BSD'ing that, it doesn't even deprive other people of your code. It just gives them more options: they can have the original code for free, or they can have the improved software for a price."
Right. Public domain will accomplish the same thing (there is very little difference between public domain and BSD). It's communism. I am not a communist, I don't believe in communism. I don't think that people should be forced or even encouraged to relquinsh their labors to others.
"Even Stallman supports music piracy."
He believes in fair use not piracy. I for one think it's immoral that a musician or their agents can punish you for singing a song.
Ask anybody who has done this and they will tell you what a bad idea it is.
Putting business logic into the database is a tarpit which will doom your application.
No unit testing, no way to organize your code into discrete files, no compiler to check the sanity of your entire codebase, no object oriented features (for MSSQL anyway), basically crappy SP languages. It goes on and on.
Having said that most non microsoft databases support java as an SP language and that mitigates a lot of my objections.
" There still is one, you know. Sooner or later, the Chinese will shoot a capsule to the moon, because they have a real interest in going there - and then America will sit back and suddenly realize that they have NOTHING that can do what the Chinese had just done. We'd have to create the Apollo program from scratch. SCRATCH."
It is now an official policy of the united states that no other nation will challenge our supremacy in space.
"However, if you do feel like giving your software away, I would rather you release it as BSD rather than GPL so you don't deny someone else the opportunity to make money off of it."
Once again GPL has a price. People who release code under the GPL are not "giving it away". The GPL is a EULA just like the code you sell has a EULA. There is no appreciable difference between the code you sell and the GPLed code.
"Metaphorically, one could say that GPL'ed software has a price."
No not metaphorically, it actually has a price. The price is not money but it's a price nevertheless. The price is so high that people like you (and Bill Gates) can not afford to pay it. It's a new kind of price for a new kind of economy.
"I dislike the GPL because I think it will be bad for the economy. Contrast that with your irrational outlook, which centres around the overwhelming fear that someone, somewhere is making money off your work (even though it does you no harm for them to do so)."
The GPL has nothing to do with money. I don't care who makes money with my code. I am happy when people make money with my code. I just don't want them to steal it. That's all. They can make all the money they want as long as they don't deny other people the same rights that I gave them (and other people gave me).
"Since it appears that the majority of GPL advocates on/. also support music piracy,"
No and it's not fair to taint the tens of thousands of honest and ethical business people in the US by saying that they are all like Bill Gates.
Re:No Function overloading?
on
PHP 5 Beta 1
·
· Score: 2, Informative
It's not bad. In the case of PHP it's not needed. PHP is not a storngly typed language so you can write a getBalance() function which can take any damned thing you can pass in.
Once inside the function you can test the passed in variable and take appropriate action.
You can also do other crazy things like declare functions without parameters and pass parameters into them. You can declare methods that act as "default" method handlers. You can add methods to objects at runtime!. Hell you can even define classes at runtime.
It's highly dynamic.
If
Re:Problems with newer versions
on
PHP 5 Beta 1
·
· Score: 1
They are not allowed to upgrade their version of java but nothing is preventing them from including a newer JVM from Sun or IBM.
To call you a communist is absolutely accurate. You advocate that people donate their labors to public for the benefit of the public for the advancement of the public good. This is exactly what communism is all about.
As I stated before, the GPL is closer to captialism then public domain or BSD. GPL'ed code comes with restrictions and a price and is therefore is closer to proprietary/capitalism model.
"What I do advocate is pragmatism. The GPL is a Machiavelian plot to bring down the entire software economy."
Lying does not help your cause. You can spread all kinds of venom and hatred towards the GPL or stallamn or whaoever you want but it only makes you look more stupid because you are not able to convince other people of your point of view using logic. This kinds of obvious vitriolic lie was exactly the kind of propaganda used by other prominent communist and look how far it got them.
"Yeah, but it's amazing how 90% of those people lose their ideals when it comes to the ownership of other peoples' music."
"Now you're not even being consistent with your last message, in which you deride communism."
I never derided communism. Go back and re-read my posts.
"Aside from that, you didn't even bother to refute my point"
You know,you made so many scattered arguments that I have lost track of what you are saying. All I know is that you hate stallman, you hate the GPL and you are on some kind of a crusade to convince people to embrace communism by donating their labor to the public good.
I don't have anything against communism. If you want to advocate a socialist/communist lifestyle that is your right. Maybe we would all be better off if everybody (including Bill Gates) just dumped all their code into the public pool but Bill Gates is not a communist and he would never ever share his products with the public. By the same token The folks at the FSF are not communists either and they also don't want to dump their code into the public pool.
GPL is closer to your ideal then the proprietary code of MS and all other corporations so I really don't see why you would hate them so much while at the same time praising MS.
Once again I have nothing against communism it's just that history shows that it does not work.
It's great that you have communist ideals and want to share your work with the world. It's great that you want to relinquish ownership of your labors and let everybody have it for nothing. But it's not fair to force other people to share in your beliefs.
Some people don't want to let anybody do whatever they want with their code.
"I don't understand what you have against working for the greater good."
I don't have anything against it. I just call it what it is which is communism. If you are communist and want to advance the cause of communism then by all means release your code into the public domain.
"As I said, I was only paraphrasing a common/. motto."
I have enver heard that on./ but what the fuck who cares.
If you release your code into the public domain you are practising communism and advancing the cause of communism. Communism is working for the greater good. In communist countries your labor and efforts don't belong to you they belong to the "people". In other words in communism all your labor is in the public domain and for the benefit of the public.
GPL may not be capitalism in the sense that you perceive capitalism but there is no denying that GPLed code comes with a price. The price is not money but it's a high price nevertheless. SO high that most companies won't pay it.
"To paraphrase a/. motto, people are going to steal your code no matter what you do, so you might as well release it as BSD and at least get credit for it."
That's just downright stupid. Do you leave your bike unlocked? DO you leave your house unlocked? Why make it easy or safe for people to steal your labor. That's communism.
In communism you work for the benefit of other people (the greater good). If you realease your code under a BSD or a public domain license you are practising communism.
That's why GPL people get upset when you call them communists. They are charging for their product, the price is clearly stated and you are not under any obligation to buy it.
GPL is capitalism public domain and BSD is communism.
Slashdot Mirror
"Well, it really depends on what you're developing, doesn't it?"
It really should not. The language ought to be useful enough to develop just about anything.
"No, in many cases we need to take off the 'straightjacket' of static typing (not for everything, of course) and breathe the sweet smell of freedom."
freedom is great if you are a single developer. For teams I think it's better to enforce a stricter code of conduct, style, and implementation.
"Not sure that's possible. Both SmallTalk and Objective-C have dynamic typing (of course it's optional in Obj C) and that's one of their best features. Java is statically typed and that leads to all manner of typecasts which defeat the purpose of static typing - the idea that static typing was supposed to save you from all kinds of mistakes."
Yes I agree. No one language on my list does what I want. I want a language that is highly dynamic and at the same time typesafe. PHP5 believe or not might come closer to that goal then anything else. Of course it still lacks a lot of other features I would like.
I think both high level languages like ruby and python and very low level languages like C are wrong for OSS development.
What is needed is a typesafe language that is compiled, has garbage collection, and kind of straightjackets the programmers so that they don't make foolish mistakes that end up as security holes.
Java is a good choice, so is eiffel. Too bad neither one is open source.
I hate to say this but I really wish somebody would make a new language. One with strong design by contract, pre and post conditions, forced error handling (like the throws in java) etc.
take the best aspects of java, objective-c, eiffel and maybe some smalltalk like elements and roll them up into one language.
It's not they are illegal it's that the authors of the software may be able to sue the installers. Since this will never happen in reality the installers can sleep in peace.
"But you don't believe in selling the things *you produce* for money, which, if anything, is the real bedrock of capitalism."
Again that's not true. I sell some stuff I produce, I get paid for other things I produce, and I GPL some stuff I produce. It's all according to the marketplace. If I can compete and have a chance in hell of winning then I'll ask for money, If I have no chance to win then I'll GPL (which is winning!).
"I.e. If you can't make the blind people see, poke out everyone's eyes so they can all compete on the same level."
Bzzzzzt wrong again. I harm no one by releaseing my code under the GPL. I could have not released it at all, I could have simply retained the copyright. Nobody has to accept the GPL. If they want to use my code then can PAY ME. So you can pay me with the GPL or you can pay me with cash. Either way I want to get paid for my code.
"My intent is to make enough money to live a comfortable life"
I already make enough money to live a comfortable life. My employer compensates me generously for my labors.
"There's enough room out there for more than one person out there to make money, although OSS has significantly reduced my chances."
OSS only hurts you if you are too stupid to write your own code. If you are too lazy to write your own code, too stupid to ride on the backs of BSD coders and exploit their labors then you don't deserve to make money. Capitalism is not a handout, nobody owes you code, nobody owes yoy anything.
"You view competition as a game and you are willing to cut off your nose to spite your face."
I don't hurt myself at all by GPLing my code. I win. I get better code (other people help me) yet at the same time Bill Gates is too afraid to touch my code and ruin it for everybody.
"there is strong evidence of a correlation between guns and murder, so to say that guns and murder are "unrelated" is simply willful ignorance."
You are seeing a causation where none exists. People murder with guns because guns are an effective tool for killing. Before guns people murdered with knives, arrows and swords. Guns are just a tool.
"But you don't believe in selling things for money, which, if anything, is the real bedrock of capitalism. "
I have said repeatedly that I have no objection to anybody selling anything. I really don't know where you are getting this stuff from. You can't just make shit up and then draw a conclusion from it.
Not only do I believe in selling things for money, I also believe in an expanded definition of currency. In a rapidly evolving world we need to expand our ways of looking at wealth and currency. The GPL is but one way of refining currency. It's a way of converting labor to wealth that effectively allows you to compete with Bill Gates the richest man in the world. In the old economy BIll Gates gets to fuck you in ass while making your mother watch just for fun and because he owns the world. In the new economy (by exploring new kinds of currency and wealth) you can hope to compete with him.
"Face it: you are perfectly willing to relinquish your labours to others"
You are truly misinformed. When I release my code under the GPL I retain ownership of the code. I also retain a degree of control over what happens to that code forever.
See my comment above why in some ways GPLing code is better then selling it. When you sell your code you are competing with Bill Gates. That's a fight you are going to lose because he is the richest, most powerful person on the planet. You are just wasting your money and time by fighting a 400 pound gorilla.
It's better the enter a fight you at least have a chance of winning.
"And the Indians? And a reborn Russian program? And the ESA? Is the US going to take on the entire world?"
Yes.
We will kill anybody we want anytime we want for whatever reason we want. That's the bush doctorine.
"However, if you do feel like releasing your software under terms that allow redistribution of the source code without renumeration paid to the original author as cash or cash equivalents, I would rather you released it under a BSD license rather than GPL so that if someone else thinks they could make money from it, they aren't likely to be disuaded by the terms of the license."
It's apparent to me that your value system is very narrowly defined. You define value and worth (and cost and price) strictly in terms of cash. I guess that's what makes us different.
"Sure, if you want to be naive. I should also point out that guns have nothing to do with murder. You can have murder without guns and you can have guns without murder."
Absolutely. That is dead on. COngratulations, you now get it.
"The real question is why you care that someone is reusing your code without permission."
Because I am not a communist. I believe in ownership and property. Those things are the bedrock of capitalism.
"The BSD license doesn't deprive you of your code. If someone extends your software without BSD'ing that, it doesn't even deprive other people of your code. It just gives them more options: they can have the original code for free, or they can have the improved software for a price."
Right. Public domain will accomplish the same thing (there is very little difference between public domain and BSD). It's communism. I am not a communist, I don't believe in communism. I don't think that people should be forced or even encouraged to relquinsh their labors to others.
"Even Stallman supports music piracy."
He believes in fair use not piracy. I for one think it's immoral that a musician or their agents can punish you for singing a song.
Ask anybody who has done this and they will tell you what a bad idea it is.
Putting business logic into the database is a tarpit which will doom your application.
No unit testing, no way to organize your code into discrete files, no compiler to check the sanity of your entire codebase, no object oriented features (for MSSQL anyway), basically crappy SP languages. It goes on and on.
Having said that most non microsoft databases support java as an SP language and that mitigates a lot of my objections.
" There still is one, you know. Sooner or later, the Chinese will shoot a capsule to the moon, because they have a real interest in going there - and then America will sit back and suddenly realize that they have NOTHING that can do what the Chinese had just done. We'd have to create the Apollo program from scratch. SCRATCH."
It is now an official policy of the united states that no other nation will challenge our supremacy in space.
If the chinese get close we will kill them.
"Bob: "Let me see your 1040... You only made $143,000 last year. I'm not telling you anything."
More likely response.
Bob: "It will cost you 10 billion dollars to know the answer."
"However, if you do feel like giving your software away, I would rather you release it as BSD rather than GPL so you don't deny someone else the opportunity to make money off of it."
/. also support music piracy,"
Once again GPL has a price. People who release code under the GPL are not "giving it away". The GPL is a EULA just like the code you sell has a EULA. There is no appreciable difference between the code you sell and the GPLed code.
"Metaphorically, one could say that GPL'ed software has a price."
No not metaphorically, it actually has a price. The price is not money but it's a price nevertheless. The price is so high that people like you (and Bill Gates) can not afford to pay it. It's a new kind of price for a new kind of economy.
"I dislike the GPL because I think it will be bad for the economy. Contrast that with your irrational outlook, which centres around the overwhelming fear that someone, somewhere is making money off your work (even though it does you no harm for them to do so)."
The GPL has nothing to do with money. I don't care who makes money with my code. I am happy when people make money with my code. I just don't want them to steal it. That's all. They can make all the money they want as long as they don't deny other people the same rights that I gave them (and other people gave me).
"Since it appears that the majority of GPL advocates on
Bullshit, offtopic and irrelevent.
"Instead, vote with your eyes and go somewhere else. But stop whining."
Do both.
No and it's not fair to taint the tens of thousands of honest and ethical business people in the US by saying that they are all like Bill Gates.
It's not bad. In the case of PHP it's not needed. PHP is not a storngly typed language so you can write a getBalance() function which can take any damned thing you can pass in.
Once inside the function you can test the passed in variable and take appropriate action.
You can also do other crazy things like declare functions without parameters and pass parameters into them.
You can declare methods that act as "default" method handlers.
You can add methods to objects at runtime!.
Hell you can even define classes at runtime.
It's highly dynamic.
If
They are not allowed to upgrade their version of java but nothing is preventing them from including a newer JVM from Sun or IBM.
"To call me a communist is ridiculous"
To call you a communist is absolutely accurate. You advocate that people donate their labors to public for the benefit of the public for the advancement of the public good. This is exactly what communism is all about.
As I stated before, the GPL is closer to captialism then public domain or BSD. GPL'ed code comes with restrictions and a price and is therefore is closer to proprietary/capitalism model.
"What I do advocate is pragmatism. The GPL is a Machiavelian plot to bring down the entire software economy."
Lying does not help your cause. You can spread all kinds of venom and hatred towards the GPL or stallamn or whaoever you want but it only makes you look more stupid because you are not able to convince other people of your point of view using logic. This kinds of obvious vitriolic lie was exactly the kind of propaganda used by other prominent communist and look how far it got them.
"Yeah, but it's amazing how 90% of those people lose their ideals when it comes to the ownership of other peoples' music."
Off topic and irrelevant.
"Now you're not even being consistent with your last message, in which you deride communism."
,you made so many scattered arguments that I have lost track of what you are saying. All I know is that you hate stallman, you hate the GPL and you are on some kind of a crusade to convince people to embrace communism by donating their labor to the public good.
I never derided communism. Go back and re-read my posts.
"Aside from that, you didn't even bother to refute my point"
You know
I don't have anything against communism. If you want to advocate a socialist/communist lifestyle that is your right. Maybe we would all be better off if everybody (including Bill Gates) just dumped all their code into the public pool but Bill Gates is not a communist and he would never ever share his products with the public. By the same token The folks at the FSF are not communists either and they also don't want to dump their code into the public pool.
GPL is closer to your ideal then the proprietary code of MS and all other corporations so I really don't see why you would hate them so much while at the same time praising MS.
Once again I have nothing against communism it's just that history shows that it does not work.
It's great that you have communist ideals and want to share your work with the world. It's great that you want to relinquish ownership of your labors and let everybody have it for nothing. But it's not fair to force other people to share in your beliefs.
Some people don't want to let anybody do whatever they want with their code.
MS does not have to bundle java. If they choose to bundle java then they must bundle a JVM that is compliant with the sun license.
.NET runtime.
If they can not bundle a JVM that is compliant with the JVM they are not allowed to call it java. They could for example call it
Your govt gives you silly things like health care, clean streets, low crime and free education.
Our govt gives us shiny new tanks and airplanes and lots and lots of missles to kill muslims with.
So there!.
For that kind of money the Army could have hired the entire development teams of KDE, Samba, postgresql, and apache.
Imagine having that kind of support at your fingertips.
"I don't understand what you have against working for the greater good."
/. motto."
./ but what the fuck who cares.
I don't have anything against it. I just call it what it is which is communism. If you are communist and want to advance the cause of communism then by all means release your code into the public domain.
"As I said, I was only paraphrasing a common
I have enver heard that on
I will say it again.
/. motto, people are going to steal your code no matter what you do, so you might as well release it as BSD and at least get credit for it."
If you release your code into the public domain you are practising communism and advancing the cause of communism. Communism is working for the greater good. In communist countries your labor and efforts don't belong to you they belong to the "people". In other words in communism all your labor is in the public domain and for the benefit of the public.
GPL may not be capitalism in the sense that you perceive capitalism but there is no denying that GPLed code comes with a price. The price is not money but it's a high price nevertheless. SO high that most companies won't pay it.
"To paraphrase a
That's just downright stupid. Do you leave your bike unlocked? DO you leave your house unlocked? Why make it easy or safe for people to steal your labor. That's communism.
"The world should not be denied the benefit of your people-skills."
Once again you display your lack of inteligence by failing to keep to the topic of the discussion.
Are you going to tell us a cute story of about your dog now?
In communism you work for the benefit of other people (the greater good). If you realease your code under a BSD or a public domain license you are practising communism.
That's why GPL people get upset when you call them communists. They are charging for their product, the price is clearly stated and you are not under any obligation to buy it.
GPL is capitalism public domain and BSD is communism.
"When exactly did charity become a negative thing?"
When peace became a dirty word. I think it was right around the first gulf war of Bush Sr.