My machines both at work and at home already have established naming conventions, but if I were starting out now, I'd use names like seismo, utzoo, cbosgd, allegra, and ihnp4 -- for obvious reasons.
I name my home machines this way. Not hard to spell; I just use the obvious one- or two-letter alias. Best of all, every chemistry book has a backup of my zone files.
I'm curious; how many 64-bit UNIX(-alike) systems were there before the first port to an Intel part, and exactly how long ago was the first? (Indeed, how many other 64-bit operating systems and architectures predate IA-64?)
Was UNICOS first? Then SysV on the ETA-10, VX/VE and the native port (name?) on the Cyber 180,... after that I can't think of any more for several years. Then the micros (in what order?): OSF/1 (alias DU, Tru64) on Alpha, IRIX on MIPS, Solaris on Sparc, AIX on Power, HP/UX on HPPA, and....? And of course NetBSD and Linux both on Alpha and Sparc.
A dozen at least. But get ready for the "First 64-bit Computer!" news reports once Intel finally ships.
Ah, but the dc paper clearly states that numbers are stored with one base-100 "digit" per char, followed by the scale factor, and that P simply prints the characters. That's why
3367683276.6569823265P
must print out
A REAL DC!
if, in fact, it is a real dc. GNU dc prints some random crap instead. Therefore, GNU dc is broken.
<flamebait>That's why GNU/Linux systems just don't feel right -- they get so many of the details wrong.</flamebait>
Re:You can do it just using "dc"
on
Nitrozac Answers
·
· Score: 1
Congratulations! You've been embraced and extended by the FSF. <pedant>That use of P is inconsistent with the description in the original paper, DC - An Interactive Desk Calculator.</pedant>
(Oooh! Bet you've never seen a dc flamewar before.)
A book suitable for laymen (i.e. no math/physics background necessary) that covers this is The Fabric of Reality by David Deutsch, one of the pioneers of quantum computing mentioned in the article. See here.
In 1977, if you wanted a computer with 256k ram, you started by asking the architect how much it would cost for the raised floor and the air-conditioning.
A slight exaggeration. In 1975 you could put 256Kb in a PDP-11/45, and that's smaller than a fridge, happy on a solid floor, and needs air conditioning only in the summer:-)
Database client: "Excuse me, but, if you wouldn't mind, could you mark record 27B/6 as 'completed', please." Database server: "Sure thing; marked it is."
X client: "Excuse me, but, if you wouldn't mind, could you draw me a rectangle please? Just a little one." X server: "Sure thing; drawn it is."
What I don't understand is why people think X uses the terms backwards. Would someone mind explaining?
... get rid of those fscking.Xdefaults and.appdefaults files!
You realize there's a difference?
If the programmer wants certain UI behaviors to be customizable, she should just add a "Preferences" dialog
So, I get to go through twenty-three applications' preference dialogs to tell each one that on my double-headed console I want to use 16-point Lucida on a LightSteelBlue background (I don't really, that's just an example!), while on the quiet little monochrome terminal in the bedroom I want one of its built-in fonts on a white background.... Or more likely, I don't get to do that because it doesn't occur to the apps' luser programmers that I might want to run the thing on different displays with different properties.
That's part of what the article's author meant by the "PC-centric" attitude of many X opponents. X sucks, but how can people come up with better answers if they don't even notice that there are questions?
I'd take objection to his calling the use of NP-complete problems "security through obscurity"
He has a point though, if only by accident. He writes:
The back door into cryptographic methods that rely on multiplying primes is, quite simply, to develop a swift means of factoring those multiples. This
NP-time problem must be solved before a private key can be derived...
The complexity of factoring is an open question, isn't it? It might be easier than NP. A quantum computer using Shor's algorithm could factor quickly (if built), so factoring-based schemes (RSA) would fall apart. This doesn't require that NP-complete problems be solvable quickly.
Exactly/what/ in that article wasn't common knowledge?
That P=NP?
What is Slashdot coming to these days?
Yeah, you'd think news like that would rate its *own* item:-)
(Note: I didn't see anything *on the referenced site* that *claimed* that this method solved the Travelling Salesman problem in linear time. Hint: more cities need longer and more chains.)
The MIPS R4000 was the first 64-bit CPU (back in 1989 or 1990, IIRC).
The first 64-bit microprocessor, perhaps.
Nothing against MIPS parts -- my main workstation at home and my main games machine both use 'em (the latter is faster, of course) -- but 64-bit machines existed well before that.
Just wait; when Merced-based PCs become available, the idiot press will tout them as the first 64-bit computers.
Slashdot Mirror
My machines both at work and at home already have established naming conventions, but if I were starting out now, I'd use names like seismo, utzoo, cbosgd, allegra, and ihnp4 -- for obvious reasons.
I name my home machines this way. Not hard to spell; I just use the obvious one- or two-letter alias. Best of all, every chemistry book has a backup of my zone files.
UNICOS first I can believe, though at that point Cray was a long, long way from being sold to SGI.
IRIX surely wasn't second. At the time of the 64-bit CDC machines (mid 80s), Silicon Graphics was building M68K boxes.
Na. Hs. Au.
I'm curious; how many 64-bit UNIX(-alike) systems were there before the first port to an Intel part, and exactly how long ago was the first? (Indeed, how many other 64-bit operating systems and architectures predate IA-64?)
Was UNICOS first? Then SysV on the ETA-10, VX/VE and the native port (name?) on the Cyber 180, ... after that I can't think of any more for several years. Then the micros (in what order?): OSF/1 (alias DU, Tru64) on Alpha, IRIX on MIPS, Solaris on Sparc, AIX on Power, HP/UX on HPPA, and....? And of course NetBSD and Linux both on Alpha and Sparc.
A dozen at least. But get ready for the "First 64-bit Computer!" news reports once Intel finally ships.
Okay, okay. Fr, Ni, or Au would do too. But that's my final offer.
Of course not half a second after posting, I remember Hs.
If they were going to use that pattern, I think they really should have picked Na rather than Ti.
And NOS/VE, 15-odd years ago. I understand HCR got UNIX running on the 64-bit CYBERs as well.
But none of those ran on Intel processors, so obviously they don't count.
Ah, but the dc paper clearly states that numbers are stored with one base-100 "digit" per char, followed by the scale factor, and that P simply prints the characters. That's why
3367683276.6569823265Pmust print out
A REAL DC!if, in fact, it is a real dc. GNU dc prints some random crap instead. Therefore, GNU dc is broken.
<flamebait>That's why GNU/Linux systems just don't feel right -- they get so many of the details wrong.</flamebait>
Congratulations! You've been embraced and extended by the FSF. <pedant>That use of P is inconsistent with the description in the original paper, DC - An Interactive Desk Calculator.</pedant>
(Oooh! Bet you've never seen a dc flamewar before.)
Perl!? Real unix systems don't have perl -- it doesn't fit, even with split I&D.
Also, perl is too easy to read. Try dc:
96dd[ll-]sgse4+st3/sl2i[sidle<glilt*+ls1-dss0<o]
so[?zss0loxPlax]salax
Note: this won't work with GNU dc. GNU dc is broken.
Nah, twitching is Tourette's syndrome. Turret's syndrome is associated with rotating slowly to face the target.
A book suitable for laymen (i.e. no math/physics background necessary) that covers this is The Fabric of Reality by David Deutsch, one of the pioneers of quantum computing mentioned in the article. See here.
In 1977, if you wanted a computer with 256k ram, you started by asking the architect how much it would cost for the raised floor and the air-conditioning.
A slight exaggeration. In 1975 you could put 256Kb in a PDP-11/45, and that's smaller than a fridge, happy on a solid floor, and needs air conditioning only in the summer :-)
And in ten years, the Altair will still be worth $2500, at least, while the Dell stuff will be worth $5.
Sure. Compare it to, for example, a database.
Database client: "Excuse me, but, if you wouldn't mind, could you mark record 27B/6 as 'completed', please." Database server: "Sure thing; marked it is."
X client: "Excuse me, but, if you wouldn't mind, could you draw me a rectangle please? Just a little one." X server: "Sure thing; drawn it is."
What I don't understand is why people think X uses the terms backwards. Would someone mind explaining?
You realize there's a difference?
If the programmer wants certain UI behaviors to be customizable, she should just add a "Preferences" dialog
So, I get to go through twenty-three applications' preference dialogs to tell each one that on my double-headed console I want to use 16-point Lucida on a LightSteelBlue background (I don't really, that's just an example!), while on the quiet little monochrome terminal in the bedroom I want one of its built-in fonts on a white background.... Or more likely, I don't get to do that because it doesn't occur to the apps' luser programmers that I might want to run the thing on different displays with different properties.
That's part of what the article's author meant by the "PC-centric" attitude of many X opponents. X sucks, but how can people come up with better answers if they don't even notice that there are questions?
He has a point though, if only by accident. He writes:
The complexity of factoring is an open question, isn't it? It might be easier than NP. A quantum computer using Shor's algorithm could factor quickly (if built), so factoring-based schemes (RSA) would fall apart. This doesn't require that NP-complete problems be solvable quickly.
That P=NP?
Yeah, you'd think news like that would rate its *own* item :-)
(Note: I didn't see anything *on the referenced site* that *claimed* that this method solved the Travelling Salesman problem in linear time. Hint: more cities need longer and more chains.)
The first 64-bit microprocessor, perhaps.
Nothing against MIPS parts -- my main workstation at home and my main games machine both use 'em (the latter is faster, of course) -- but 64-bit machines existed well before that.
Just wait; when Merced-based PCs become available, the idiot press will tout them as the first 64-bit computers.
Rogers doesn't (afaik) create any content
Actually Rogers owns several cable channels and at least one broadcast station.
"... change the way Canadians watch TV"
It will. I'm gonna get a dish...
Also, manpages aren't required in SysV (they're a BSD-ism)
Ha. The First Edition man pages are available online.
Hell, even GNU disses manpages in favor of "info"!
"Those who don't understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it, poorly." -- Henry Spencer