you can keep it in your hard drive and/or redistribute at will.
If they are sending it over the network to my computer then I can find a way to do that, no matter what application they want to force me to use to play it.
When exactly is $200 going to be change for me? I've been at my job for six years, had my degree for four, almost have my masters, survived all my company's layoffs, and just got a raise, but $200 is still a major purchase I have to think about for awhile. Heck, I have to think about the $10 purchases, because they add up.
When am I going to finally be able to spend money like water?
I don't see how it's "flamebait" or "troll." Apparently functional programmers can't see past "defense of the functional paradigm of programming."
Don't you understand? I want to be one of you; I want to be a functional programmer. I want to know what this book is about and if it can help me get into functional programming. I already know there's something special and wonderful to be gained from the functional paradigm. I don't need an introduction to functional programming or a defense of its merits. What I need is a description of what's in this book. (My thanks to the user who posted the book's table of contents. That was far better than the review.)
I guess some folks are so busy dividing up the world into "friends" and "enemies" that they can't figure out how to just provide information. Obviously, since I didn't rave about how great the review was, I must be an enemy of functional programming and deserve to be modded down.
How can this review be so great when the reviewer didn't even talk about the book? I'd probably willingly agree the book was great if I could know what was in it, but this review told me next to nothing. The people who've said the review is great are really commenting on the quality of the book, not the review; almost all of them say they've already got it.
If you don't know any functional languages and don't want to learn them, this book will not be helpful
I do know functional languages a little, and I very much want to learn more. I've got a bit of scheme and lisp under my belt and a vague understanding of what they offer; I would certainly enjoy adding ML and OCaml, too. More importantly, I'd love to see concepts of how to use a functional language in practice to represent data structures.
Judging by the table of contents that somebody else posted in the comments, the book does sound helpful. The original review, unfortunately, was not. He failed to talk about the book itself and let me, an interested programmer who already knows what a functional language is, know why I should read the book.
I hate to disagree, but I don't feel there was a lot of content. I'm very interested in functional programming and would have liked to know what sort of topics are covered in the book and get a sneak peak at the "how-to" behind representing data structures in a purely functional language. Instead I got an introduction to lazy functional languages followed by an introduction to functional languages. Good material, to be sure, but about the only thing I got on the book's specific content was that it requires you to know big-O notation and has an introduction to functional languages that really doesn't completely suffice if you've never seen functional programming before.
You make the mistake of underestimating AZO possibly because it's not a hard-core tech company.
Here's hoping SCO is making the same mistake. I think the post you're responding to is accurately interpreting SCO's reasoning, even if AZ is actually pretty technologically illiterate.
I read at 4 and almost always see wonderful stuff. A good chunk of what I see seems to be posts saying, "Why is everyone saying X? X is not true; Y instead!" Reading slashdot at high moderation, while not perfect, means you're seeing a fairly high level of peer review and correction on the comments. And you get to see good jokes.:)
Also, I mark people as friends when I see insightful comments, and set a bonus modifier to their posts. That increases the quality of the comments I see significantly. Unfortunately I got to 200 friends and can't set any more.:)
I've got yet another question. If AutoZone WAS using SCO, then presumably they have or had a SCO license, right? They "bought" the software to run on their machines. As long as that license didn't expire, didn't they have the right to take portions of that software and keep it running on those machines, under another OS? Why is it automatically assumed that using shared libraries which AutoZone had the right to would be infringement? What exactly were the terms of SCO's license, anyway?
It almost seems like it would be worth it for an organization wanting to migrate from SCO to Linux to first migrate to Sun Solaris or something. SCO apparently doesn't realize just how much good UNIX coding practices have proliferated. In the past efficiently moving a program from one UNIX to another required all kinds of compatibility libraries, but fifteen years of O'Reilly books, internet discussion, free UNIX software, and GNU autoconf have made people realize what a pain it is to be locked into relying on operating system specific features.
Buying a Sun license when practical and migrating there first would help prove that the code was easily portable and there has been no underhanded trickery in porting. Or, if a Sun license is too much, the software could be ported first to one of the BSDs. Once the initial port away from SCO is done, the port to Linux should be almost trivial, as long as care is taken to use only standard UNIX features. Two ports could even be done simultaneously.
I'm presently running Gentoo on my dual boot snow ibook. The fact is that I would prefer Debian; I used to run Debian exclusively on this machine's predecessor, a blueberry that couldn't handle the static electricity of the winter of 2002-2003.:) Unfortunately I spent half a year trying to get Debian X to work on this machine with no luck. I finally discovered that the version of X with the correct drivers is still considered experimental. I never could get any luck figuring out how to rehome my machine to get the right XFree86, and finally decided Gentoo would be easier, which it was.
I like Gentoo. I admit it seems speedy (though this is the fastest machine I've ever owned). I used to like compiling my own Linux distro through Linux From Scratch and sort of like the idea that everything on this machine was compiled for source (though since I didn't do it manually myself I don't have quite the same since of satisfaction). That said, Gentoo currently doesn't offer anything that will make me stay with it after Debian catches up. Worst of all, I have some doubts that all of the software I can emerge is under licensing schemes I want; they seem to be a little bit more lax about that than RedHat and Debian.
So can you actually give an example of a piece of software that you have written and licensed under the BSD license that helps feed your family but could not have done so under a GPL license? Are there really a lot of people out there feeding their families on open source BSD-licensed work?
The term interactive fiction isn't new. Infocom was using it in their glory days.
I'd say the main point of the term is that the games can be described as literary works of fiction, and they are interactive. I don't see anything politically correct about it at all. I'd shy away from "adventure game" because to me adventure game suggests some sort of high-paced excitement, probably involving slaying dragons and such. These games were set in so many different genres that many of them wouldn't seem "adventurous" to me. For example, the classic infocom game "Nord and Bert couldn't make head or tail or it" is mostly a game of word puzzles and could hardly be described as an "adventure" at all.
Do not call secretaries and HR people. Find newspaper articles (or online or whatever) that mention names and call those people. Be very polite and respectful, as well as appreciative of their time. Call to ask questions; do not call to ask for an interview or a job. Call with good questions that the person you're talking to will enjoy answering.
Definitely go check out the Ask the Headhunter site, weekly email newsletter, and book for more details on how to do this.
Re:Installation for BerkeleyDB, Apache, Subversion
on
Subversion 1.0 Released
·
· Score: 3, Informative
make sure LD_LIBRARY_PATH includes/usr/local/BerkeleyDB.4.2
Gah! Don't use LD_LIBRARY_PATH. Instead you should be setting LD_RUN_PATH when you compile applications that will use the Berkeley DB library.
I seem to recall that several years back (2001) sourceforge did some tests for subversion where they imported all of their repositories into a subversion repository as a stress test. (Yes, subversion has been working as a minimally functional VCS since then... since then they've been adding features, refining protocols, and most importantly making it more robust.) I'm pretty certain sourceforge will want to be moving to subversion, or at least making it an option.
Slashdot Mirror
you can keep it in your hard drive and/or redistribute at will.
If they are sending it over the network to my computer then I can find a way to do that, no matter what application they want to force me to use to play it.
When exactly is $200 going to be change for me? I've been at my job for six years, had my degree for four, almost have my masters, survived all my company's layoffs, and just got a raise, but $200 is still a major purchase I have to think about for awhile. Heck, I have to think about the $10 purchases, because they add up.
When am I going to finally be able to spend money like water?
All of a sudden, I'm thinking of naming my first child after Maxwell's equations.
... who was immediately reminded of Chairface Chippendale?
If you ever get interested in printing books on demand, CafePress now offers that service.
I don't see how it's "flamebait" or "troll." Apparently functional programmers can't see past "defense of the functional paradigm of programming."
Don't you understand? I want to be one of you; I want to be a functional programmer. I want to know what this book is about and if it can help me get into functional programming. I already know there's something special and wonderful to be gained from the functional paradigm. I don't need an introduction to functional programming or a defense of its merits. What I need is a description of what's in this book. (My thanks to the user who posted the book's table of contents. That was far better than the review.)
I guess some folks are so busy dividing up the world into "friends" and "enemies" that they can't figure out how to just provide information. Obviously, since I didn't rave about how great the review was, I must be an enemy of functional programming and deserve to be modded down.
How can this review be so great when the reviewer didn't even talk about the book? I'd probably willingly agree the book was great if I could know what was in it, but this review told me next to nothing. The people who've said the review is great are really commenting on the quality of the book, not the review; almost all of them say they've already got it.
If you don't know any functional languages and don't want to learn them, this book will not be helpful
I do know functional languages a little, and I very much want to learn more. I've got a bit of scheme and lisp under my belt and a vague understanding of what they offer; I would certainly enjoy adding ML and OCaml, too. More importantly, I'd love to see concepts of how to use a functional language in practice to represent data structures.
Judging by the table of contents that somebody else posted in the comments, the book does sound helpful. The original review, unfortunately, was not. He failed to talk about the book itself and let me, an interested programmer who already knows what a functional language is, know why I should read the book.
I hate to disagree, but I don't feel there was a lot of content. I'm very interested in functional programming and would have liked to know what sort of topics are covered in the book and get a sneak peak at the "how-to" behind representing data structures in a purely functional language. Instead I got an introduction to lazy functional languages followed by an introduction to functional languages. Good material, to be sure, but about the only thing I got on the book's specific content was that it requires you to know big-O notation and has an introduction to functional languages that really doesn't completely suffice if you've never seen functional programming before.
You make the mistake of underestimating AZO possibly because it's not a hard-core tech company.
Here's hoping SCO is making the same mistake. I think the post you're responding to is accurately interpreting SCO's reasoning, even if AZ is actually pretty technologically illiterate.
I read at 4 and almost always see wonderful stuff. A good chunk of what I see seems to be posts saying, "Why is everyone saying X? X is not true; Y instead!" Reading slashdot at high moderation, while not perfect, means you're seeing a fairly high level of peer review and correction on the comments. And you get to see good jokes. :)
Also, I mark people as friends when I see insightful comments, and set a bonus modifier to their posts. That increases the quality of the comments I see significantly. Unfortunately I got to 200 friends and can't set any more. :)
I've got yet another question. If AutoZone WAS using SCO, then presumably they have or had a SCO license, right? They "bought" the software to run on their machines. As long as that license didn't expire, didn't they have the right to take portions of that software and keep it running on those machines, under another OS? Why is it automatically assumed that using shared libraries which AutoZone had the right to would be infringement? What exactly were the terms of SCO's license, anyway?
It almost seems like it would be worth it for an organization wanting to migrate from SCO to Linux to first migrate to Sun Solaris or something. SCO apparently doesn't realize just how much good UNIX coding practices have proliferated. In the past efficiently moving a program from one UNIX to another required all kinds of compatibility libraries, but fifteen years of O'Reilly books, internet discussion, free UNIX software, and GNU autoconf have made people realize what a pain it is to be locked into relying on operating system specific features.
Buying a Sun license when practical and migrating there first would help prove that the code was easily portable and there has been no underhanded trickery in porting. Or, if a Sun license is too much, the software could be ported first to one of the BSDs. Once the initial port away from SCO is done, the port to Linux should be almost trivial, as long as care is taken to use only standard UNIX features. Two ports could even be done simultaneously.
Good call!
Thanks. I'll probably migrate back once this semester ends, then.
I'm presently running Gentoo on my dual boot snow ibook. The fact is that I would prefer Debian; I used to run Debian exclusively on this machine's predecessor, a blueberry that couldn't handle the static electricity of the winter of 2002-2003. :) Unfortunately I spent half a year trying to get Debian X to work on this machine with no luck. I finally discovered that the version of X with the correct drivers is still considered experimental. I never could get any luck figuring out how to rehome my machine to get the right XFree86, and finally decided Gentoo would be easier, which it was.
I like Gentoo. I admit it seems speedy (though this is the fastest machine I've ever owned). I used to like compiling my own Linux distro through Linux From Scratch and sort of like the idea that everything on this machine was compiled for source (though since I didn't do it manually myself I don't have quite the same since of satisfaction). That said, Gentoo currently doesn't offer anything that will make me stay with it after Debian catches up. Worst of all, I have some doubts that all of the software I can emerge is under licensing schemes I want; they seem to be a little bit more lax about that than RedHat and Debian.
So can you actually give an example of a piece of software that you have written and licensed under the BSD license that helps feed your family but could not have done so under a GPL license? Are there really a lot of people out there feeding their families on open source BSD-licensed work?
Who remembers Perry Simm? Absolutely best story in a game manual ever.
And nowadays, some people are actually trying it. (I'm really curious if that project is real or if they are putting us on. Can anyone tell?)
The term interactive fiction isn't new. Infocom was using it in their glory days.
I'd say the main point of the term is that the games can be described as literary works of fiction, and they are interactive. I don't see anything politically correct about it at all. I'd shy away from "adventure game" because to me adventure game suggests some sort of high-paced excitement, probably involving slaying dragons and such. These games were set in so many different genres that many of them wouldn't seem "adventurous" to me. For example, the classic infocom game "Nord and Bert couldn't make head or tail or it" is mostly a game of word puzzles and could hardly be described as an "adventure" at all.
I'm kind of amazed noone's mentioned that you can telnet to eldorado.elsewhere.org.
--- Free America - Vote Libertarian [lp.org]
Check out the Free State Project if you haven't already. They are freeing America one state at a time. :)
Do not call secretaries and HR people. Find newspaper articles (or online or whatever) that mention names and call those people. Be very polite and respectful, as well as appreciative of their time. Call to ask questions; do not call to ask for an interview or a job. Call with good questions that the person you're talking to will enjoy answering.
Definitely go check out the Ask the Headhunter site, weekly email newsletter, and book for more details on how to do this.
make sure LD_LIBRARY_PATH includes /usr/local/BerkeleyDB.4.2
Gah! Don't use LD_LIBRARY_PATH. Instead you should be setting LD_RUN_PATH when you compile applications that will use the Berkeley DB library.
I seem to recall that several years back (2001) sourceforge did some tests for subversion where they imported all of their repositories into a subversion repository as a stress test. (Yes, subversion has been working as a minimally functional VCS since then ... since then they've been adding features, refining protocols, and most importantly making it more robust.) I'm pretty certain sourceforge will want to be moving to subversion, or at least making it an option.
I'm not quite sure how readily available binaries of subversion 0.37 help with the problem of waiting for binaries of subversion 1.0 ...
Err, Andy's ID on slashdot is different.