That may be the case, but it seems to me that the way those skinned COM controls work isn't the way tools like "grep" and "sort" work. Word isn't an editor that calls up a spell-checker when needed, pipes things to a printing subsystem later, uses a word-counter-tool when needed, etc. It is a monolithic thing that (seemingly at least) runs all those tools at the same time. Something monolithic must be starting, otherwise why does Word take so long to load, even on the fastest machine?
More to the point, why does everything need to be built into another layer of abstraction from the operating system? Why can't the spellchecker be used on a text file in notepad? Why can't Word highlight a piece of code automatically since I have Visual Studio on my computer?
Why, in fact, do we need "Yet another GUI" on top of the Desktop GUI that we already have?
Perhaps a real cool solution would be to stop treating the desktop as "Something that's there to be a host to other programs" and more as "something that's there to let me get my job done".
As an example, when you think of the command line, do you think of bash, or do you think of all of those useful utilities is/usr/bin such as grep which can be combined in different ways to do different things?
The only response I can think of is to identify and destroy the organizations responsible and any governments who gave aid and comfort to the terrorists. Fuck the civilians of these countries, they obviously are like the Borg and believe everything that there goverment says because they are lesser lifeforms than us Americans and deserve to Die.
The issue is revenge. Those who initiate force against us must be identified and killed as a warning to the rest of the world not to fuck with America.
We (the US) should not rely on the fiction of "international law" -- we believe that we are the law. This is an act of war and war is the appropriate response, even though we don't know who we are fighting yet - we'll pick a likely target, because as I said, we need to make an example to the rest of the world.
I'm glad you're not a citizen of the US. You clearly don't deserve to be, because your not like me.
* * *
This is the message that your post sends to me. I sure as hell hope that I am wrong.
Look at the arms situation. If it was a nuclear capable organization that did this, any attack from the U.S. is going to result in those nukes being used
When I first saw on television the devestation, I had this terrfiying thought in the back of my mind that the tell-tale mushroom cloud would suddenly appear in the back of one of the broadcasts.
It's nice to see how ready you are to enrol yourself in the army and go on the front line in all this.
But please don't start world war III - I would get dragged into it too if it escalated. Whether through conscription, or through the effects that the nuclear weapons that would fly around the world would have on me.
I have been in a state of shock from what I've seen on television today, even though I live in England, thousands of miles away. I know people who are touring America. They visited the white house last week. I don't know where they are at this moment in time. But more than anything else, the thought that goes through my head is that if this had happened in 5 years time, it could just have easily been me, or people who I know trapped at the top of one of those twin towers when they collapsed. And that truly terrifies me.
Even though it happened in America because it is the largest target, I also cannot think of any reason why the same attack could not have succeeded in England, and neither can the rest of the country - our stock exchange has been evacuated, airport security has been increased, our Government has gone into a state of emergency.
I do not disagree with you that the people involved should be brought to justice, but by waging war on everyone whom you even think could be involved with this tradegy is a terrible thought. I truly hope that you calm down and think the situation through rationally, rather than acting on you emotions which you are understandably doing at the moment.
Teach em perl and lisp. They can't rejoin society until they can look at the obfuscation competition winning entries and say what they do at a single glance:-)
For me, you can't beat a good 'ol pinball machine.
Requires fast reflexes, quick thinking, and the better you are the better you longer you play for (with no upper boundary). What more could you ask for?
I accept that the JVM fits the description of an emulator, but why do you decisively state that it isn't an interpreter? It seems that those terms can be used interchangably.
Hmm... Just my own interpretaion of what an emulator and an interpreter are, I suppose. I consider an interpreter to be something that takes a high level language, and understands what to do with it (for instance, regular expressions in Perl).
I see an emulator more as a "I don't know what this program does, but I can follow this set of instructions and see what happens".
Surely though the problem here would be either bloat (since the com object would need to carry every interface that ever existed, possibly seperately), and/or the complexity would still be there inside of the object.
You still need the most up-to-date com object (what happens if you ask for IID_ICAT2 and it doesn't exist?) or else you have still got lot's of conditionals for the new code to check which COM version is available and to work with it.
The point was also on environmental benefits. True, books won't cost any less, but books aren't disposable and usually aren't just thrown away. The landfill/rain forest savings would, in deed be grand.
Please remember that computers require POWER. This power comes from powerstations, which require coal, gas, or nuclear power. Environmentally these are just as bad as cutting down rainforests (in fact, when you realise that every tree in the rainforest releases EVERYTHING back into the atmosphere when it dies and rots, you realise that books aren't such a bad thing).
What we really need if we want to be environemental is to look at ways of preserving energy. This includes using renewable sources (such as sunlight and wind power), reducing the amount of power we use (computers are hideously inefficiant), and using the most efficiant sources of energy around. Muscle is good - i.e. writing on blackboards, writing on paper, whatever, pulling a cart along by slaves, etc.
And it hasn't been a simple interpreter for a while. Not since JIT and Hot Spot more than 3 years ago
VMs can compile bytecode to machine language at the time of class loading.</i>
No, it's an emulator.
It takes "byte code" (a machine code for a different machine - if that machine exists or not) and translates it into native machine code at run time.
You speak of JIT, but this was used in the ULTRA 64 emulator (dynamic recompilation) about a year after the N64 came out. (perhaps before, I haven't checked my dates).
Java doesn't know about specific machine abilities - hence it uses a subset of them, or emulates those not available. Exactly what a Spectrum emulator does (no mouse-wheel), or xmame does (PC's don;t come with coin-slots).
I don't understand why you don't see this as emulation.
Better get a second job, because no matter how much time and money you spend improving this code, as soon as you release it, people are going to download the code for free rather than pay you a nickel.
There's a simple solution to this - if you want to get paid, FIND A COMPANY WHO NEEDS THE CODE YOU WANT TO WRITE. This is so goddamn simple, I don't understand why so many programmers are so thick to realise it. Can you imagine if plumbers just wandered into random houses, checked all the pipes then asked the house-holders for hundred quid for the privilage?"
The secret is this (and the same for music, as I know). If people want you to do something, they will pay you for your time. If you do something on your own accord and _then_ expect people to pay, then you are a fool. (unless you have a big marketting team creating hype behind you, but even then, it's not your music/software they are after - it's the lies you have been telling them.)
Also, in relatiom to your last comment, whether or not programmers want to be there is NOT a reasong for this kind of world to evolve. Software is for the USERS not the other way round. Too many programmers are making a comfortable, no make that INCREDIBLY comfortable living and don't want to loose what is for most, essentially, a simple, easy, non-taxing job.
as a musician i resent the idea of anyone else touching my work that isn't in my band. especially since it still would have my name attached to it.
Why? If it was such a great piece of work in the first place, then you should be pleased thnat other people see it as worth copying (and since your the original, people would come to your gigs to see that "classic" rendition. If it's not such a great piece of work, then it's shite so I don't see why other people would copy it.
Plus i cant' imagine the hell you'd have with multiple bands playing "forked" versions of the same song
It's simple - whoever played it would earn the money, but that doesn't stop anyone else from playing the same song.
It happened in the past - look at Wonderwall by Oasis - that other guy sang it at the same time (some Easy Listeneing thing, can't remember his name) people bought the copy they wanted.
If your copy isn't the best, then by the Gods you don't have a right to make the most money.
Quite a few people might download a binary from the internet, switch to root and install it. It would only require the trojan to be included in the make script somewhere for it to have been run as root.
In other words, the threat is not from email, it's more from people being careless about what they download from the internet, and where from.
With a tool like Visual Basic(ugh! VB sucks!) your GUIs and forms are easy to design
I agree, but I don't know if you've noticed but VB programs always tend to look... VBish - they stand out a mile away. I haven't figured out why exactly, it's just that they always look amaturish, no matter who designs using them.
I used to use Visual Studio when I programmed in Windows, simply because it had a project window allowing me to easily select between files, had syntax highlighting and an integrated debugger.
When I switched to Linux, I made up the same functionality using Kate and the Kdbg.
So to be honest, for me I don't see any point in extra GUI stuff - when you realise how many command line options for each compiler and linker tool, all a GUI does is change -c to a checkbox with "compile but do not link" next to it. It's nicer to be able to see all the options, but when you know exactly what options you want (i.e. you've learned them), it's easier to type them in on a CLI.
The only exception I can think of is tools which build GUI's which is quite often easier than coding them (but even so, not so powerful - you can code a GUI to do lots more than a GUI designer does, particularly dynamic GUI's).
Strange, I'm writing a piece of software at the moment which I could normally sell for £30. I don't see any particular reason to sell it though - I really wish someone else had given a version of it away years ago, then I wouldn't have had to bother writing it.
Actually, it's about time I learned to use emacs. By not doing so, I'm binding myself to a single application, which probably isn't the best for every job concievable.
Actually, that's not quite true - I tend to use kate, the main KDE editor at the moment, for my programming, whilst I use vi for editing system files. If it comes to something such as sorting all lines of a file into order (say you've got a list that needs sorting), then I use the command line.
The POINT OF THIS MESSAGE is that programmers choose the best tool for the job. So do engineers, designers, artists, you name it.
When was that last time you saw an electrician who only had one screwdriver?
By limiting yourself to basically a swiss-army knife, your limiting yourself to what you can achieve. That's why I try out different editors, to see if they suit ME, not the other way around.
Perhaps the real point of this message is that the clerical workers should be given more than one office suite to work with, and let them choose which they want to use. Only they are qualified to say which is right for them. Damn the cost, there isn't any for sticking Star Office, or any other free office suite on the computer - make it available for them if they want it.
Oh, and if you try and take away vi, I'll kill you!:-)
I second this - without a doubt, mplayer is the most robust media player I've used on linux - amongst other things, it can fast forward/rewind ASF files (something I haven't managed to do with any other media player) and it can play incomplete AVI files (again, this seems to be rare functionality anywhere else).
I haven't checked out the GUI, but I can't wait till it arrives:-)
Slashdot Mirror
That may be the case, but it seems to me that the way those skinned COM controls work isn't the way tools like "grep" and "sort" work. Word isn't an editor that calls up a spell-checker when needed, pipes things to a printing subsystem later, uses a word-counter-tool when needed, etc. It is a monolithic thing that (seemingly at least) runs all those tools at the same time. Something monolithic must be starting, otherwise why does Word take so long to load, even on the fastest machine?
/usr/bin such as grep which can be combined in different ways to do different things?
More to the point, why does everything need to be built into another layer of abstraction from the operating system? Why can't the spellchecker be used on a text file in notepad? Why can't Word highlight a piece of code automatically since I have Visual Studio on my computer?
Why, in fact, do we need "Yet another GUI" on top of the Desktop GUI that we already have?
Perhaps a real cool solution would be to stop treating the desktop as "Something that's there to be a host to other programs" and more as "something that's there to let me get my job done".
As an example, when you think of the command line, do you think of bash, or do you think of all of those useful utilities is
One of those planes alone crashing, with the hundred people on board would have been enough to be considered a tradegy.
The fact that so little has been said about the people on those flights really puts this tradegy into perspective.
You sound all in favour for war, but I bet your not thinking of joining the army any time soon, are you?
The only response I can think of is to identify and destroy the organizations responsible and any governments who gave aid and comfort to the terrorists. Fuck the civilians of these countries, they obviously are like the Borg and believe everything that there goverment says because they are lesser lifeforms than us Americans and deserve to Die.
The issue is revenge. Those who initiate force against us must be identified and killed as a warning to the rest of the world not to fuck with America.
We (the US) should not rely on the fiction of "international law" -- we believe that we are the law. This is an act of war and war is the appropriate response, even though we don't know who we are fighting yet - we'll pick a likely target, because as I said, we need to make an example to the rest of the world.
I'm glad you're not a citizen of the US. You clearly don't deserve to be, because your not like me.
* * *
This is the message that your post sends to me. I sure as hell hope that I am wrong.
Look at the arms situation. If it was a nuclear capable organization that did this, any attack from the U.S. is going to result in those nukes being used
When I first saw on television the devestation, I had this terrfiying thought in the back of my mind that the tell-tale mushroom cloud would suddenly appear in the back of one of the broadcasts.
It's nice to see how ready you are to enrol yourself in the army and go on the front line in all this.
But please don't start world war III - I would get dragged into it too if it escalated. Whether through conscription, or through the effects that the nuclear weapons that would fly around the world would have on me.
I have been in a state of shock from what I've seen on television today, even though I live in England, thousands of miles away. I know people who are touring America. They visited the white house last week. I don't know where they are at this moment in time. But more than anything else, the thought that goes through my head is that if this had happened in 5 years time, it could just have easily been me, or people who I know trapped at the top of one of those twin towers when they collapsed. And that truly terrifies me.
Even though it happened in America because it is the largest target, I also cannot think of any reason why the same attack could not have succeeded in England, and neither can the rest of the country - our stock exchange has been evacuated, airport security has been increased, our Government has gone into a state of emergency.
I do not disagree with you that the people involved should be brought to justice, but by waging war on everyone whom you even think could be involved with this tradegy is a terrible thought. I truly hope that you calm down and think the situation through rationally, rather than acting on you emotions which you are understandably doing at the moment.
Teach em perl and lisp. They can't rejoin society until they can look at the obfuscation competition winning entries and say what they do at a single glance :-)
(made of han and chease and bread rather than polymer resin).
Well, even if it's not ham and cheese, as long as it's edible and _tastes_ like ham and cheese, it will be a step up. One thing at a time, eh?
Could they make a 3d printer that works on some sort of dough, and adds artificial flavourings as it makes it?
Could be great for custom-made birthday cakes
For me, you can't beat a good 'ol pinball machine.
Requires fast reflexes, quick thinking, and the better you are the better you longer you play for (with no upper boundary). What more could you ask for?
Hmmm.
"Rook to rook eight and here's a picture of a goat"
Or
"knight to queens-bish three and here's some ascii art of two people having sex"
And never let AC's play as white - "hah hah! First move!"
I accept that the JVM fits the description of an emulator, but why do you decisively state that it isn't an interpreter? It seems that those terms can be used interchangably.
Hmm... Just my own interpretaion of what an emulator and an interpreter are, I suppose. I consider an interpreter to be something that takes a high level language, and understands what to do with it (for instance, regular expressions in Perl).
I see an emulator more as a "I don't know what this program does, but I can follow this set of instructions and see what happens".
And I see a native program as just "follow rules"
Surely though the problem here would be either bloat (since the com object would need to carry every interface that ever existed, possibly seperately), and/or the complexity would still be there inside of the object.
You still need the most up-to-date com object (what happens if you ask for IID_ICAT2 and it doesn't exist?) or else you have still got lot's of conditionals for the new code to check which COM version is available and to work with it.
The point was also on environmental benefits. True, books won't cost any less, but books aren't disposable and usually aren't just thrown away. The landfill/rain forest savings would, in deed be grand.
Please remember that computers require POWER. This power comes from powerstations, which require coal, gas, or nuclear power. Environmentally these are just as bad as cutting down rainforests (in fact, when you realise that every tree in the rainforest releases EVERYTHING back into the atmosphere when it dies and rots, you realise that books aren't such a bad thing).
What we really need if we want to be environemental is to look at ways of preserving energy. This includes using renewable sources (such as sunlight and wind power), reducing the amount of power we use (computers are hideously inefficiant), and using the most efficiant sources of energy around. Muscle is good - i.e. writing on blackboards, writing on paper, whatever, pulling a cart along by slaves, etc.
Incidentally, that last one was a joke.
emulator? or do you mean interpreter?
And it hasn't been a simple interpreter for a while. Not since JIT and Hot Spot more than 3 years ago
VMs can compile bytecode to machine language at the time of class loading.</i>
No, it's an emulator.
It takes "byte code" (a machine code for a different machine - if that machine exists or not) and translates it into native machine code at run time.
You speak of JIT, but this was used in the ULTRA 64 emulator (dynamic recompilation) about a year after the N64 came out. (perhaps before, I haven't checked my dates).
Java doesn't know about specific machine abilities - hence it uses a subset of them, or emulates those not available. Exactly what a Spectrum emulator does (no mouse-wheel), or xmame does (PC's don;t come with coin-slots).
I don't understand why you don't see this as emulation.
Better get a second job, because no matter how much time and money you spend improving this code, as soon as you release it, people are going to download the code for free rather than pay you a nickel.
There's a simple solution to this - if you want to get paid, FIND A COMPANY WHO NEEDS THE CODE YOU WANT TO WRITE. This is so goddamn simple, I don't understand why so many programmers are so thick to realise it. Can you imagine if plumbers just wandered into random houses, checked all the pipes then asked the house-holders for hundred quid for the privilage?"
The secret is this (and the same for music, as I know). If people want you to do something, they will pay you for your time. If you do something on your own accord and _then_ expect people to pay, then you are a fool. (unless you have a big marketting team creating hype behind you, but even then, it's not your music/software they are after - it's the lies you have been telling them.)
Also, in relatiom to your last comment, whether or not programmers want to be there is NOT a reasong for this kind of world to evolve. Software is for the USERS not the other way round. Too many programmers are making a comfortable, no make that INCREDIBLY comfortable living and don't want to loose what is for most, essentially, a simple, easy, non-taxing job.
as a musician i resent the idea of anyone else touching my work that isn't in my band. especially since it still would have my name attached to it.
Why? If it was such a great piece of work in the first place, then you should be pleased thnat other people see it as worth copying (and since your the original, people would come to your gigs to see that "classic" rendition. If it's not such a great piece of work, then it's shite so I don't see why other people would copy it.
Plus i cant' imagine the hell you'd have with multiple bands playing "forked" versions of the same song
It's simple - whoever played it would earn the money, but that doesn't stop anyone else from playing the same song.
It happened in the past - look at Wonderwall by Oasis - that other guy sang it at the same time (some Easy Listeneing thing, can't remember his name) people bought the copy they wanted.
If your copy isn't the best, then by the Gods you don't have a right to make the most money.
Smae with software.
Here's one point though...
Quite a few people might download a binary from the internet, switch to root and install it. It would only require the trojan to be included in the make script somewhere for it to have been run as root.
In other words, the threat is not from email, it's more from people being careless about what they download from the internet, and where from.
With a tool like Visual Basic(ugh! VB sucks!) your GUIs and forms are easy to design
I agree, but I don't know if you've noticed but VB programs always tend to look... VBish - they stand out a mile away. I haven't figured out why exactly, it's just that they always look amaturish, no matter who designs using them.
I used to use Visual Studio when I programmed in Windows, simply because it had a project window allowing me to easily select between files, had syntax highlighting and an integrated debugger.
When I switched to Linux, I made up the same functionality using Kate and the Kdbg.
So to be honest, for me I don't see any point in extra GUI stuff - when you realise how many command line options for each compiler and linker tool, all a GUI does is change -c to a checkbox with "compile but do not link" next to it. It's nicer to be able to see all the options, but when you know exactly what options you want (i.e. you've learned them), it's easier to type them in on a CLI.
The only exception I can think of is tools which build GUI's which is quite often easier than coding them (but even so, not so powerful - you can code a GUI to do lots more than a GUI designer does, particularly dynamic GUI's).
It's still an emulator.
Strange, I'm writing a piece of software at the moment which I could normally sell for £30. I don't see any particular reason to sell it though - I really wish someone else had given a version of it away years ago, then I wouldn't have had to bother writing it.
Damn, I so can relate to that. I started having my tea black & no sugar simply so that I eliminated to possible steps of forgetting I was making it.
Actually, it's about time I learned to use emacs. By not doing so, I'm binding myself to a single application, which probably isn't the best for every job concievable.
:-)
Actually, that's not quite true - I tend to use kate, the main KDE editor at the moment, for my programming, whilst I use vi for editing system files. If it comes to something such as sorting all lines of a file into order (say you've got a list that needs sorting), then I use the command line.
The POINT OF THIS MESSAGE is that programmers choose the best tool for the job. So do engineers, designers, artists, you name it.
When was that last time you saw an electrician who only had one screwdriver?
By limiting yourself to basically a swiss-army knife, your limiting yourself to what you can achieve. That's why I try out different editors, to see if they suit ME, not the other way around.
Perhaps the real point of this message is that the clerical workers should be given more than one office suite to work with, and let them choose which they want to use. Only they are qualified to say which is right for them. Damn the cost, there isn't any for sticking Star Office, or any other free office suite on the computer - make it available for them if they want it.
Oh, and if you try and take away vi, I'll kill you!
I second this - without a doubt, mplayer is the most robust media player I've used on linux - amongst other things, it can fast forward/rewind ASF files (something I haven't managed to do with any other media player) and it can play incomplete AVI files (again, this seems to be rare functionality anywhere else).
:-)
I haven't checked out the GUI, but I can't wait till it arrives
Where does this myth come from that Office is loaded with features no one uses? Please name me some features that "no one" uses.
The easter eggs?