Other industries (like a skydiving school) might make you sign a disclaimer. This has the appearance of protecting the company from a lawsuit. The reality is that these do not hold up court if said company is found to be negligent.
This is not true of EULAs. I think the legal reason is that you do not own software. The EULA is your permission to use a copy of it. That makes it a contract, not a disclaimer.
The other reason is that software is notoriously difficult to make un-buggy. If a precident were set that a software company could be sued for "negligence" there would be massive chaos in the industry.
I do not see how Qt is "moving away from the C++ standard" Trolltech produces a library, standards conformance depends upon your compiler.
Trolltech does not produce their own version of C++; but their library does provide some macros that may appear to change the language. (ie: the new foreach)
You are free not to use these things, or you may use as much fancy-pants standard C++ as your compiler will let you get away with. I mix Qt and some pretty steep template metaprogramming code with (uh, relative) ease.
Furthermore, there is are excellent bindings to python, if you'd like to write something in another language. http://www.riverbankcomputing.co.uk/pyqt/
Trolltech is a company that derives revenue from Qt. Without that revenue TT, and thus Qt, would not exist. I believe the reason for not releasing a regular GPL version for windows is the entrenched culture of piracy.
There is a book available with a recent version of Qt included on CD. I am not aware of the license it is under, but I've heard the book is quite good.
Re:keep it anonymous and private.
on
Privacy in the Woods?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I don't think privacy is the primary concern when considering such a system.
Oh, IANAL (but I play one on/.)
Placing sensors to aid in S&R is a noble idea, however, legal concerns may arise if someone does go missing. By placing the sensors, an implicit promise of protection may be conveyed, legally speaking. If the hiker is not found, there could be grounds for a wrongful death suit.
This is kinda like ISPs filtering content; they become potentially responsible for ALL of it if they try to filter some of it.
Now, hopefully I'm wrong about this, but the legal system is a little...odd at times. Ask a lawyer. =)
This, and the changes in the XFree86 license would seem to indicate that MicroSoft will be using XFree86 as the graphics server in a later version of Windows; code name 'Horny Toad'
Here in Canada, there have been many similar commercials from the local cable providers. They are running scared.
My building has an ExpressVu dish on the side, and I had this for about two years. Quality was excellent, price was good.
I think there was one time where I had a significant signal problem, which went away in five minutes. Rarely, there might also be a momentary blip, which happens with cable too.
I live in some of the rainiest climate. (That'd be Vancouver, BC) Rain never caused a problem for my signal.
You are correct, return will always be evaluated last.
But if you are returning the result of an expression, it's just good form, IMHO. ie:
return (x != y);
is nicer than but equivalent to: return x != y;
return (0); is just absurd, though. Excessive use of parenthesis. Must've been a lithp programmer in a previous life.
Getting further away from the topic...
Some would argue that returning directly the result of an expression is poor form; that it should be assigned to a variable. This has some merit in C++, due to the named return value optimisation. This part of the standard states that the compiler can elide the copy construction when returning an object by value, and return the object directly. This cannot be done with unnamed objects, such as might be returned from an expression you put in the return statement. (There is an arcane reason for this, which I do not recall.)
I received a nine month (six+three) contract through a head hunter. My experience was actually quite good. At the time, I was not aware of the reputation of headhunters.
It was one of my first significant jobs in my career as a developer. I had little experience, and no more education than a high school diploma. I did profess to be good with computers. (And I am!)
Both the headhunters and the company I was to be placed at liked me; I was hired.
The company I was working for was a small dot-*cough* Of course, this was before the bubble burst. I was actually told by the headhunters, "We don't normally deal with clients this small, but we know these guys, and we think they're going somewhere"
I was being paid CAD$25/hr, eventually I got a raise to $29. Not too bad for me, at the time. The headhunter's cut off that was $13/hr. When I found this out, I was a little offended. Still, I was making okay cash, and after a year the company was allowed to hire me without the need to buy my contract.
The, predictably, the company went south. I spent the last couple months warming a chair (and reading/.) I told management there was nothing for me to do, but they asked that I stay, "In case anything happens to the servers"
(Did I mention I was hired as a developer -- but this was after the sys admins had quit. Servers weren't under any real load, and everything was pretty automated.)
After two months of this, I was contacted by an old employer and offered a position. I took it and worked both jobs part time.
Not two weeks after taking the new job, the headhunters contacted me. I was asked not to go back, because there were some problems regarding payment. This didn't really prove to be a problem; I transitioned nicely into full time at the other job.
I found out later that the company had burned the headhunters for about $30,000. (There was a second contractor, as well.) Apparently, the company was promising for months to get their bills paid. Of course, this never happened.
Looking back, I am very glad the headhunters were there. I was paid by them, every two weeks, right into my account. I know other people who worked there and have long given up on receiving any money they were owed.
A few weeks after I stopped going there, the office manager called me, to ask if I would work under the table. I laughed at her.
I still talk to the guys at the headhunter's once in a while. Even went to a couple christmas parties after my work with them was done.
No no, it's a drop in Outlook replacement, features must be replicated, possibly enhanced.
Rumour has it that the next version of Evolution will not only automatically execute harmful attachments; in the absense of such, it will attempt to find one and translate the code to the Linux equivalent before executing it.
I'm getting all misty just remembering the days....Wait, mostly I was cursing the thing because my doors would always crash and lock up the computer. Stupid old, badly written, DOS games.
I was one of the first one-line boards in my area to have a usenet and internet email gateway. Everyone who signed up got Your.Name@pirates.uniserve.com (or something like that)
Damn...I just suddenly have visions of me sitting on the front porch curmudgeoning all day.
Take the example of a BOM, given above, with subassembiles (components which are not raw materials) This type of layout is common in manufacturing situations.
I can build something called WIDGET1, for example.
WIDGET1 uses 10 screws and 3 of WIDGET2.
WIDGET2 uses another 20 screws and 4 more of WIDGET3.
Write SQL query which can express this information. The only requirement placed upon your tables is they must be at least 2nf.
You're going to end up rejoining your BOM file at least a couple times for that one. The problem is, the subassemblies can recurse an arbitrary number of times. That kind of thing cannot be expressed in a single query, since SQL can't recurse.
That's the kind of situation where you need something like an XMLDB.
OTOH. You can express this problem with a series of queries, and if that is the only problem in your app that an RDB can't solve, but there are many other places where it's a better fit, you make it work. Thus is the way of the real world.
I'd just like to take a moment to commend you on your outstanding journalistic ability, as displayed in your recent article regarding the future of a beleaguered Apple.
It seems natural to me that one would come to the conclusion that a beleaguered company was failing because they were having difficulty figuring out how to get their system to work.
Third party support for Apple's platform is of course, terrible. I mean, just look at Office X! It's clearly a horrible hack-job that Microsoft just tossed together in the middle of the night to shut up those whiney Apple zealots. Never mind those broken implementations of Photoshop, Illustrator, et al.
I commend your journalistic foresight, for despite the fact that Apple has forecasted a profit in the second quarter -- something pretty rare for this industry right now, they're apparently beleaguered, and going down in flames. The fact that they have become the world's largest provider of UNIX systems certainly tolls the bell for the beleaguered company. Who wants to use technology originally developed in the sixties? Those beleaguered Apple-hippies!
Your article has been noticed by the community, and it would seem they may not agree with us. They mentioned something about journalists predicting a beleaguered Apple's demise for the last fifteen years of the century past.
I suggest that you switch platforms. I've discovered a far more durable, user friendly, and powerful computing platform. You may find information and an emulator to evaluate it's capabilities at the following URL. Unfortunately, I believe it lacks a thesaurus.
http://www.speaknspell.co.uk/
Re:CORBA slower than SOAP?
on
.NET or CORBA?
·
· Score: 1
The marshalling process is not going to have a significant impact on RPC performance when you're sending messages across a network. CORBA calls need to be marshalled as well, just to a binary format.
However, it has been said that SOAP is more 'chatty' than CORBA, which would have an impact in a network situation.
The Apple UI guidelines specifically disagree with you. Each button on a dialog is supposed to be a verb. Here is a page talking about it...
If you think about it, this makes sense. Imagine a dialog that says "You are using an outdated version of this program, do you wish to continue?" and "You are using an outdated version of this program, do you wish to exit?" If the buttons are labelled Yes/No/Cancel, I need to read the dialog carefully. If buttons are labelled "Continue" and "Exit" I am less likely to select the wrong button.
There are altogether too many times when I've triggered some Yes/No/Cancel dialog in Windows, I don't read the text carefully because I'm in a hurry, and I click 'Yes'.
Slashdot Mirror
To add to the list...
MinGW - because you need a good CLI. (Alternatives include Cygwin)
Vim - Better than emacs =)
IANAL, but I play one on /.
Other industries (like a skydiving school) might make you sign a disclaimer. This has the appearance of protecting the company from a lawsuit. The reality is that these do not hold up court if said company is found to be negligent.
This is not true of EULAs. I think the legal reason is that you do not own software. The EULA is your permission to use a copy of it. That makes it a contract, not a disclaimer.
The other reason is that software is notoriously difficult to make un-buggy. If a precident were set that a software company could be sued for "negligence" there would be massive chaos in the industry.
Four letters: EULA
Actually...
Try french, and quit bitching about english.
Names of countries are capitalised, languages are not; they are not proper pronouns.
I develop commercial software with Qt
I do not see how Qt is "moving away from the C++ standard" Trolltech produces a library, standards conformance depends upon your compiler.
Trolltech does not produce their own version of C++; but their library does provide some macros that may appear to change the language. (ie: the new foreach)
You are free not to use these things, or you may use as much fancy-pants standard C++ as your compiler will let you get away with. I mix Qt and some pretty steep template metaprogramming code with (uh, relative) ease.
Furthermore, there is are excellent bindings to python, if you'd like to write something in another language. http://www.riverbankcomputing.co.uk/pyqt/
Trolltech is a company that derives revenue from Qt. Without that revenue TT, and thus Qt, would not exist. I believe the reason for not releasing a regular GPL version for windows is the entrenched culture of piracy.
There is a book available with a recent version of Qt included on CD. I am not aware of the license it is under, but I've heard the book is quite good.
I don't think privacy is the primary concern when considering such a system.
/.)
Oh, IANAL (but I play one on
Placing sensors to aid in S&R is a noble idea, however, legal concerns may arise if someone does go missing. By placing the sensors, an implicit promise of protection may be conveyed, legally speaking. If the hiker is not found, there could be grounds for a wrongful death suit.
This is kinda like ISPs filtering content; they become potentially responsible for ALL of it if they try to filter some of it.
Now, hopefully I'm wrong about this, but the legal system is a little...odd at times. Ask a lawyer. =)
What about X12? =)
This, and the changes in the XFree86 license would seem to indicate that MicroSoft will be using XFree86 as the graphics server in a later version of Windows; code name 'Horny Toad'
Here in Canada, there have been many similar commercials from the local cable providers. They are running scared.
My building has an ExpressVu dish on the side, and I had this for about two years. Quality was excellent, price was good.
I think there was one time where I had a significant signal problem, which went away in five minutes. Rarely, there might also be a momentary blip, which happens with cable too.
I live in some of the rainiest climate. (That'd be Vancouver, BC) Rain never caused a problem for my signal.
You are correct, return will always be evaluated last.
But if you are returning the result of an expression, it's just good form, IMHO. ie:
return (x != y);
is nicer than but equivalent to:
return x != y;
return (0); is just absurd, though. Excessive use of parenthesis. Must've been a lithp programmer in a previous life.
Getting further away from the topic...
Some would argue that returning directly the result of an expression is poor form; that it should be assigned to a variable. This has some merit in C++, due to the named return value optimisation. This part of the standard states that the compiler can elide the copy construction when returning an object by value, and return the object directly. This cannot be done with unnamed objects, such as might be returned from an expression you put in the return statement. (There is an arcane reason for this, which I do not recall.)
Thus, consume the blue ones first, then negate their influence by eating the red ones last.
I received a nine month (six+three) contract through a head hunter. My experience was actually quite good. At the time, I was not aware of the reputation of headhunters.
/.) I told management there was nothing for me to do, but they asked that I stay, "In case anything happens to the servers"
It was one of my first significant jobs in my career as a developer. I had little experience, and no more education than a high school diploma. I did profess to be good with computers. (And I am!)
Both the headhunters and the company I was to be placed at liked me; I was hired.
The company I was working for was a small dot-*cough* Of course, this was before the bubble burst. I was actually told by the headhunters, "We don't normally deal with clients this small, but we know these guys, and we think they're going somewhere"
I was being paid CAD$25/hr, eventually I got a raise to $29. Not too bad for me, at the time. The headhunter's cut off that was $13/hr. When I found this out, I was a little offended. Still, I was making okay cash, and after a year the company was allowed to hire me without the need to buy my contract.
The, predictably, the company went south. I spent the last couple months warming a chair (and reading
(Did I mention I was hired as a developer -- but this was after the sys admins had quit. Servers weren't under any real load, and everything was pretty automated.)
After two months of this, I was contacted by an old employer and offered a position. I took it and worked both jobs part time.
Not two weeks after taking the new job, the headhunters contacted me. I was asked not to go back, because there were some problems regarding payment. This didn't really prove to be a problem; I transitioned nicely into full time at the other job.
I found out later that the company had burned the headhunters for about $30,000. (There was a second contractor, as well.) Apparently, the company was promising for months to get their bills paid. Of course, this never happened.
Looking back, I am very glad the headhunters were there. I was paid by them, every two weeks, right into my account. I know other people who worked there and have long given up on receiving any money they were owed.
A few weeks after I stopped going there, the office manager called me, to ask if I would work under the table. I laughed at her.
I still talk to the guys at the headhunter's once in a while. Even went to a couple christmas parties after my work with them was done.
Only if you want to sit < 3 feet from the TV.
You missed OSXI.
;)
Personally, I'm looking forward to OSXXX. Mmmm...lickable widgets.
Indeed, it's a lot like damning the entire OSS community for the actions of a single DOSer.
No no, it's a drop in Outlook replacement, features must be replicated, possibly enhanced.
Rumour has it that the next version of Evolution will not only automatically execute harmful attachments; in the absense of such, it will attempt to find one and translate the code to the Linux equivalent before executing it.
/. is too US centric! =)
Ahh...but it's okay if you say it's a quBit.
I'm getting all misty just remembering the days. ...Wait, mostly I was cursing the thing because my doors would always crash and lock up the computer. Stupid old, badly written, DOS games.
I was one of the first one-line boards in my area to have a usenet and internet email gateway. Everyone who signed up got Your.Name@pirates.uniserve.com (or something like that)
Damn...I just suddenly have visions of me sitting on the front porch curmudgeoning all day.
Having a compiler swap objects out from under you would be
1. Tricky to implement properly
2. Rude
However, emitting a warning when the compiler thinks you could do a better job with a StringBuffer might be nice.
Take the example of a BOM, given above, with subassembiles (components which are not raw materials) This type of layout is common in manufacturing situations.
I can build something called WIDGET1, for example.
WIDGET1 uses 10 screws and 3 of WIDGET2.
WIDGET2 uses another 20 screws and 4 more of WIDGET3.
Write SQL query which can express this information. The only requirement placed upon your tables is they must be at least 2nf.
You're going to end up rejoining your BOM file at least a couple times for that one. The problem is, the subassemblies can recurse an arbitrary number of times. That kind of thing cannot be expressed in a single query, since SQL can't recurse.
That's the kind of situation where you need something like an XMLDB.
OTOH. You can express this problem with a series of queries, and if that is the only problem in your app that an RDB can't solve, but there are many other places where it's a better fit, you make it work. Thus is the way of the real world.
I'd just like to take a moment to commend you on your outstanding journalistic ability, as displayed in your recent article regarding the future of a beleaguered Apple.
2 2/ 152252&mode=nested&tid=107
It seems natural to me that one would come to the conclusion that a beleaguered company was failing because they were having difficulty figuring out how to get their system to work.
Third party support for Apple's platform is of course, terrible. I mean, just look at Office X! It's clearly a horrible hack-job that Microsoft just tossed together in the middle of the night to shut up those whiney Apple zealots. Never mind those broken implementations of Photoshop, Illustrator, et al.
I commend your journalistic foresight, for despite the fact that Apple has forecasted a profit in the second quarter -- something pretty rare for this industry right now, they're apparently beleaguered, and going down in flames. The fact that they have become the world's largest provider of UNIX systems certainly tolls the bell for the beleaguered company. Who wants to use technology originally developed in the sixties? Those beleaguered Apple-hippies!
Your article has been noticed by the community, and it would seem they may not agree with us. They mentioned something about journalists predicting a beleaguered Apple's demise for the last fifteen years of the century past.
http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/02/
I suggest that you switch platforms. I've discovered a far more durable, user friendly, and powerful computing platform. You may find information and an emulator to evaluate it's capabilities at the following URL. Unfortunately, I believe it lacks a thesaurus.
http://www.speaknspell.co.uk/
The marshalling process is not going to have a significant impact on RPC performance when you're sending messages across a network. CORBA calls need to be marshalled as well, just to a binary format.
However, it has been said that SOAP is more 'chatty' than CORBA, which would have an impact in a network situation.
The Apple UI guidelines specifically disagree with you. Each button on a dialog is supposed to be a verb. Here is a page talking about it...
If you think about it, this makes sense. Imagine a dialog that says "You are using an outdated version of this program, do you wish to continue?" and "You are using an outdated version of this program, do you wish to exit?" If the buttons are labelled Yes/No/Cancel, I need to read the dialog carefully. If buttons are labelled "Continue" and "Exit" I am less likely to select the wrong button.
There are altogether too many times when I've triggered some Yes/No/Cancel dialog in Windows, I don't read the text carefully because I'm in a hurry, and I click 'Yes'.
Canadians are all higher life forms, at least in BC.