Re:Let's don't get ahead of ourselves
on
TrollTech to IPO?
·
· Score: 1
Eloquent, but still quite close to trolling. I could spend much time pointing out where you're wrong, but it looks like this is just about your personal feelings and opinion, not about arguments or technology. Write your stuff, be happy with it, but I really hope that I will never have to ask you for an additional feature or a bugfix in something you created a few months ago.
Have a nice weekend:-)
Re:Let's don't get ahead of ourselves
on
TrollTech to IPO?
·
· Score: 1
> Still, nobody commented on how unecessarily difficult programming is made.
Maybe because "unecessarily difficult" implies that it would be no problem to make it easier. What do you think how many people are currently trying to improve programming languages, development environments and GUI builders? Hey, it is definitely not easy to make it easier. And you are talking about "unecessarily difficult".
>Is it wrong to ask that the programming interface of a computer to be more human?
Maybe not (see below), but it is not easy to do that. Why do you think there are so many programming languages? Just check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Programming_ languages - Different people have different ways of expressing what they want, and different problems they want to explain to the computer, and different needs regarding how detailed the explaination has to be.
When you think VB is easy, that is only one side of the medal. It looks easy. Maybe it is easy to get started. But then it is quite easy to shoot yourself in the foot and to produce code that's extremely hard to maintain. Well, not as easy as with older BASIC dialects (anyone remember the times when there wasn't functions, but only GOTO and GOSUB?), but still easy enough.
And if you like talking about personal histories: I only have self learned programming skills, I am one of the science folks you mention but luckily I was exposed to different languages than BASIC (did some VB stuff, aswell, so I know why I don't like it that much).
BTW: I don't want programming interfaces to be more human. I want them to be easy to understand, precise and reliable:-)
Re:Let's don't get ahead of ourselves
on
TrollTech to IPO?
·
· Score: 1
Sure, there is some overhead involved with an object oriented approach (though much can be saved by good compilers, just as you say) - but this guy was talking of an "object oriented speed penalty... compared gtk... " - and since gtk is object oriented, this must refer to some magic speed-eater and bloat-bringer that is tightly coupled with OO languages, and I didn't meet this beast yet.
Re:Let's don't get ahead of ourselves
on
TrollTech to IPO?
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
> C++ and Qt C++ is comparable to java and dotnet in terms of bloat and raw speed.
That's not even comparing apples and oranges - that's comparing cars, toasters and computers.
Let's get this straight. C++ is a programming language (and it's standard library). Java is a programming language, a standard library and a virtual machine..net is a framework that can be used by several very different languages.
> You can just feel the object oriented speed penalty in both kde and trolltech windows, compared gtk or win32 api c.
Sure. What about comparing programs that actually do the same instead of some that just somehow look similar? There is no such thing as an "object oriented speed penalty". OOP is a way of doing things that's often used even in languages that don't support it. OOP languages just provide some help and eye candy for doing things the OO way.
Your beloved gtk API is definitely object oriented. If you don't believe me (and can't see it from the API), just check http://developer.gnome.org/doc/API/2.0/gtk/gtk.htm l and read: "GTK+ has a C-based object-oriented architecture that allows for maximum flexibility.".
This "oop is bad" example is just ridiculous and has nothing to do with the actual experience in any OO language. The opposite is true. Normally you have something like:
... and still don't have any reasonable error handling, which makes the code much worse readable.
In an OO language with operator overloading you would get:
result = Tsomething(specification) + TSomething(otherSpecification)
About your "suggestion" to use C as an intermediate language - good morning, there are things that can't (or can only with a some performance hit) be translated into C.
Praising BASIC really is an evil idea. You should't expose novice programmers to this pest when there are so much cleaner languages around which make it harder to write spaghetti code and shoot yourself in the foot than BASIC. For example, you already mentioned Python.
By the way, good morning, Java bytecode does not have to run interpreted. There are both available: Just in time compilers and ordinary compilers.
Perhaps you should also notice that C++ is not an object oriented language. Java is. C++ just allows you to do OOP. Or ordinary imperative programming. Or generic programming. Or mix them all.
Reading your comment once again I really get the impression I am just feeding a troll. Perhaps you are not, but I just can't let it uncommented as "insightful" when you obviously don't know what you are talking about.
Where did you get that from? I guess you mean "Mars Society Deutschland e.V." - that's just a society of people who want the goverment to plan manned mars missions for the future(together with other countries).
You got that 2009 figure most likely from Archimedes
which is not manned.
Your experiment is a wonderful demonstration of the fact that CO2 does not conduct heat as well as nitrogen or oxygen. You just can't prove anything about the greenhouse effect with it.
Of course someone can - to be more precise, anyone living in a country that does not have software patents. This is still true for most parts of the world, even if the usual suspects are working hard on exporting this brain-dead software patents system everywhere.
The comments are even funny if they are not translated by babelfish... well, let's say that sometimes you get an idea of personal animosities in the team when you look at certain variable names and comments. Rough translation: "String bennyshugestinkingpileofshit =..."
By the way, I really prefer English keywords because mostly they are shorter than their german translations.
Re:C++ a nightmare? C not good for big projects?
on
Does C# Measure Up?
·
· Score: 1
I don't think that C++ is correctly classified as a "low level language". It allows low-level constructs, sure. But you can also use it at arbitrary high levels of abstraction. C++ can be painful, admitted. But it doesn't have to. It is simply nonsense to say "programming in C++ is like this" or "programming in C++ is like that". This is a multi-paradigm language. It makes a hell of a lot of difference if you are bit-banging and abusing C++ as some kind of C with additions, or if you use mature class libraries like Qt and design your program from the start using the benefits of the language you are using, not of the one you are used to.
It's quite often seen that C programmers who learned a bit C++ produce horrible programs... seeing you put both together as "low level languates like C and C++" makes me afraid you didn't get the right impression. And yes, I believe that you can get the wrong impression no matter how big the projects were you have worked on.
Re:Does it work with other languages?
on
Can You Raed Tihs?
·
· Score: 1
My test candidate was at bit mean, from http://www.ruhr-uni-bochum.de -
Aetnesindbeklugn hmemt die Uithekiukensnnnemmomaortn mit Zprpileguen: Zu diesem Egrnbies kmmot Arne Wtenmsearn (Ftoo) in siener Sidute zum Tisnetknhceaiz in der PR. Er baetgrfe die 600 utazktrstmasesn Umterehnenn im dhsgastrepihucecn Raum.
Yet, it works for non-native speakers. But it does not work with the german language because there are too many words which are combinations of others - they are not recognisable. I doubt that it will work for other languages which for example put a lot of information into the declination/conjugation instead of using articles/pronouns and auxillury verbs.
C++ a nightmare? C not good for big projects?
on
Does C# Measure Up?
·
· Score: 1
When you think C++ is a nightmare and all code you've seen is a total mess, you maybe should start looking somewhere else. For example at the rapid progress of the KDE project. Btw, perhaps you should tell the Gnome team that using C is no good idea, maybe they just didn't notice yet.
So, you think "Linux UI" (whatever that may be, considering the multitude of choices) is a copy of Windows? Perhaps you have never seen those desktops Windows copied. There is hardly anything original about Windows UI. And considering ease of use and that step behind or ahead, you should maybe start exploring what KDE can do more than Windows. But therefore you would have to stop just using it like Windows and start accepting the idea that it is different. Just one example: Did you ever think of just entering URIs in file dialogs instead of using upload and download programs? No? Do you think that Windows approach is more intuitive?:-)
About these two areas where you think Linux lags behind Windows: - install/uninstall programs. I am really happy that Linux does not have this cruft, but that most distributions have some flavour of package management system which actually allows you to install/uninstall programs with one click/one command instead of having to answer stupid dialogs which mostly ask the same again and again and which sometimes don't even look the same. Who cares where the program does install? I want to _use_ it, not to click around in some explorer to see where the files are. Hey, finally that's why Windows includes a start menu, doesn't it? - UI conformity - you would have been nearly right a few years ago. But here you are contradicting yourself. First you say that it is copied from windows, then you say that each program looks different. Both at the same time is hardly possible.
I do not know how exactly you tried it - but if you got "one giant single-crystal slab" you definitely did something wrong. If you stir while pouring in the liquid nitrogen, the top layer will freeze rapidly so that you get problems stirring. So just stop adding the nitrogen and stir until it works smoothly again (repeat this until it looks fine) - this way you will, as already someone mentioned here earlier, get smoother ice cream than with the conventional process. Tried it several times, it always was great. Definitely not "icy".
They've been using turbines in the M1 tanks for years. If you can handle it in a tank, you can definitely handle it in a locomotive. The main problem in the M1 is the thirst, but it seems like modern turbine engines (at least those of the size a locomotive needs) don't have that handicap.
2.4.10 did not work on an old SMP box (P133), my best result was a series of ooops! near the end of the boot sequence - especially ide-scsi seemed to make a lot of trouble. Maybe that's just my problem since I ignore the recommendations and use gcc 3.0.1... but 2.4.10-ac4 works fine. Didn't dare to try 2.4.11 yet:-)
Indeed, it is legal to demand the money from him. If he does not want to pay, he has to go to court. Sure, their demands are ridiculous, but I don't think that this will change anything.
Slashdot Mirror
> Example, the US Abrams tank is 2-3x better than any other tank it will meet except perhaps the British Challenger tanks
I think you forgot something...
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leopard_2
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merkava
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leclerc
Eloquent, but still quite close to trolling.
:-)
I could spend much time pointing out where you're wrong, but it looks like this is just about your personal feelings and opinion, not about arguments or technology. Write your stuff, be happy with it, but I really hope that I will never have to ask you for an additional feature or a bugfix in something you created a few months ago.
Have a nice weekend
> Still, nobody commented on how unecessarily difficult programming is made.
_ languages - Different people have different ways of expressing what they want, and different problems they want to explain to the computer, and different needs regarding how detailed the explaination has to be.
:-)
Maybe because "unecessarily difficult" implies that it would be no problem to make it easier. What do you think how many people are currently trying to improve programming languages, development environments and GUI builders? Hey, it is definitely not easy to make it easier. And you are talking about "unecessarily difficult".
>Is it wrong to ask that the programming interface of a computer to be more human?
Maybe not (see below), but it is not easy to do that. Why do you think there are so many programming languages? Just check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Programming
When you think VB is easy, that is only one side of the medal. It looks easy. Maybe it is easy to get started. But then it is quite easy to shoot yourself in the foot and to produce code that's extremely hard to maintain. Well, not as easy as with older BASIC dialects (anyone remember the times when there wasn't functions, but only GOTO and GOSUB?), but still easy enough.
And if you like talking about personal histories: I only have self learned programming skills, I am one of the science folks you mention but luckily I was exposed to different languages than BASIC (did some VB stuff, aswell, so I know why I don't like it that much).
BTW: I don't want programming interfaces to be more human. I want them to be easy to understand, precise and reliable
Sure, there is some overhead involved with an object oriented approach (though much can be saved by good compilers, just as you say) - but this guy was talking of an "object oriented speed penalty... compared gtk... " - and since gtk is object oriented, this must refer to some magic speed-eater and bloat-bringer that is tightly coupled with OO languages, and I didn't meet this beast yet.
That's not even comparing apples and oranges - that's comparing cars, toasters and computers.
Let's get this straight. C++ is a programming language (and it's standard library). Java is a programming language, a standard library and a virtual machine. .net is a framework that can be used by several very different languages.
> You can just feel the object oriented speed penalty in both kde and trolltech windows, compared gtk or win32 api c.
Sure. What about comparing programs that actually do the same instead of some that just somehow look similar? There is no such thing as an "object oriented speed penalty". OOP is a way of doing things that's often used even in languages that don't support it. OOP languages just provide some help and eye candy for doing things the OO way. Your beloved gtk API is definitely object oriented. If you don't believe me (and can't see it from the API), just check http://developer.gnome.org/doc/API/2.0/gtk/gtk.htm l and read: "GTK+ has a C-based object-oriented architecture that allows for maximum flexibility.".
This "oop is bad" example is just ridiculous and has nothing to do with the actual experience in any OO language. The opposite is true. Normally you have something like:
... and still don't have any reasonable error handling, which makes the code much worse readable.In an OO language with operator overloading you would get: result = Tsomething(specification) + TSomething(otherSpecification)
About your "suggestion" to use C as an intermediate language - good morning, there are things that can't (or can only with a some performance hit) be translated into C.
Praising BASIC really is an evil idea. You should't expose novice programmers to this pest when there are so much cleaner languages around which make it harder to write spaghetti code and shoot yourself in the foot than BASIC. For example, you already mentioned Python.
By the way, good morning, Java bytecode does not have to run interpreted. There are both available: Just in time compilers and ordinary compilers.
Perhaps you should also notice that C++ is not an object oriented language. Java is. C++ just allows you to do OOP. Or ordinary imperative programming. Or generic programming. Or mix them all.
Reading your comment once again I really get the impression I am just feeding a troll. Perhaps you are not, but I just can't let it uncommented as "insightful" when you obviously don't know what you are talking about.
> I HATE the way KDE looks...
Considering how configurable the look of KDE is, this is really ridiculous.
That's no good protection against an asteroid.
You got that 2009 figure most likely from Archimedes which is not manned.
Your experiment is a wonderful demonstration of the fact that CO2 does not conduct heat as well as nitrogen or oxygen. You just can't prove anything about the greenhouse effect with it.
Of course someone can - to be more precise, anyone living in a country that does not have software patents. This is still true for most parts of the world, even if the usual suspects are working hard on exporting this brain-dead software patents system everywhere.
So you don't think SuSE is commercial?d ownloads/suse_linux/index.html
http://www.novell.com/products/linuxprofessional/
With a bit delay after starting to sell DVDs, but they release it for free.
The comments are even funny if they are not translated by babelfish... well, let's say that sometimes you get an idea of personal animosities in the team when you look at certain variable names and comments. Rough translation: "String bennyshugestinkingpileofshit = ..."
By the way, I really prefer English keywords because mostly they are shorter than their german translations.
I don't think that C++ is correctly classified as a "low level language". It allows low-level constructs, sure. But you can also use it at arbitrary high levels of abstraction. C++ can be painful, admitted. But it doesn't have to. It is simply nonsense to say "programming in C++ is like this" or "programming in C++ is like that". This is a multi-paradigm language. It makes a hell of a lot of difference if you are bit-banging and abusing C++ as some kind of C with additions, or if you use mature class libraries like Qt and design your program from the start using the benefits of the language you are using, not of the one you are used to.
It's quite often seen that C programmers who learned a bit C++ produce horrible programs... seeing you put both together as "low level languates like C and C++" makes me afraid you didn't get the right impression. And yes, I believe that you can get the wrong impression no matter how big the projects were you have worked on.
My test candidate was at bit mean, from http://www.ruhr-uni-bochum.de -
Aetnesindbeklugn hmemt die Uithekiukensnnnemmomaortn mit Zprpileguen: Zu diesem Egrnbies kmmot Arne Wtenmsearn (Ftoo) in siener Sidute zum Tisnetknhceaiz in der PR. Er baetgrfe die 600 utazktrstmasesn Umterehnenn im dhsgastrepihucecn Raum.
Yet, it works for non-native speakers. But it does not work with the german language because there are too many words which are combinations of others - they are not recognisable. I doubt that it will work for other languages which for example put a lot of information into the declination/conjugation instead of using articles/pronouns and auxillury verbs.
When you think C++ is a nightmare and all code you've seen is a total mess, you maybe should start looking somewhere else. For example at the rapid progress of the KDE project. Btw, perhaps you should tell the Gnome team that using C is no good idea, maybe they just didn't notice yet.
So, you think "Linux UI" (whatever that may be, considering the multitude of choices) is a copy of Windows? Perhaps you have never seen those desktops Windows copied. There is hardly anything original about Windows UI. And considering ease of use and that step behind or ahead, you should maybe start exploring what KDE can do more than Windows. But therefore you would have to stop just using it like Windows and start accepting the idea that it is different. Just one example: Did you ever think of just entering URIs in file dialogs instead of using upload and download programs? No? Do you think that Windows approach is more intuitive? :-)
About these two areas where you think Linux lags behind Windows:
- install/uninstall programs. I am really happy that Linux does not have this cruft, but that most distributions have some flavour of package management system which actually allows you to install/uninstall programs with one click/one command instead of having to answer stupid dialogs which mostly ask the same again and again and which sometimes don't even look the same. Who cares where the program does install? I want to _use_ it, not to click around in some explorer to see where the files are. Hey, finally that's why Windows includes a start menu, doesn't it?
- UI conformity - you would have been nearly right a few years ago. But here you are contradicting yourself. First you say that it is copied from windows, then you say that each program looks different. Both at the same time is hardly possible.
Stop asking, start coding (or maybe betting?)
I do not know how exactly you tried it - but if you got "one giant single-crystal slab" you definitely did something wrong. If you stir while pouring in the liquid nitrogen, the top layer will freeze rapidly so that you get problems stirring. So just stop adding the nitrogen and stir until it works smoothly again (repeat this until it looks fine) - this way you will, as already someone mentioned here earlier, get smoother ice cream than with the conventional process. Tried it several times, it always was great. Definitely not "icy".
KDE has gained quite some speed with the last version changes. The gap is not as large as you remember.
Gentoo is really nice.
They've been using turbines in the M1 tanks for years. If you can handle it in a tank, you can definitely handle it in a locomotive. The main problem in the M1 is the thirst, but it seems like modern turbine engines (at least those of the size a locomotive needs) don't have that handicap.
2.4.10 did not work on an old SMP box (P133), my best result was a series of ooops! near the end of the boot sequence - especially ide-scsi seemed to make a lot of trouble. Maybe that's just my problem since I ignore the recommendations and use gcc 3.0.1... but 2.4.10-ac4 works fine. Didn't dare to try 2.4.11 yet :-)
Indeed, it is legal to demand the money from him. If he does not want to pay, he has to go to court. Sure, their demands are ridiculous, but I don't think that this will change anything.
Not correct. Have a look at /sbin/init.d.README:
/etc/init.d/ (they have been moved accordingly to the Linux Standard Base (LSB) specification).
The scripts for controlling the system are placed in