Using XML to write config files is SHOOTING yourself in the foot. You're better off using natural language. For one, it's easier to parse.
Using XML to represent/pass around data is... shooting yourself in the foot. You still have to build an application on top of it, so use a database and nice well-behaved database clients. (like a SQL news server on port 5555 - all the headlines you can get - make the format standard and that's all folks)
That leaves XML for... I don't really know... Microsoft, standard groups and university courses?
NASA eats funding and captures brains and attention that could be put to better uses. What did the US get out of the apollo missions? Twelve pounds of rocks?
Well, I've got a team of 2 people. One writes 52 lines of code per day, the other 48. I fired the second guy. The average productivity of my team went up (and a whooping 4% - do the math -... ). Hurray! I never saw it coming. And another thing: Did YOU know 1+1=2?
Even if you had the source code. It's a mathematical imposibility.I can write a 34 character C function (searching for an even perfect number) and no man in this world can tell me with certainty if that 34 byte thingie ever stops or not.
"Contacting the maintainers of the Open Source products and asking if anyone provided commercial support was fruitless; in one case the response was downright rude (basically a variation on RTFM) and in the other the response was more helpful, but still could not suggest anything other than being active on the mailing list."
Did you try: we're gonna pay you 400$/month to answer our questions regarding product xxx?
Nice halting proof.There's a little problem in defining Q:
"Here's the trick I would use - and it's simple to do. I'd define a procedure - we'll name the thing Q - that would take and program and call P (of course!) to tell if it looped, by reading the source; "
How does the last verse map to calling P(proc,proc)?
1. if my toaster starts to think I swear to God I'll shoot it. think about it. 2. i can make your computer never, ever need rebooting if you promise getting chipped. you should be accounted for at all times.
I suppose that particles are very close to mathematical concept of numbers. You can say that the ones in 4+1=5 and 5+1=6 are different,they are in diffrernt equations, but to distinguish between the ones in 1+1+1+1=2+2 is a complete mathematical nonsense.
There are only 2 possibilities here: 1.the universe has a finite basic structure (which means that the universe has an underlying mathematical structure) and 2. it doesn't and it is kept together by the will of god, magic, an infinitely descending ladder of turtles or an infinite number of basic laws.
If it's 1 (which I believe it is -- it's a hunch -- not a certitude) then the fact that fundamental particles are very close to a platonic ideal (they're all identical) should be no surprise. They're (almost) the basic bricks of the Universe and like 1s,2s and 3s they're identical.
If it's number 2 then all bets are off.
Anyway most/all scientists believe it's number one.
As a side note, I also believe (call it a hunch) 1.The universe doesn't know how to count (no Godel axioms). 2. Equational decriptions are fit for complex approximating systems. They might not be fit to describe the discrete time evolution of a discrete Universe. 3. There are extra dimensions. Anything > 6. Some of them might be quite sizeable (have effect at microscopic/molecular/atomic scale interactions) Random results of various interactions can be simulated easily by building 1-d cellular automaton another xtra small dimension. 4. The Universe might be quasi-static after all. 5. There's no such thing as a black hole. They're a side effect of equational physics.
Try this: http://www.smipp.com/linuxlk.htm (lots of links to Chinese on everything Linux, including the deb flavor - which suits well my tastebuds too)
Really, elementary particles don't have any fur. You can't distinguish between them. There is no way you can say : this electron is different from that electron (exept if they are free particles and exist at the same time, occupying a different space). But inside an atom, they're not free particles, so you can't say this is electron A and this is electron B, and they interact blah blah blah...
Sweetie, they do. Really. I'm coding windoze apps for my employer on Linux. Debian, to be precise. And listening to music. And the system is stable. Which is more than I can expect of Windows.
Slashdot Mirror
Use the right tool for the job.
... shooting yourself in the foot. You still have to build an application on top of it, so use a database and nice well-behaved database clients. (like a SQL news server on port 5555 - all the headlines you can get - make the format standard and that's all folks)
... I don't really know ... Microsoft, standard groups and university courses?
Using XML to write config files is SHOOTING yourself in the foot. You're better off using natural language. For one, it's easier to parse.
Using XML to represent/pass around data is
That leaves XML for
And really, really masochistic developers...
well, I believe XML was invented by aliens... and not very sane ones
what's wrong with
alien.language = "ptuh"
ptuh.language.family = {"ptuh", "XML"}
it spins in april like a spiffy mp3 that damages your hearing and sends your head spinning after a wma.
what, am I trolling AGAIN?
and OF COURSE i'm also an engineer - that's all that programming is about
Knowing you have misinformed (b..s..ed) a whole generation of slashdotters?
NASA eats funding and captures brains and attention that could be put to better uses. What did the US get out of the apollo missions? Twelve pounds of rocks?
Well, I've got a team of 2 people. One writes 52 lines of code per day, the other 48. I fired the second guy. The average productivity of my team went up (and a whooping 4% - do the math - ... ). Hurray! I never saw it coming.
And another thing: Did YOU know 1+1=2?
Even if you had the source code. It's a mathematical imposibility.I can write a 34 character C function (searching for an even perfect number) and no man in this world can tell me with certainty if that 34 byte thingie ever stops or not.
"Contacting the maintainers of the Open Source products and asking if anyone provided commercial support was fruitless; in one case the response was downright rude (basically a variation on RTFM) and in the other the response was more helpful, but still could not suggest anything other than being active on the mailing list."
Did you try: we're gonna pay you 400$/month to answer our questions regarding product xxx?
Your lawyer is an idiot. Change it. Ask next lawyer, etcaetera. Seriously, NVIDIA is _DISTRIBUTING_ a linux driver, binary only.
Nice halting proof.There's a little problem in defining Q:
"Here's the trick I would use - and it's simple to do.
I'd define a procedure - we'll name the thing Q -
that would take and program and call P (of course!)
to tell if it looped, by reading the source; "
How does the last verse map to calling P(proc,proc)?
1. if my toaster starts to think I swear to God I'll shoot it. think about it.
2. i can make your computer never, ever need rebooting if you promise getting chipped. you should be accounted for at all times.
Somewhere between 2.4.12 and 2.4.16 (i believe that it was : mempages should be 4k long or AGP goes bust -- and the rest goes down hard and fast)
I suppose that particles are very close to mathematical concept of numbers. You can say that the ones in 4+1=5 and 5+1=6 are different,they are in diffrernt equations, but to distinguish between the ones in 1+1+1+1=2+2 is a complete mathematical nonsense.
There are only 2 possibilities here: 1.the universe has a finite basic structure (which means that the universe has an underlying mathematical structure) and 2. it doesn't and it is kept together by the will of god, magic, an infinitely descending ladder of turtles or an infinite number of basic laws.
If it's 1 (which I believe it is -- it's a hunch -- not a certitude) then the fact that fundamental particles are very close to a platonic ideal (they're all identical) should be no surprise. They're (almost) the basic bricks of the Universe and like 1s,2s and 3s they're identical.
If it's number 2 then all bets are off.
Anyway most/all scientists believe it's number one.
As a side note, I also believe (call it a hunch) 1.The universe doesn't know how to count (no Godel axioms).
2. Equational decriptions are fit for complex approximating systems. They might not be fit to describe the discrete time evolution of a discrete Universe.
3. There are extra dimensions. Anything > 6. Some of them might be quite sizeable (have effect at microscopic/molecular/atomic scale interactions) Random results of various interactions can be simulated easily by building 1-d cellular automaton another xtra small dimension.
4. The Universe might be quasi-static after all.
5. There's no such thing as a black hole. They're a side effect of equational physics.
Try this:
http://www.smipp.com/linuxlk.htm (lots of links to Chinese on everything Linux, including the deb flavor - which suits well my tastebuds too)
or this:
http://www.debian.org/intl/zh/
Really, elementary particles don't have any fur. You can't distinguish between them. There is no way you can say : this electron is different from that electron (exept if they are free particles and exist at the same time, occupying a different space). But inside an atom, they're not free particles, so you can't say this is electron A and this is electron B, and they interact blah blah blah ...
So finger yourself.
They'll never replace the current solution with a solution running on proprietary hardware whose specs are closed source. Why should they anyhow?
Usually Africans do not like being associated with such a sorry bunch of ugly people ;)
Sweetie, they do. Really. I'm coding windoze apps for my employer on Linux. Debian, to be precise. And listening to music. And the system is stable. Which is more than I can expect of Windows.
Bsd code belongs to NOBODY (see Darwin). Linux code belongs to us. All hail the GPL :)
That's all folks.
There is no historical evidence for the existence of:
God
Big Bang
quarks
myself
If they're illegal the authorities don't know about them in the first place, right?
So they'll shut down the _legal_ ones first, right?
And then they'll hunt down the illegal ones, which they might or might NOT find.
And so the underground Shanghai internet movement was born. Waiting for the revolution.
I did it on Debian more than once. It runs.