That may be the most readable code, but it's also wrong.
strcmp returns a value greater, equal to, or less than zero. It does not return 1, 0, and -1. That means you shouldn't compare the return of strcmp with your STRCMPGREATER or STRCMPLESS.
This allows strcmp to be implemented in a very simple and efficient way.
Even if he might not be doing much right now. He's done a lot of significant work on Emacs, ncurses, and I believe nethack. Take a look at http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/software.html to see some of the stuff he's done (mostly the stuff he distributes... it doesn't mention the Emacs stuff, for instance).
I don't care about people who want to use Linux but don't want to learn anything about it. I don't care about Linux world domination. I don't want to spend my free time holding hands through Linux installs day in and day out, and I don't really care if my mom can use Linux. So name me elitist.
It seems these days, if you just want to get your work done, or work on things that interest you, you're named an elitist or an asshole. Why should other people be dictating what I should do with my life, simply because I've learned more than they care to?
I say, let the people that want to deal with those who don't want to learn do so. I'll deal with the applications I want and the users I'm interested in.
A modem interacts with many more things than a toaster does. It's easy to make a toaster easy to install: it integrates with only one interface, which has been standard for decades. A modem has to integrate with the hosts ports (physical), potentially many different kinds of software, the phone line.
It's the flexibility in the modem that makes it difficult to install.
It sounds like you're reading things, and won't be asking questions you can't find. So you probably shouldn't have problem.
But there are lots and lots of questions asked which could be answered simply by reading the HOWTOs, and those people deserve to have them pointed out.
As far as being a newbie once, yes, I was. And I learned perfectly well from the HOWTOs, and a whole lot of news posts that someone asked just in time for me to read the answer....
It's not about fonts. It's about a rather difficult-to-read layout, caused by HTML misuse.
For example, there are no paragraph breaks in the article at all. It's all s, sometimes with two in a row. No , , etc, just font size tags. Sure, these aren't big things, but it makes a difference and makes the article looks worse than it should.
The old harmony project list archive included a few threads of the form "You know, I don't think we should hurt troll by continuing harmony, since they're being so cool in letting people use their code." If the old archives are still out there, you can see for yourself.
The sentiment is out there, even if it's not on slashdot.
I disagree that production apps are a good place for proprietary software. When you're using something in production, that's exactly where you want the robustness that comes with open-source/free software, and where the ability to fix bugs yourself matters.
Even if a company doesn't want to fix bugs in-house, it would be a lot easier to hire bug-fixes if you could call any number of consultants to work on the source, than if you had to call the original vendor and wait for the next release.
I guess it boils down to the fundamental difference between RMS and ESR. RMS wants to be able to do whatever he wants with software. ESR wants the source to be visible so that people can see the source, learn from it, and fix bugs. But it doesn't seem that the ability to reuse code in other applications is as important to him.
The article makes a good point in describing a lot of the new open-source programs as very project-oriented. The recent licenses encourage fixes, reading the source, etc, but make certain that it's all directed towards a single project, the project the company is sponsoring. Patch-only releases are great, for instance, if you're working on (eg) a mail application. But you won't be able to use the mail handling code if you'd like to add a "Mail document to" to your word processor.
These licenses will satisfy ESR's pragmatic motivations (making software better), but won't help the common good as much as freer licenses. For example, if Linux and BSD were licensed in a patch-only form, for instance, I don't think there would be as much driver cross-pollination, and both systems would be less for it.
The Utah cencership discussion is pretty old... more recent ones might be more valid, since the moderators are probably getting used to things, and Rob's been able to bounce abusers. And I think it was before the new high limit and low limit, and I'm sure moderators are adjusting to that...
What do recent posts look like? They've seemed ok to me, but I haven't read many older (ie, more likely moderated) posts.
You must be using a different LPR than I am. I can't find any information on model files, a -O option, etc.
As such, I don't know how safe it would be to use on a remote printer, which probably doesn't support such things. That's another reason IPP is good... it's standardized, and LPR isn't.
Microsoft hasn't sped up progress most of the time. It's slowed them down.
Let's look at a few things. Multitasking. Other PC OSes had it for years, during which MS was saying "Nobody wants or needs that." Until finally Windows could do it.
How about preemptive multitasking? Same thing. GUIs? Same thing. Memory protection? Same thing.
Microsoft's rise was based on convincing people they didn't want features their competitors had, until years later, their software had those features. You can see it in practically every market MS has been in.
It's made Bill lots of money, but I don't know how much it has helped the consumer.
I don't know if it's _sturdier_... Gerbers have a lifetime warranty and Leathermans are 25yrs, but that's because the company haven't been around too long.
Personally, I've seen a Swiss Tool and think it's worthy, but I like my Leatherman Supertool more. Personal preference. (I don't think the lesser Swiss Army knives are very worthy, though.)
I have to say you're probably right. I'm as much of an emacs-phile as anyone: I compile, edit, debug, read email, news, etc, in emacs, write emacs packages, etc. But when I have to look at logfiles and checking disk space, I normally use the shell. Well, if it's one-off stuff... for big disk cleaning, I do use dired with some scripts I wrote to find usage hotspots.
Note that this is dependant on having a decent shell, namely bash. If I have to use anything else, I tend to do things more from Emacs, because it can compensate for faults in other shells, like not having both ! and C-r histories.
Well, there _is_ accountability, just not accountability to us. Rob said that moderators can't change the score of an article twice and that he's removed some 15 for abuses, so the system has to be keeping track of things. So you should be able to email Rob if you see an abuse and have it fixed.
IPP does not specify a page description language. It does allow a printer to specify the forms it can accept, so your software can know that sending it a tiff will work, but fortran formatting codes won't.
Check out the IPP documents. It uses HTTP as a transport mechanism. (That way, they hope to take advantage of HTTP security mechanisms and existing implementations.)
No, you can't just use "the appropriate model file". There are lots of useful printer capabilities that lpr just has no idea of. And most servers (well, none I know of) don't do anything with the PPD file (what I assume you're talking about).
Tell me, how do I tell the LPD server I'm sending it PDF which it should print in reverse order, 4 pages per sheet, both sides, first page from the letterhead tray and remainder from tray 3?
Slashdot Mirror
That may be the most readable code, but it's also wrong.
strcmp returns a value greater, equal to, or less than zero. It does not return 1, 0, and -1. That means you shouldn't compare the return of strcmp with your STRCMPGREATER or STRCMPLESS.
This allows strcmp to be implemented in a very simple and efficient way.
Meow usenet?
Gee, I've been reading ~30-50 usenet groups daily over the past 5 years, and I never noticed it. It seems to be a very localized phenomenom.
Even if he might not be doing much right now. He's done a lot of significant work on Emacs, ncurses, and I believe nethack. Take a look at http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/software.html to see some of the stuff he's done (mostly the stuff he distributes... it doesn't mention the Emacs stuff, for instance).
If you think that, you _still_ don't get RMS's point.
I don't care about people who want to use Linux but don't want to learn anything about it. I don't care about Linux world domination. I don't want to spend my free time holding hands through Linux installs day in and day out, and I don't really care if my mom can use Linux. So name me elitist.
It seems these days, if you just want to get your work done, or work on things that interest you, you're named an elitist or an asshole. Why should other people be dictating what I should do with my life, simply because I've learned more than they care to?
I say, let the people that want to deal with those who don't want to learn do so. I'll deal with the applications I want and the users I'm interested in.
But the world _is_ divided between those who want to learn, and those who don't.
I don't see why we should care about those who don't.
A modem interacts with many more things than a toaster does. It's easy to make a toaster easy to install: it integrates with only one interface, which has been standard for decades. A modem has to integrate with the hosts ports (physical), potentially many different kinds of software, the phone line.
It's the flexibility in the modem that makes it difficult to install.
It sounds like you're reading things, and won't be asking questions you can't find. So you probably shouldn't have problem.
But there are lots and lots of questions asked which could be answered simply by reading the HOWTOs, and those people deserve to have them pointed out.
As far as being a newbie once, yes, I was. And I learned perfectly well from the HOWTOs, and a whole lot of news posts that someone asked just in time for me to read the answer....
It's not about fonts. It's about a rather difficult-to-read layout, caused by HTML misuse.
For example, there are no paragraph breaks in the article at all. It's all
s, sometimes with two in a row. No , , etc, just font size tags. Sure, these aren't big things, but it makes a difference and makes the article looks worse than it should.
The old harmony project list archive included a few threads of the form "You know, I don't think we should hurt troll by continuing harmony, since they're being so cool in letting people use their code." If the old archives are still out there, you can see for yourself.
The sentiment is out there, even if it's not on slashdot.
I disagree that production apps are a good place for proprietary software. When you're using something in production, that's exactly where you want the robustness that comes with open-source/free software, and where the ability to fix bugs yourself matters.
Even if a company doesn't want to fix bugs in-house, it would be a lot easier to hire bug-fixes if you could call any number of consultants to work on the source, than if you had to call the original vendor and wait for the next release.
I guess it boils down to the fundamental difference between RMS and ESR. RMS wants to be able to do whatever he wants with software. ESR wants the source to be visible so that people can see the source, learn from it, and fix bugs. But it doesn't seem that the ability to reuse code in other applications is as important to him.
The article makes a good point in describing a lot of the new open-source programs as very project-oriented. The recent licenses encourage fixes, reading the source, etc, but make certain that it's all directed towards a single project, the project the company is sponsoring. Patch-only releases are great, for instance, if you're working on (eg) a mail application. But you won't be able to use the mail handling code if you'd like to add a "Mail document to" to your word processor.
These licenses will satisfy ESR's pragmatic motivations (making software better), but won't help the common good as much as freer licenses. For example, if Linux and BSD were licensed in a patch-only form, for instance, I don't think there would be as much driver cross-pollination, and both systems would be less for it.
If you think these look better, you probably haven't seen decent PDF files. (Ditto file size, actually.)
PDFs don't have to suck. They just do most of the time because most people don't create good ones.
It would affect any developer outside the US who wanted to give the software to someone else, who happenned to be on the US "bad" list at the time.
The Utah cencership discussion is pretty old... more recent ones might be more valid, since the moderators are probably getting used to things, and Rob's been able to bounce abusers. And I think it was before the new high limit and low limit, and I'm sure moderators are adjusting to that...
What do recent posts look like? They've seemed ok to me, but I haven't read many older (ie, more likely moderated) posts.
You must be using a different LPR than I am. I can't find any information on model files, a -O option, etc.
As such, I don't know how safe it would be to use on a remote printer, which probably doesn't support such things. That's another reason IPP is good... it's standardized, and LPR isn't.
This has been a test of the emergency moderation system. This is only a test.
Microsoft hasn't sped up progress most of the time. It's slowed them down.
Let's look at a few things. Multitasking. Other PC OSes had it for years, during which MS was saying "Nobody wants or needs that." Until finally Windows could do it.
How about preemptive multitasking? Same thing. GUIs? Same thing. Memory protection? Same thing.
Microsoft's rise was based on convincing people they didn't want features their competitors had, until years later, their software had those features. You can see it in practically every market MS has been in.
It's made Bill lots of money, but I don't know how much it has helped the consumer.
I don't know if it's _sturdier_... Gerbers have a lifetime warranty and Leathermans are 25yrs, but that's because the company haven't been around too long.
Personally, I've seen a Swiss Tool and think it's worthy, but I like my Leatherman Supertool more. Personal preference. (I don't think the lesser Swiss Army knives are very worthy, though.)
I have to say you're probably right. I'm as much of an emacs-phile as anyone: I compile, edit, debug, read email, news, etc, in emacs, write emacs packages, etc. But when I have to look at logfiles and checking disk space, I normally use the shell. Well, if it's one-off stuff... for big disk cleaning, I do use dired with some scripts I wrote to find usage hotspots.
Note that this is dependant on having a decent shell, namely bash. If I have to use anything else, I tend to do things more from Emacs, because it can compensate for faults in other shells, like not having both ! and C-r histories.
Well, there _is_ accountability, just not accountability to us. Rob said that moderators can't change the score of an article twice and that he's removed some 15 for abuses, so the system has to be keeping track of things. So you should be able to email Rob if you see an abuse and have it fixed.
It's from an IETF working group, and on the IETF standards track. Isn't that the definition of "open"?
The author of LPRng has already announced he'll be implementing it, from a post in the other IPP article.
IPP does not specify a page description language. It does allow a printer to specify the forms it can accept, so your software can know that sending it a tiff will work, but fortran formatting codes won't.
Check out the IPP documents. It uses HTTP as a transport mechanism. (That way, they hope to take advantage of HTTP security mechanisms and existing implementations.)
No, you can't just use "the appropriate model file". There are lots of useful printer capabilities that lpr just has no idea of. And most servers (well, none I know of) don't do anything with the PPD file (what I assume you're talking about).
Tell me, how do I tell the LPD server I'm sending it PDF which it should print in reverse order, 4 pages per sheet, both sides, first page from the letterhead tray and remainder from tray 3?