Here are a few tips to Developing for Unix while getting the most out of your Windows code (C++ only):
Caveat Emptor (Let the buyer beware)
1: Use the Visual C Runtime as much as possible for your Windows code.
The MSVCRT contains many calls that can be substituted for Win32 calls. The beauty of the library is that the MSVCRT was designed to look as much like unadorned C++ code as possible. For example most functions return longs istead of HANDLEs. This can be most helpful for cross-platform code.
2: Use FIBERS instead of threads for Windows. Fibers were included in Win32/Win64 to make porting UNIX apps to Windows NT easier. They are basically lightweight threads that manage their own scheduling, memory, and concurrency. While this may seem like an insane suggestion, this is the method used by the SQL Server team at MS to get maximum performance.
This may be a good way to approach your problem because using fibers allows you to write your multithreaded routines specifically for *NIX, avoiding Win32 specific code.
3: Use the development utilities included with Visual Studio to get insane performance boosts on the NT platform (30-40%) without changing a single line of code.
Specifically, you want to look at rebase and bind.
By default all DLL's are loaded at memory address 0x1000000. If this actually happens, Windows will have top calculate the offset of every function call contained within any DLL at load time - a huge performance hit. Rebase.exe recalcuates the DLL memory address during development.
Bind serves a similar funtion, nailing down the addresses of each function in your code. Good for a 10-15% performance gain.
4: For Windows, pay most attention to DLL loading, startup, shutdown, and unloading.
Perfecting your code in this area can save you some serious CPU cycles at runtime, and, best of all, most of this code can be isolated from your other, cross-platform code.
For some Win32 tricks that will improve performance on the NT platform, check out Developing Apllications for Windows, 3rd Edition by Jeffery Richter (MS Press). Has some great stuff on tuning and perfecting.
FUD, FUD, FUD. For a start, most Microsoft developers are using VB. Slashbots may flame them as not being real programmers, but they're as much programmers as those Linux people working in Perl and Python.
Actually, I am not trying to spread FUD. I am, in fact, a senior Windows programmer. And as such, while I recognize that VB programmers are real developers, I also know that VB has some serious limitations. Need a multithreaded COM object, or true asynchronous IO? No VB for you. Only C++ can do that.
The learning curve for VC++ is no steeper than the learning curve for gcc, but VC++ has a lot of stuff to help newbies that gcc doesn't, like code-writing wizards. MFC is certainly no more difficult than say Motif. And the plethora of APIs where have I seen that before? Look at the arguments between the KDE and GNOME camps for desktop applications. And C# is about as easy (or difficult) to learn as Java.
For a newbie who is unfamilliar with Windows programming in C++, getting started can be a pretty daunting task. Aside from the required C or C++ skills, there are other hurdles to jump. And like VB, the Microsoft Foundation Classes have their limits as well. Want a lean ActiveX control? Minimum build and release dependencies? No MFC for you.
Take copy and paste, for example. Anything serious in this arena - ie, not the command line parameter in t_winMain() - requires OLE. So what? All that requires is an in depth uderstanding of the Win32 API - raw, not MFC - , COM or COM+, and the Active Template Library - which itself requires expert knowledge of C++ templates.
Also, while Visual C++ will spit out quite a bit of boilerplate code, I have seen a great many developers who had no idea what most of that code actually did. Not a pretty situation when, for example, using the OLEDB Provider templates. Most of the coders I have seen were unaware that the column map, parameter map, connection call, and execute call should be edited for performance and scalability.
And finally, I doubt that many new developers are aware of development utilities such as rebase.exe. Certainly the developers of[insert major Mac apps vendor's product here] are not. If they were all of [insert major Mac apps vendor's product here] DLLs would not be loaded at memory address 0x10000000; a huge performance hit, as Windows must calculate the memory offset for every DLL function call. Which is probably why it takes so long to load...
Linux may not be easier for a newbie, sure. But development and experimentation on Linux are free, a price that simply can't be beat.*
*AFAIK, the only really good way to learn MS development inside and out on your own is to order the MSDN Universal package. It comes with just about every product MS ships, including all of the Back Office servers. I have it and find it very helpful. So much so, that I recommend it highly for anyone willing to part with the 2700 USD to get it.
Think on this for a moment. When Microsoft developed the Win32 API, one of the design goals was to take full advantage of the 32 bit chips from Intel. No problem. The other design goal was to make it as backwards-compatible as possible with Win16 and OS/2. Serious problem. While developers were able to easily port Windows 3.x apps to 95 and NT, the OS was crippled.
Just as an example, the worst part of NT's core security protocol, NTLM, was not even written by Microsoft. It was coded by IBM for OS/2... and left in for backwards-compatability.
Fast forward to the present. Microsoft Windows, as a platform, is insanely difficult to develop for (unless you are using VB). The learning curve to get started with C or C++ is insane. (eg: COM, COM+, OLE, OLE2, OLEDB, ATL, MFC, ADO, RDO, etc.) Not to mention the cost of getting your hands on Visual Studio.
Linux, on the other hand, is easy to develop for. The tools are free, the compiler is free, and getting your code up and running is as simple as make, make install. It is one of the biggest advantages Linux has (forget security and stability for a moment). Also, Java never worked out on Windows. Even with the WFC extentions, Windows developers never used it to code Win32 apps.
Now, however, MS has.NET. Thanks to its deployment mechanism (assemblies), its somewhat unique object code (CLI, the rough equivilent of Java's VM), and its code libraries (covering about 99% of the Win32 API, but not dependent on Win32),.NET is in a position to make Win32 obsolete.
My guess is that the interviewee is right. MS's next version of Windows will most likely be a platform for.NET, with a stripped down API for 'native' apps. And MS wants.NET ported to everything. In fact, becuase the JITC compiles down to assembly, how much effort would it take to port.NET to Linux? On the IA-32 platform? That the JITC already compiles to? Think on that for a while.
Right now, a better laser correction technology is in trials and should be available sometime in '03 or '04. Albeit at a greater cost, of course.
The new method uses computer assisted distorted mirror and lens technology to create a real time map of the retina for the shaping beam (also new).
The benefits? Try 10/20 vision. And unlike LASIK, this new method promises less irritation and actually improves your night vision instead of nearly erasing it.
For my money, near super-human vision is worth the wait... and the estimated 5k per eye price tag.
I thought the Internet was already decentralized, so I'm curious about what exactly they're fixing.
Not quite. The primary vulnerability lies within the Root DNS servers, which contain all DNS information for the entire Internet*. IIRC, there are only eleven or twelve of them. And because each replicates its data set to all other Root servers, catastrophic failure of one would bring down all of the others.
If that ever happens, you can pretty much say goodbye to the Net, at least temporarily.
*Actually, I think they hold the addresses of all Local DNS servers, which is basically the same thing.
Sorry for playing, but you must turn in your MCSD at the door. There will be a nice parting kick in the pants for your stupidity.
Actually, the one who should be getting a nice, swift kick in the ass is you.
...the.Net framework is nothing more than a VM, and nothing less than a VM, and if you don't understand that, you shouldn't even be on this board, let alone modded to insightful.
Actually, it is you who do not understand. The.NET CLI is not a VM, and it is not an alternative to Java.
In reality (it's no so bad here, you should visit sometime),.NET is now an alternative to Win32 and COM+, and in the future will likely replace the Win32 API, in whole or in part.*
Oh, and if SUN wants an option to disable.NET because SUN claims that it is middleware, does that mean that they will go after DDE, OLE, OLE/DB, COM, DCOM, COM+, RDO, ADO, etc...
Thank you for purchasing Windows XP. Unfortunately, your copy of Windows will not run due to legal issues.
What, you think that MS would release the largest single class library in history (encapsulation nearly every Win32 API call and then some) just for kicks. Longhorn is supposed to be a total rewrite of Windows... and.Net will likely be its API.
But the best part about Mozilla is that it is not just a browser. Scores of developers are now talking about using Mozilla as a "platform"... which, if you think about it, is exactly the kind of thing Microsoft was trying to prevent when it launched its war against Netscape. It didn't want Netscape around, because Netscape was becoming a platform. So wouldn't it be rich if, in the end, Microsoft succeeds in killing Netscape and winning the browser war but still, somehow, doesn't eliminate the platform threat?
Microsoft doesn't really need to worry about the so-called platform threat, and they never did. They made IE the platform, and then welded it to Windows.
And could Salon really think that Moz as a platform could possibly compete with.Net? The API for the next Windows OS? Unlikely.
I mean, really, can you honestly say, with a straight face, that IBM and HP put money into Linux *because* it was GPLd?
Yes.
IBM and HP are hardware and service companies. AIX and HP-UX were just what happened to come in the box with one of their machines - aside from driving hardware, they were unimportant. So why go with Linux?
Microsoft Windows NT Server versions 4.0, 5.0, 5.1. and Sun Solaris
IBM has already faced MS in a software showdown (OS/2 vs NT), and they were trashed soundly. (IBM never could get OS/2 ver. 2 - 32 bit - to run as fast as OS/2 ver. 1.x). HP doesn't even want to try. So they have adopted Linux, using open source as a devolopment arm to compete with MS. The GPL removes competition.
ie, The copyleft portion of the GPL gives IBM and HP a form of security - no one will have a better Linux core than they will. And they no longer need to expend the effort to compete with MS and Sun in the OS arena - they have an army of OSS developers to do that for them.
Nowhere does it [the article] describe some of the significant advantages that Java has over C# such as checked exceptions, inner classes, class granularity reflection, a far better collections implementation and so on.
Rather than behaving as zealots, Slashdotters, and especially Java 'advocates', might want to remember that in some cases, comparisons may be inappropriate.
For example, simply stating that Java is superior to, or has signifigant advatages over, C#, is a bit unfair. Not to mention untrue, at least for the most part. Regardless of your opinion of the Java and C#, the fact is that the laguages were designed for different purposes, and are therefore different - in some cases, radically different.
Developers especially should keep that in mind when thinking about trashing some language. After all, compared to C++, Java is somewhat, well... limited, in power, speed, etc. Of course, Java and C++ are not exactly intended (or suited) for the same tasks. To use the eric consiracy's example, I could say that C++ has signifigant advantages over Java such as pointers, operator overloading, a superior standard class library, templates, a collections implementation (STL) that is orders of magnitude better than Java's, and asm{} (YCMV).
But that wouldn't be fair either; for all that C++ has over Java, Java has a few over C++. Most importantly, a learning curve that doesn't look like Mt. Everest.
Looking more closely...
on
Want Freedom?
·
· Score: 1
It should be no surprise that the individuals surveyed responded with wariness in regard to the First Amendment. After all, Slashdotters, who seem to be, for the most part, a liberal group, have bashed the First Amendment as much as the Democratic party has.
What the *, you say? Let us step through it, shall we...
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...
Uh, yeah, ok. Beginning with the Warren Court ( which heard Roe vs. Wade), the Federal Courts, led by liberal judges, have virtually made hanging your head for a moment of silence on public property s crime. Even the relatively harmless Pledge has been eviscerated.
...; or abridging the freedom of speech...
Sure. That's why we have college speech codes and political correctness. Have you been to your sensitivity sessions yet? Your right to free speech is pretty much a joke, and has been for years.
..., or of the press...
Whatever. While the Fairness In Broadcasting Regulations existed, JFK, RFK, LBJ, Nixon, and Carter regularly threatened to have the licenses of 'hostile' radio broadcasters pulled for 'unfair coverage'. When they were trashed, Congress, with Al Gore and Ted Kennedy leading the charge, tried to have them brought back. Why? Well, the Senate did nickname the bill the 'Hush Rush' law.
; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Sure, you can assemble. So long as you have a permit. And as for a redress of grievances... whatever. The Federal Government, in particular, has been trying damned hard to make to sue them. Hell, they are more likely to sue you.
Of course, no one bitches about any of this. When they hear about any of these, or a hundred other things relating to the First Amendment, they hear about 'religious freedom', 'diversity', 'hate speech', etc. Given the number of devisive issues tied to the First Amemdment, why shouldn't people think that it needs some trimming?
Damn, but those screenshots look like the ones posted of Microsoft Whistler (XP) Beta 2. At the time, XP's UI looked kind of like a cross between their 'Luna' and 'Classic' modes.
But damn again, when will the OSS world learn that you cannot overtake Windows, especially on the desktop, until we have something better than XP? Looking at those fuzzy screens, I almost cringe at the idea of what the fonts look like up close. And i do cringe at the thought of how slow this thing has got to be on less than prime grade hardware.
Seriously, folks, if we really want a peice of the desktop, we have to take Apple's lead and build a new UI. If they can do it, there is no reason OSS can't.
...because they are so out of step with the rest of the business world. The key to hiring a good - or even superior - programmer is the same as for hiring an an executive assistant.
The ability and willingness to learn.
The interveiwer for a professional position must examine candidates in terms of has done, can do, and will do.
Has done is what you see in the 'employment history' or 'career background' sections of a resume. It should be evaluated for scale, ie: how many millions of dollars was in your budget? Mostly, however, it is used as proof of can do.
Can do is what the interviewee can do for your company right now, with no training or preparation. While this is important, it is nothing compared to
Will do, the potential benefits your candidate would provide with training and advancement. An assessment of loyalty is made here, as well. No need to train someone to get a better job with a competitor.
Ever gone into an interview as the most experienced candidate within a 300 mile radius, only to find the (bastards) hired some entry-level hack? Well, sorry to tell you, but you were almost certainly lacking in will do.
Technical questions are good for can do, but so what? What do you do when the limit of can do is reached? Your boy may be able to recite the entire Win32 API by heart (which would be damned impressive), but what happens when your company makes the move to *NIX? He better have a hell of a lot of will do...
Donahue's opening is enough to make me want to vomit...
"I want to show you a picture. This is 13-year-old Noah. While reenacting the video game Mortal Kombat, he was stabbed to death by his friend."
Reenacting the game Mortal Kombat? How intellectually challenged must one be to accept such an excuse? Seriously, folks, just think about what this forbodes...
A minor (teenager, I presume) stabs a thirteen year old often enough, and with enough force, to kill him. There is No Way in Hell (tm) the stabber was not clued in to what he was doing. Unless the victim was taken completely by surprise and killed with the first blow, no one on Earth could fail to correctly interpret the screaming, fighting, and maybe even begging as an act.
The mere fact that anyone, much less 'soccer moms' in middle class burbs, would believe the Mortal Kombat crap should tell you something about the state of our society. It's on its way to Hell, and the handbasket is long gone.
My apologies for the name calling. It was certainly bad form, and I am sorry.
The rest of you:
The point of my posts is that government is not as beholden to corporations as many of you seem to think. The US government is much more beholden to special interest groups who deliver both cash and votes. Yet ultimately, it is most beholden to itself.*
Does big business lobby for laws that benefit business? Of course. Do those same entities lobby for laws that would severly limit your ability to exercise your constitutional rights? Few of them probably do. But not all of them. And none of them can deprive you of your life, property, etc.
Special interests give cash. Special interests lobby. Many of them lobby for legislation worse than the DCMA. Hate crimes legislation, for example. But most important, they bring together like minded people to vote as one for a candidate. Vastly more important than cash.
Think about it folks: there are many influences on government, and I happen to find corps more benign than others. YMMV, but it is unlikely that you are being severly harmed by a corp.
(And yes, if corps were controlling gov't, I would expect to see some evidence of that - sorry)
*There are millions of goverment employees in this nation (more than industrial workers, in fact). They typically give 99% of their votes to whichever politician promises to expand the size and power of our government. (Exactly who were those 50 or so folks in DC who voted for Bush?)
As I have posted elsewhere, the government is driven more by interest groups that are capable of delivering votes than by corporations that can only donate cash.
You do realize that, at the end of an election, it is only the votes tallied that count, right?* Who do you think a politician is more likely to listen to?
A: Microsoft, who can donate large piles of mostly 'soft' money to the party... OR
B: The AFL/CIO, who can probably persuade 60% or more of the local membership to vote for you? And give you a wad of cash to boot?
Keep in mind before you answer that employers cannot compel employees to vote. In fact, most Microserfs actually voted for Al Gore in 2000 (politically, they really are lemmings... they even voted a former exec of Real Networks as their US Senator).
As I see it, the only shafting I'm getting is from the government. No matter what execs at AOL say, Microsoft could never force me to give them money for any reason. The government, on the other hand has forced me to give them money for stupid reasons, completely against my will.
* Don't even go there with the 2000 election in Florida. The court simply affirmed that the candidate with the most votes would become president.
Corporate take over of the world. . . It isn't that far fetched. Check out who pays the politicans, and who they really listen too.
The point is that 'who pays the politicians' and 'who they [politicians] really listen to' are different groups.
While politicians lust for cash, and while they do in fact take quite a bit from corporations, they also take from other entities. This may surprise you, but special interest groups (especially liberal/pro-government ones) and labor unions give quite a bit themselves.
So who do the pols listen to? More likely than not, the interest groups and unions. For all that a candidate may love cash, nothing, and I mean nothing beats a solid voting block.
And corps do not represent voting blocks. A corporate entity cannot itself vote, and how many corporate officers are out there? Can they gift a pol as many votes as the AFL/CIO? The AARP? NOW?
Corps are not even close to taking over the government. A candidate would much rather have the money and backing of the NAACP (which, along with some money, represents 80-95% of the black vote) than the backing of AOL/TW (more cash, but maybe 100 votes).
While I can't speak for Japanese culture, I doubt evisceration is on the way. After all, we ourselves have not eviscerated TRW or Visa.
The (somewhat sad) fact of life is that here in the US, banks and other financial institutions (BFIs) have done an outstanding job of tracking and making available the spanding habits of consumers. Every time you use your credit card, the issuing agency gains access to yet another transaction. Ditto checks, ckeck cards, etc.
BFIs have been happily selling the information to, well, just about anyone who can pay for years, so this kind of 'harvesting' is nothing new. The proliferation of technology (read : the Net) has simply brought this kind of activity more widespread attention.
Not to woory though... you have no need to wait for Blockbuster to start tracking your video rentals - they likely do now. But, even if they didn't, they could buy the information from your bank anyway.
Nothing seems to stop the behemoths - we can't rely on our government: Not only do they pass the laws that give the corps power, and not only do the corps pay the people in government to pass those laws (let's quit pretending here - of course they do - this is not a fairy tale, and we know it!), but they also pass laws that hinder us, the people, from being able to do anything about those in government (ie, campaign finance reform, term limits, etc)!
What, exactly, gives you the idea that corporations are controlling the government? Or that they even exert undue influence over the government? You have told us what you see, and I submit that you must be blind.
To illustrate my point, let me tell you what I see:
If Enron was swimming in a sea of red ink, then the government is certainly drowning in an ocean of it. No corporation could obtain credit while holding over $5,000,000,000,000 (five trillion USD), yet Congress borrows cash through legislative fiat.
The government runs an average overhead of seventy-two cents on every dollar. That means, for example, that every of every dollar slated for Social Security payments, the recipient gets 28 cents. Do you honestly believe that a corp could survive while doing the same?
Say what you want about corps, but with few exceptions, they provide goods and services very efficiently; governments do not. Why? Why can my employer pay run payroll every two weeks, while the IRS usually takes more than a month to refund money that they witheld by mistake?
Why continue? The government does an excellent job of destroying quality of life through corruption and stupidity. The list of 'solutions' that the government has offered that have actually made problems worse would rival the Federal Register in size.
In summary, please spare us the lunatic rantings concerning the corporate takeover of the US (and the World). If corporations are taking over the government, I expect to see the government being run as a corporation. I don't.
Companies that are in trouble often offer up FUD as a first line of defense, and Sun is or will soon be, getting murdered by competitors.
Competition in the low-end and nid range markets (Microsoft,.Net and Free *NIX):
The threat here is somewhat severe. Why buy a Sun solution if you can pick up an Intel/AMD (IA-32 or IA-64) rig for half the price and run Windows on it? Or better yet, run Linux on it? Where is Sun's advantage here? Hint: it's not Java...
Because.Net will likely kill Java. The.Net Initiative can (or so MS thinks) deliver something that Java cannot: a platform for in-the cloud-data access.
Competition in the high-end market (Free *NIX):
IBM, SGI, etc are offering solutions powered by Linux. Unless you just have to have the Sun logo on your boxen, Linux has been proven more than capable on relatively big iron.
As the infamous Halloween Documents stated, Linux is primarily a threat to proprietary *NIX setups.
Now, Sun offers up the ultimate proof: Linux is just fine as long as it impacts the x86 world - but don't dare put it on a platform that affects us.
To be fair, IBM's offering is not perfect - yet. What Sun is preparing for is a future Linux and Big Iron combo that will be. They are afraid, and this FUD is the proof.
The Litigating States Remedial Proposal is directed, almost in its entirety, to open sourcing nearly all of Microsoft's products for the benefit of MS's competitors. Check out this section from the remedy, and read the rest here.
12. Internet Browser Open-Source License. Beginning three months after the date of entry of this Final Judgment, Microsoft shall disclose and license all source code for all Browser products and Browser functionality. In addition, during the remaining term of this Final Judgment, Microsoft shall be required to disclose and make available for license, both at the time of and subsequent to the first beta release (and in no event later than one hundred eighty (180) days prior to its commercial distribution of any Browser product or Browser functionality embedded in another product), all source code for Browser products and Browser functionality. As part of this disclosure, Microsoft shall identify, provide reasonable explanation of, and disseminate publicly a complete specification of all APIs, Communications Interfaces and Technical Information relating to the Interoperation of such Browser product(s) and/or functionality and each Microsoft Platform Software product. The aforementioned license shall grant a royalty-free, non-exclusive perpetual right on a non-discriminatory basis to make, use, modify and distribute without limitation products implementing or derived from Microsoft's source code, and a royalty-free, nonexclusive perpetual right on a non-discriminatory basis to use any Microsoft APIs, Communications Interfaces and Technical Information used or called by Microsoft's Browser products or Browser functionality not otherwise covered by this paragraph.
Wow... everyone can produce and make money from IE, COM, COM+, Windows Script Host, MS XML Engine, etc - except Microsoft, of course. Nice...
Given the remaining language in the remedy, I would not trust the litigating states with any kind of MS source code. And all of you should be supporting the settlement as is yourselves... because next time, it might be your IP...
Anyone familliar with Windows development should know exactly how IE is integrated with the OS... it's called OLE Automation (COM). No one needs to see the source to know that.
Despite claims to the contrary, Windows is pretty well documented. In fact, you can get all of the information needed to clean room the entire OS at your favorite bookstore. For example, Programming Apllications for Microsoft Windows goes into some pretty explicit details regarding kernel32.dll services, process and thread creation, etc. Hell, Inside COM shows you how to actually implement a basic COM system in C++. But I digress...
And BTW... the integration of IE and Windows didn't wasn't exactly the straw that broke the back of Netscape. I seem to recall that almost all software for Windows included IE in the box. In fact, I got copies of IE with Quake II (to read the help files and manual) and Unreal (ditto). But I don't remember getting Navigator...
This book (or perhaps series of books) would be a single source of theory and practical applications for advanced programming techniques. All examples and code would be solutions to real-world problems, not academic samples.
It is, IMHO, somewhat frustrating to find valuable information on high-level development concepts scattered through a wide variety of special interest works. For example, Programming Applications for Microsoft WIndows contains some good information on cache-line optimization. Developing Applications with COM+ has a fascinating section on generic interception. And C++, How to Program has a very good overview of virtual machine theory and development.
Of course, who wants to spend about $180US to get some info about the aforementioned concepts, especially considering the narrow scope they are presented in? Personally, I would rather lay down cash for one good book dedicated to advanced programming.
Oh, BTW... it had better be available in dead tree form.
Would someone please tell me why my previous post is a troll?
Pardon me, if you will, but I do not really understand why posts containing truthful (but dissenting) statements are marked as 'troll' or 'flamebait'... Is the average Slashdot reader so mentally infeebled that they would be harmed by a dissenting opinion? Would the Open Source community crash and burn if honest debate was allowed in the confines of its advocacy forums?
Please people... Slashdot is damaged every time crap (FUD, lies, misinformation, re-written history, etc.) is celebrated as 'interesting' or 'insightful'. Open your minds a crack... you might be surprised at how much good it will do.
'Pure scientific research' has certainly not been the most productive driver of American prosperity...
In fact, the technologies many of us enjoy (and that have spurred our economy) are the result of isolated efforts by individuals and small groups of individuals motivated by interest / profit / necessity. Here are some examples for you:
Electric power: While Edison may have been motivated by the ideals of science, his protege Tesla was not. Tesla's inventions were designed to make money and satisfy his ego.
Modern power tools: Black and Decker were interested in creating a new kind of electric drill. They were inspired by the design of a Colt 1911 pistol.
Personal computers: I doubt that Jobs and the Woz were persuing pure science when they introduced the Apple.
Some other ideas/ products that are not born out of scientific research include: interchangable parts, assembly line manufacturing, the automobile, the locomotive, seagoing vessels... starting to get the point here?
Slashdot Mirror
Caveat Emptor (Let the buyer beware)
1: Use the Visual C Runtime as much as possible for your Windows code.
The MSVCRT contains many calls that can be substituted for Win32 calls. The beauty of the library is that the MSVCRT was designed to look as much like unadorned C++ code as possible. For example most functions return longs istead of HANDLEs. This can be most helpful for cross-platform code.
2: Use FIBERS instead of threads for Windows.
Fibers were included in Win32/Win64 to make porting UNIX apps to Windows NT easier. They are basically lightweight threads that manage their own scheduling, memory, and concurrency. While this may seem like an insane suggestion, this is the method used by the SQL Server team at MS to get maximum performance.
This may be a good way to approach your problem because using fibers allows you to write your multithreaded routines specifically for *NIX, avoiding Win32 specific code.
3: Use the development utilities included with Visual Studio to get insane performance boosts on the NT platform (30-40%) without changing a single line of code.
Specifically, you want to look at rebase and bind.
By default all DLL's are loaded at memory address 0x1000000. If this actually happens, Windows will have top calculate the offset of every function call contained within any DLL at load time - a huge performance hit. Rebase.exe recalcuates the DLL memory address during development.
Bind serves a similar funtion, nailing down the addresses of each function in your code. Good for a 10-15% performance gain.
4: For Windows, pay most attention to DLL loading, startup, shutdown, and unloading.
Perfecting your code in this area can save you some serious CPU cycles at runtime, and, best of all, most of this code can be isolated from your other, cross-platform code.
For some Win32 tricks that will improve performance on the NT platform, check out Developing Apllications for Windows, 3rd Edition by Jeffery Richter (MS Press). Has some great stuff on tuning and perfecting.
Actually, I am not trying to spread FUD. I am, in fact, a senior Windows programmer. And as such, while I recognize that VB programmers are real developers, I also know that VB has some serious limitations. Need a multithreaded COM object, or true asynchronous IO? No VB for you. Only C++ can do that.
The learning curve for VC++ is no steeper than the learning curve for gcc, but VC++ has a lot of stuff to help newbies that gcc doesn't, like code-writing wizards. MFC is certainly no more difficult than say Motif. And the plethora of APIs where have I seen that before? Look at the arguments between the KDE and GNOME camps for desktop applications. And C# is about as easy (or difficult) to learn as Java.
For a newbie who is unfamilliar with Windows programming in C++, getting started can be a pretty daunting task. Aside from the required C or C++ skills, there are other hurdles to jump. And like VB, the Microsoft Foundation Classes have their limits as well. Want a lean ActiveX control? Minimum build and release dependencies? No MFC for you.
Take copy and paste, for example. Anything serious in this arena - ie, not the command line parameter in t_winMain() - requires OLE. So what? All that requires is an in depth uderstanding of the Win32 API - raw, not MFC - , COM or COM+, and the Active Template Library - which itself requires expert knowledge of C++ templates.
Also, while Visual C++ will spit out quite a bit of boilerplate code, I have seen a great many developers who had no idea what most of that code actually did. Not a pretty situation when, for example, using the OLEDB Provider templates. Most of the coders I have seen were unaware that the column map, parameter map, connection call, and execute call should be edited for performance and scalability.
And finally, I doubt that many new developers are aware of development utilities such as rebase.exe. Certainly the developers of[insert major Mac apps vendor's product here] are not. If they were all of [insert major Mac apps vendor's product here] DLLs would not be loaded at memory address 0x10000000; a huge performance hit, as Windows must calculate the memory offset for every DLL function call. Which is probably why it takes so long to load...
Linux may not be easier for a newbie, sure. But development and experimentation on Linux are free, a price that simply can't be beat.*
*AFAIK, the only really good way to learn MS development inside and out on your own is to order the MSDN Universal package. It comes with just about every product MS ships, including all of the Back Office servers. I have it and find it very helpful. So much so, that I recommend it highly for anyone willing to part with the 2700 USD to get it.
Think on this for a moment. When Microsoft developed the Win32 API, one of the design goals was to take full advantage of the 32 bit chips from Intel. No problem. The other design goal was to make it as backwards-compatible as possible with Win16 and OS/2. Serious problem. While developers were able to easily port Windows 3.x apps to 95 and NT, the OS was crippled.
Just as an example, the worst part of NT's core security protocol, NTLM, was not even written by Microsoft. It was coded by IBM for OS/2... and left in for backwards-compatability.
Fast forward to the present. Microsoft Windows, as a platform, is insanely difficult to develop for (unless you are using VB). The learning curve to get started with C or C++ is insane. (eg: COM, COM+, OLE, OLE2, OLEDB, ATL, MFC, ADO, RDO, etc.) Not to mention the cost of getting your hands on Visual Studio.
Linux, on the other hand, is easy to develop for. The tools are free, the compiler is free, and getting your code up and running is as simple as make, make install. It is one of the biggest advantages Linux has (forget security and stability for a moment). Also, Java never worked out on Windows. Even with the WFC extentions, Windows developers never used it to code Win32 apps.
Now, however, MS has .NET. Thanks to its deployment mechanism (assemblies), its somewhat unique object code (CLI, the rough equivilent of Java's VM), and its code libraries (covering about 99% of the Win32 API, but not dependent on Win32), .NET is in a position to make Win32 obsolete.
My guess is that the interviewee is right. MS's next version of Windows will most likely be a platform for .NET, with a stripped down API for 'native' apps. And MS wants .NET ported to everything. In fact, becuase the JITC compiles down to assembly, how much effort would it take to port .NET to Linux? On the IA-32 platform? That the JITC already compiles to? Think on that for a while.
Windows is dead. .NET lives.
The new method uses computer assisted distorted mirror and lens technology to create a real time map of the retina for the shaping beam (also new).
The benefits? Try 10/20 vision. And unlike LASIK, this new method promises less irritation and actually improves your night vision instead of nearly erasing it.
For my money, near super-human vision is worth the wait... and the estimated 5k per eye price tag.
I thought the Internet was already decentralized, so I'm curious about what exactly they're fixing.
Not quite. The primary vulnerability lies within the Root DNS servers, which contain all DNS information for the entire Internet*. IIRC, there are only eleven or twelve of them. And because each replicates its data set to all other Root servers, catastrophic failure of one would bring down all of the others.
If that ever happens, you can pretty much say goodbye to the Net, at least temporarily.
*Actually, I think they hold the addresses of all Local DNS servers, which is basically the same thing.
Actually, the one who should be getting a nice, swift kick in the ass is you.
Actually, it is you who do not understand. The .NET CLI is not a VM, and it is not an alternative to Java.
In reality (it's no so bad here, you should visit sometime), .NET is now an alternative to Win32 and COM+, and in the future will likely replace the Win32 API, in whole or in part.*
Oh, and if SUN wants an option to disable .NET because SUN claims that it is middleware, does that mean that they will go after DDE, OLE, OLE/DB, COM, DCOM, COM+, RDO, ADO, etc...
Thank you for purchasing Windows XP. Unfortunately, your copy of Windows will not run due to legal issues.
What, you think that MS would release the largest single class library in history (encapsulation nearly every Win32 API call and then some) just for kicks. Longhorn is supposed to be a total rewrite of Windows... and .Net will likely be its API.
Microsoft doesn't really need to worry about the so-called platform threat, and they never did. They made IE the platform, and then welded it to Windows.
And could Salon really think that Moz as a platform could possibly compete with .Net? The API for the next Windows OS? Unlikely.
Yes.
IBM and HP are hardware and service companies. AIX and HP-UX were just what happened to come in the box with one of their machines - aside from driving hardware, they were unimportant. So why go with Linux?
Microsoft Windows NT Server versions 4.0, 5.0, 5.1. and Sun Solaris
IBM has already faced MS in a software showdown (OS/2 vs NT), and they were trashed soundly. (IBM never could get OS/2 ver. 2 - 32 bit - to run as fast as OS/2 ver. 1.x). HP doesn't even want to try. So they have adopted Linux, using open source as a devolopment arm to compete with MS. The GPL removes competition.
ie, The copyleft portion of the GPL gives IBM and HP a form of security - no one will have a better Linux core than they will. And they no longer need to expend the effort to compete with MS and Sun in the OS arena - they have an army of OSS developers to do that for them.
Rather than behaving as zealots, Slashdotters, and especially Java 'advocates', might want to remember that in some cases, comparisons may be inappropriate.
For example, simply stating that Java is superior to, or has signifigant advatages over, C#, is a bit unfair. Not to mention untrue, at least for the most part. Regardless of your opinion of the Java and C#, the fact is that the laguages were designed for different purposes, and are therefore different - in some cases, radically different.
Developers especially should keep that in mind when thinking about trashing some language. After all, compared to C++, Java is somewhat, well... limited, in power, speed, etc. Of course, Java and C++ are not exactly intended (or suited) for the same tasks. To use the eric consiracy's example, I could say that C++ has signifigant advantages over Java such as pointers, operator overloading, a superior standard class library, templates, a collections implementation (STL) that is orders of magnitude better than Java's, and asm{} (YCMV).
But that wouldn't be fair either; for all that C++ has over Java, Java has a few over C++. Most importantly, a learning curve that doesn't look like Mt. Everest.
What the *, you say? Let us step through it, shall we...
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...
Uh, yeah, ok. Beginning with the Warren Court ( which heard Roe vs. Wade), the Federal Courts, led by liberal judges, have virtually made hanging your head for a moment of silence on public property s crime. Even the relatively harmless Pledge has been eviscerated.
Sure. That's why we have college speech codes and political correctness. Have you been to your sensitivity sessions yet? Your right to free speech is pretty much a joke, and has been for years.
Whatever. While the Fairness In Broadcasting Regulations existed, JFK, RFK, LBJ, Nixon, and Carter regularly threatened to have the licenses of 'hostile' radio broadcasters pulled for 'unfair coverage'. When they were trashed, Congress, with Al Gore and Ted Kennedy leading the charge, tried to have them brought back. Why? Well, the Senate did nickname the bill the 'Hush Rush' law.
; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Sure, you can assemble. So long as you have a permit. And as for a redress of grievances... whatever. The Federal Government, in particular, has been trying damned hard to make to sue them. Hell, they are more likely to sue you.
Of course, no one bitches about any of this. When they hear about any of these, or a hundred other things relating to the First Amendment, they hear about 'religious freedom', 'diversity', 'hate speech', etc. Given the number of devisive issues tied to the First Amemdment, why shouldn't people think that it needs some trimming?
But damn again, when will the OSS world learn that you cannot overtake Windows, especially on the desktop, until we have something better than XP? Looking at those fuzzy screens, I almost cringe at the idea of what the fonts look like up close. And i do cringe at the thought of how slow this thing has got to be on less than prime grade hardware.
Seriously, folks, if we really want a peice of the desktop, we have to take Apple's lead and build a new UI. If they can do it, there is no reason OSS can't.
The ability and willingness to learn.
The interveiwer for a professional position must examine candidates in terms of has done, can do, and will do.
Has done is what you see in the 'employment history' or 'career background' sections of a resume. It should be evaluated for scale, ie: how many millions of dollars was in your budget? Mostly, however, it is used as proof of can do.
Can do is what the interviewee can do for your company right now, with no training or preparation. While this is important, it is nothing compared to
Will do, the potential benefits your candidate would provide with training and advancement. An assessment of loyalty is made here, as well. No need to train someone to get a better job with a competitor.
Ever gone into an interview as the most experienced candidate within a 300 mile radius, only to find the (bastards) hired some entry-level hack? Well, sorry to tell you, but you were almost certainly lacking in will do.
Technical questions are good for can do, but so what? What do you do when the limit of can do is reached? Your boy may be able to recite the entire Win32 API by heart (which would be damned impressive), but what happens when your company makes the move to *NIX? He better have a hell of a lot of will do...
"I want to show you a picture. This is 13-year-old Noah. While reenacting the video game Mortal Kombat, he was stabbed to death by his friend."
Reenacting the game Mortal Kombat? How intellectually challenged must one be to accept such an excuse? Seriously, folks, just think about what this forbodes...
A minor (teenager, I presume) stabs a thirteen year old often enough, and with enough force, to kill him. There is No Way in Hell (tm) the stabber was not clued in to what he was doing. Unless the victim was taken completely by surprise and killed with the first blow, no one on Earth could fail to correctly interpret the screaming, fighting, and maybe even begging as an act.
The mere fact that anyone, much less 'soccer moms' in middle class burbs, would believe the Mortal Kombat crap should tell you something about the state of our society. It's on its way to Hell, and the handbasket is long gone.
My apologies for the name calling. It was certainly bad form, and I am sorry.
The rest of you:
The point of my posts is that government is not as beholden to corporations as many of you seem to think. The US government is much more beholden to special interest groups who deliver both cash and votes. Yet ultimately, it is most beholden to itself.*
Does big business lobby for laws that benefit business? Of course. Do those same entities lobby for laws that would severly limit your ability to exercise your constitutional rights? Few of them probably do. But not all of them. And none of them can deprive you of your life, property, etc.
Special interests give cash. Special interests lobby. Many of them lobby for legislation worse than the DCMA. Hate crimes legislation, for example. But most important, they bring together like minded people to vote as one for a candidate. Vastly more important than cash.
Think about it folks: there are many influences on government, and I happen to find corps more benign than others. YMMV, but it is unlikely that you are being severly harmed by a corp.
(And yes, if corps were controlling gov't, I would expect to see some evidence of that - sorry)
*There are millions of goverment employees in this nation (more than industrial workers, in fact). They typically give 99% of their votes to whichever politician promises to expand the size and power of our government. (Exactly who were those 50 or so folks in DC who voted for Bush?)
You do realize that, at the end of an election, it is only the votes tallied that count, right?* Who do you think a politician is more likely to listen to?
A: Microsoft, who can donate large piles of mostly 'soft' money to the party... OR
B: The AFL/CIO, who can probably persuade 60% or more of the local membership to vote for you? And give you a wad of cash to boot?
Keep in mind before you answer that employers cannot compel employees to vote. In fact, most Microserfs actually voted for Al Gore in 2000 (politically, they really are lemmings... they even voted a former exec of Real Networks as their US Senator).
As I see it, the only shafting I'm getting is from the government. No matter what execs at AOL say, Microsoft could never force me to give them money for any reason. The government, on the other hand has forced me to give them money for stupid reasons, completely against my will.
* Don't even go there with the 2000 election in Florida. The court simply affirmed that the candidate with the most votes would become president.
While politicians lust for cash, and while they do in fact take quite a bit from corporations, they also take from other entities. This may surprise you, but special interest groups (especially liberal/pro-government ones) and labor unions give quite a bit themselves.
So who do the pols listen to? More likely than not, the interest groups and unions. For all that a candidate may love cash, nothing, and I mean nothing beats a solid voting block.
And corps do not represent voting blocks. A corporate entity cannot itself vote, and how many corporate officers are out there? Can they gift a pol as many votes as the AFL/CIO? The AARP? NOW?
Corps are not even close to taking over the government. A candidate would much rather have the money and backing of the NAACP (which, along with some money, represents 80-95% of the black vote) than the backing of AOL/TW (more cash, but maybe 100 votes).
The (somewhat sad) fact of life is that here in the US, banks and other financial institutions (BFIs) have done an outstanding job of tracking and making available the spanding habits of consumers. Every time you use your credit card, the issuing agency gains access to yet another transaction. Ditto checks, ckeck cards, etc.
BFIs have been happily selling the information to, well, just about anyone who can pay for years, so this kind of 'harvesting' is nothing new. The proliferation of technology (read : the Net) has simply brought this kind of activity more widespread attention.
Not to woory though... you have no need to wait for Blockbuster to start tracking your video rentals - they likely do now. But, even if they didn't, they could buy the information from your bank anyway.
Put on a happy face...
What, exactly, gives you the idea that corporations are controlling the government? Or that they even exert undue influence over the government? You have told us what you see, and I submit that you must be blind.
To illustrate my point, let me tell you what I see:
If Enron was swimming in a sea of red ink, then the government is certainly drowning in an ocean of it. No corporation could obtain credit while holding over $5,000,000,000,000 (five trillion USD), yet Congress borrows cash through legislative fiat.
The government runs an average overhead of seventy-two cents on every dollar. That means, for example, that every of every dollar slated for Social Security payments, the recipient gets 28 cents. Do you honestly believe that a corp could survive while doing the same?
Say what you want about corps, but with few exceptions, they provide goods and services very efficiently; governments do not. Why? Why can my employer pay run payroll every two weeks, while the IRS usually takes more than a month to refund money that they witheld by mistake?
Why continue? The government does an excellent job of destroying quality of life through corruption and stupidity. The list of 'solutions' that the government has offered that have actually made problems worse would rival the Federal Register in size.
In summary, please spare us the lunatic rantings concerning the corporate takeover of the US (and the World). If corporations are taking over the government, I expect to see the government being run as a corporation. I don't.
Competition in the low-end and nid range markets (Microsoft, .Net and Free *NIX):
The threat here is somewhat severe. Why buy a Sun solution if you can pick up an Intel/AMD (IA-32 or IA-64) rig for half the price and run Windows on it? Or better yet, run Linux on it? Where is Sun's advantage here? Hint: it's not Java...
Because .Net will likely kill Java. The .Net Initiative can (or so MS thinks) deliver something that Java cannot: a platform for in-the cloud-data access.
Competition in the high-end market (Free *NIX):
IBM, SGI, etc are offering solutions powered by Linux. Unless you just have to have the Sun logo on your boxen, Linux has been proven more than capable on relatively big iron.
So, yeah... I think it's FUD.
Now, Sun offers up the ultimate proof: Linux is just fine as long as it impacts the x86 world - but don't dare put it on a platform that affects us.
To be fair, IBM's offering is not perfect - yet. What Sun is preparing for is a future Linux and Big Iron combo that will be. They are afraid, and this FUD is the proof.
Wow... everyone can produce and make money from IE, COM, COM+, Windows Script Host, MS XML Engine, etc - except Microsoft, of course. Nice...
Given the remaining language in the remedy, I would not trust the litigating states with any kind of MS source code. And all of you should be supporting the settlement as is yourselves... because next time, it might be your IP...
Despite claims to the contrary, Windows is pretty well documented. In fact, you can get all of the information needed to clean room the entire OS at your favorite bookstore. For example, Programming Apllications for Microsoft Windows goes into some pretty explicit details regarding kernel32.dll services, process and thread creation, etc. Hell, Inside COM shows you how to actually implement a basic COM system in C++. But I digress...
And BTW... the integration of IE and Windows didn't wasn't exactly the straw that broke the back of Netscape. I seem to recall that almost all software for Windows included IE in the box. In fact, I got copies of IE with Quake II (to read the help files and manual) and Unreal (ditto). But I don't remember getting Navigator...
It is, IMHO, somewhat frustrating to find valuable information on high-level development concepts scattered through a wide variety of special interest works. For example, Programming Applications for Microsoft WIndows contains some good information on cache-line optimization. Developing Applications with COM+ has a fascinating section on generic interception. And C++, How to Program has a very good overview of virtual machine theory and development.
Of course, who wants to spend about $180US to get some info about the aforementioned concepts, especially considering the narrow scope they are presented in? Personally, I would rather lay down cash for one good book dedicated to advanced programming.
Oh, BTW... it had better be available in dead tree form.
Pardon me, if you will, but I do not really understand why posts containing truthful (but dissenting) statements are marked as 'troll' or 'flamebait'... Is the average Slashdot reader so mentally infeebled that they would be harmed by a dissenting opinion? Would the Open Source community crash and burn if honest debate was allowed in the confines of its advocacy forums?
Please people... Slashdot is damaged every time crap (FUD, lies, misinformation, re-written history, etc.) is celebrated as 'interesting' or 'insightful'. Open your minds a crack... you might be surprised at how much good it will do.
In fact, the technologies many of us enjoy (and that have spurred our economy) are the result of isolated efforts by individuals and small groups of individuals motivated by interest / profit / necessity. Here are some examples for you:
Electric power: While Edison may have been motivated by the ideals of science, his protege Tesla was not. Tesla's inventions were designed to make money and satisfy his ego.
Modern power tools: Black and Decker were interested in creating a new kind of electric drill. They were inspired by the design of a Colt 1911 pistol.
Personal computers: I doubt that Jobs and the Woz were persuing pure science when they introduced the Apple.
Some other ideas/ products that are not born out of scientific research include: interchangable parts, assembly line manufacturing, the automobile, the locomotive, seagoing vessels... starting to get the point here?