I know a guy, who once when he was a boy, stole some sodium at school. At recess he threw it into a puddle of water. Eventually a teacher approached, and the boy covered the puddle with a piece of paer to hide the stolen sodium. Under the paper the rection went on and the concentration of hydrogen gas increased until the level of detonating gas was reched. The burning sodium made it explode, and the poor boy got his face burned by squirting Caustic soda solution. he got seriously injured and almost left one eye.
The german computer magazine ct distributes a program to test your computer's RAM. It is loaded
into video memory and executed from there, so it can write into the entire RAM without crashing.
Actually there is not even an official announcement about the release date of woody. Instead there is an official announcement that they will not announce any release date!
Until now their policy used to be NOT to announce any release dates. They even stated something like that on debian.org.
I remember waiting for potato. There was no announcement about the release date, but a daily statistics of release critical bugs was published on debian.org. Often you could read a sentence like this:The number of release critical bugs is on the rise again.
>> would dding/dev/zero over a file just prior to erasing it work?
No. If you delete the file immediately after dding , some or all of the zeros might never be written, because the disk caches optimizes them away.
Under Linux a
Because the link is in the sig. I just wondered how long it will take the trolls to find this out...
Why not wxWindows?
on
GTK-- vs. QT
·
· Score: 1, Redundant
Why don't you consider using wxWindows? It is a great portable toolkit for free (LGPL licensed).
wxWindows has a very rich feature set for building GUIs, plus many other benefits like portable classes for threads, networking, ipc, file i/o, serialization and much more. It is available for almost any kind of UNIX-like OS, for any Windows version, and some more
platforms like VMS.
It is a shame that wxWindows doesn't yet get more attention.
Of course, there are some deficiencies in java, but your arguments are pure nonsense:
"We don't have method pointers, so we use the method name and reflection". We use pointers (yes, there are sort of pointers in java) to objects, and invoke methods on the pointed-to objects. reflection is used for other purposes.
"We do not have preprocessors or macros, so we cut&paste the code and modify each copy a little bit". We have constants for that (final static...).
"We are too lazy to write the long static method invocations, so we just inherit from the class that contains the methods that we need". I don understand your point here!
"Lets make everything a bean, use reflection to access it and separate the code in 5 layers - ok, we write 10 times the code of a simple solution, but look how easy it is to do this change" What is your point here? The Bean pattern is useful but not for everything. Reflection is used for examining objects of unknown origin. It is generally not used for method invocation. Nobody does. Separation of code into layers has to do with architecture and could as well be applied to C++. For some projects it is really useful.
wxWindows has Networking support (socket I/O, ipc,... whatever you want), thread support, a rich feature set for GUIs and much more (unfortunately there is no support for Serial I/O).
You might even consider to drop QT in favor of wxWindows.
It is availabe for Windows, XWindows (GTK based), Mac and some other platforms. It is released under the LGPL.
When i started to work as a full-time programmer, i really soon got constant back pain.
Then i started to do some exercises regularly (10 minutes muscle training every morning, 1000 meters
of swimming every week), and it became much better.
I also have found some excercises that could relieve pain and stiffness very quickly. But they are not useful alone, because if you don't change your habits in general, the pain will soon come back.
Generally most excercises are good, that strengthen your muscles. Also swimming helps a lot. But there are also some excercises that ar rather bad for your back, so you should also try to get some understanding about back problems.
There are a lot of good books around that can tell you what is good for your back and what is not. Readings such books gives you a good understanding what you can do. Unfortunately i don't know any book title in english that i could recommend, because english is not my native language.
I am not a believer in the church of emacs. I dont share the dogmatism of RMS at all. I didnt mean to propagate a policy of free software purity (not even "open source" purity).
Rather i am convinced that also proprietary approaches could be useful in strengtehening an open culture of software standards. (e.g.: In my opinion Sun did a very useful job with java, even if they didnt make it yet to pass it to an independent standardisation authority).
My concern here is that i seriously mistrust Apple regarding their policy towards look-and-feel-copyrights. I couldnt accept this as a legitimate means against MSs monopoly. If APple would have succeeded, software development in general would have to suffer from it.
I juts wish that Apple would show clearer how their position towards issues like that might have changed.
I agree: Webobjects doent really suck. It has a nice model for mapping relational databases to objects, and it has a nice RAD. It has many advantages for some purposes of software development. But in my company it is being a little bit overestimated. I Wouldnt use it for every kind of web based application. You can design a mapping scheme between relational aod OO entities without having to use Webobjects. This way you dont have to use the framework and the tools, which have disadvantages also. Generally i prefer this way.
Portability is an issue in software development, because it has a strong potential to decrease development costs. This can be achieved in many cases by using portable libs wherever applicable. For GUIs wxWindows could be a good choice. Also the OS libs of Mac OS X make portable development easier.
These portable libs are free libs too. So portability should be a strong argument for free software to convince mac geeks.
Not really. But it seems somehow strange to me, that Apple doesnt make it clear enough for its end users how much MacOS X depends on free software. E.f. just look how bash introduces itself. You realize imemdiately, that it is some kind of unix shell, but you have to look twice to see, that is is actually bash.
The same is obvious when you look at some Apple Software like WebObjects (it sucks!): It includes gcc, gdb, bash... but here gcc is called the "Apple Compiler" or something like that... Disgusting!
Mac OS is actually a free OS with a proprietary GUI, and Apple should honour this. Perhaps there are also some legal implications about this. Perhaps the FSF could find out. Remember: A few years ago the FSF tried to boycott Apple for their "Look and feel is copyrigted"-approach.
I agree in that there is one aspect in common, that has to be critisized:
Both they monopolize the definition and standardization of the language and the libraries.
But there are some important differences in how they do it.
Sun tries to evolve Java in a rather open, transparent and honest way. As far as we know SUn did not integrate any secret features or backdoors in java, that would give Sun competitive advantages against any other companies using java. Microsoft always does with its technoloogies, and i expect them to do with "c#" too.
This counts particularly, when it comes to security issues.
Next there is the high quality of the lagugage design. Compared to C++, it really seems to solve some problems that were notorious in C++. (I dont know any oo-languages other than Java and C++, maybe smalltalk or objective C are much better than Java, but Java is clearly better than C++). In contrast, Programming standards that Microsoft delivered yet were mostly crap (MFC, WINAPI, OLE, ActiveX...).
Sure, in some way Sun also does an "embrace and extend" approach. But they do it in a way that is much more acceptable. If they had a mionopolistic status like MS has now, i wouldnt trust their product the way i do now. In general i dislike their proprietary approach to the java language, and i hope that they someday will be forced to transfer maintainership to some kind of independent authority (or an industry gremium like the OMG).But even if sun is bad, MS is yet much worse.
After all, it doesn't seem clear to me, what is the exact purpose of the proposal. Of course, it's about advocating free software, and encouraging users to use as many free software as possible.
I Think,we all agree upon that. What is controversial is the strategy of the proponent. As far as i understand it, he seems to enforce some coercion into debian: Using non-free software should be labeled a non-acceptable behavior.
Such an attitude implies one of the following assumptions:
- You don't need any non-free software
- Even if you need it, it is not acceptable to use it
Seveval postings here, seem to share the first assuptiomn: the claim is made, that for any non-free software, there is a free replacement available, that might not yet be as comfortable or stable, but completely sufficient for everyone's basic needs.
It is quite easy to propagate assumptions about other people's needs, when you haven't to do their work. But is much more difficult to judge, what is actually needed.
Form the viewpoint of a java-porgrammer (yes, i admit, i develop COMMERCIAL software for my employer, so anyone is invited to deny me the legitimity to participate in this debate), i can't agree to this at all. Standard in software developement in the multimedia/internet-industry are rapidly changing. Java-Servlets and JSP are quite new technologies, but they have quickly become some kind of de-facto-standard, that couldn't be easyly ignored. Kaffee is not yet an adequate alternative to the JDK, simply because it doesn't yet implement today's state of java technology.
The free software community has achieved quite a lot to be proud of, and in many regards, free software components could be regard as technically superior. But that is not yet true for all kinds of software. Software developmenent cycles in the free software community seem slow in impelemnting some aspects of evolving programming paradigms: Partuculary object orientation.
Most GNU people advocate plain C as the state of the art. C++ is considered evil, and Java is mostly ignored. Instead a philosphy is propagated, that states: "The best way to do object-oriented programming is to avoid using a programming language that supports it". The gnome project is built around this paradigm.
Of course, gnome is great software. But it doesn't prove, that its style of programming is suitable for everyone's needs. So, as long as we still have to live in an non-free software-world, even advocators of free software sometimes have to use non-free software. P.S.: What about wine? This emulator is mostly used to run non-free software in a free OS. So, even if wine is free itself, its purpose is not. Could it be included in purified free-only-distribution?
Slashdot Mirror
I know a guy, who once when he was a boy, stole some sodium at school. At recess he threw it into a puddle of water. Eventually a teacher approached, and the boy covered the puddle with a piece of paer to hide the stolen sodium. Under the paper the rection went on and the concentration of hydrogen gas increased until the level of detonating gas was reched. The burning sodium made it explode, and the poor boy got his face burned by squirting Caustic soda solution. he got seriously injured and almost left one eye.
The german computer magazine ct distributes a program to test your computer's RAM. It is loaded into video memory and executed from there, so it can write into the entire RAM without crashing.
Download from here.
Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath, Slayer, Paradise Lost, Type-O-Negative, Sepultura,...
Actually there is not even an official announcement about the release date of woody. Instead there is an official announcement that they will not announce any release date!
I remember waiting for potato. There was no announcement about the release date, but a daily statistics of release critical bugs was published on debian.org. Often you could read a sentence like this:The number of release critical bugs is on the rise again.
It seems like the supreme cout of the european community is yet after them...
Seems like they run a seriously misconfigured smtp-server.
i agree
No. If you delete the file immediately after dding , some or all of the zeros might never be written, because the disk caches optimizes them away.
Under Linux a
might help, bur i am not sure.
Because the link is in the sig. I just wondered how long it will take the trolls to find this out...
wxWindows has a very rich feature set for building GUIs, plus many other benefits like portable classes for threads, networking, ipc, file i/o, serialization and much more. It is available for almost any kind of UNIX-like OS, for any Windows version, and some more platforms like VMS.
It is a shame that wxWindows doesn't yet get more attention.
"We don't have method pointers, so we use the method name and reflection".
We use pointers (yes, there are sort of pointers in java) to objects, and invoke methods on the pointed-to objects. reflection is used for other purposes.
"We do not have preprocessors or macros, so we cut&paste the code and modify each copy a little bit".
We have constants for that (final static
"We are too lazy to write the long static method invocations, so we just inherit from the class that contains the methods that we need".
I don understand your point here!
"Lets make everything a bean, use reflection to access it and separate the code in 5 layers - ok, we write 10 times the code of a simple solution, but look how easy it is to do this change"
What is your point here? The Bean pattern is useful but not for everything. Reflection is used for examining objects of unknown origin. It is generally not used for method invocation. Nobody does. Separation of code into layers has to do with architecture and could as well be applied to C++. For some projects it is really useful.
wxWindows has Networking support (socket I/O, ipc,... whatever you want), thread support, a rich feature set for GUIs and much more (unfortunately there is no support for Serial I/O).
You might even consider to drop QT in favor of wxWindows.
It is availabe for Windows, XWindows (GTK based), Mac and some other platforms. It is released under the LGPL.
I also have found some excercises that could relieve pain and stiffness very quickly. But they are not useful alone, because if you don't change your habits in general, the pain will soon come back.
Generally most excercises are good, that strengthen your muscles. Also swimming helps a lot. But there are also some excercises that ar rather bad for your back, so you should also try to get some understanding about back problems.
There are a lot of good books around that can tell you what is good for your back and what is not. Readings such books gives you a good understanding what you can do. Unfortunately i don't know any book title in english that i could recommend, because english is not my native language.
I am not a believer in the church of emacs. I dont share the dogmatism of RMS at all. I didnt mean to propagate a policy of free software purity (not even "open source" purity).
Rather i am convinced that also proprietary approaches could be useful in strengtehening an open culture of software standards. (e.g.: In my opinion Sun did a very useful job with java, even if they didnt make it yet to pass it to an independent standardisation authority).
My concern here is that i seriously mistrust Apple regarding their policy towards look-and-feel-copyrights. I couldnt accept this as a legitimate means against MSs monopoly. If APple would have succeeded, software development in general would have to suffer from it.
I juts wish that Apple would show clearer how their position towards issues like that might have changed.
I agree: Webobjects doent really suck. It has a nice model for mapping relational databases to objects, and it has a nice RAD. It has many advantages for some purposes of software development. But in my company it is being a little bit overestimated. I Wouldnt use it for every kind of web based application. You can design a mapping scheme between relational aod OO entities without having to use Webobjects. This way you dont have to use the framework and the tools, which have disadvantages also. Generally i prefer this way.
These portable libs are free libs too. So portability should be a strong argument for free software to convince mac geeks.
The same is obvious when you look at some Apple Software like WebObjects (it sucks!): It includes gcc, gdb, bash... but here gcc is called the "Apple Compiler" or something like that... Disgusting!
Mac OS is actually a free OS with a proprietary GUI, and Apple should honour this. Perhaps there are also some legal implications about this. Perhaps the FSF could find out. Remember: A few years ago the FSF tried to boycott Apple for their "Look and feel is copyrigted"-approach.
I agree in that there is one aspect in common, that has to be critisized:
Both they monopolize the definition and standardization of the language and the libraries.
But there are some important differences in how they do it.
Sun tries to evolve Java in a rather open, transparent and honest way. As far as we know SUn did not integrate any secret features or backdoors in java, that would give Sun competitive advantages against any other companies using java. Microsoft always does with its technoloogies, and i expect them to do with "c#" too.
This counts particularly, when it comes to security issues.
Next there is the high quality of the lagugage design. Compared to C++, it really seems to solve some problems that were notorious in C++. (I dont know any oo-languages other than Java and C++, maybe smalltalk or objective C are much better than Java, but Java is clearly better than C++). In contrast, Programming standards that Microsoft delivered yet were mostly crap (MFC, WINAPI, OLE, ActiveX...).
Sure, in some way Sun also does an "embrace and extend" approach. But they do it in a way that is much more acceptable. If they had a mionopolistic status like MS has now, i wouldnt trust their product the way i do now. In general i dislike their proprietary approach to the java language, and i hope that they someday will be forced to transfer maintainership to some kind of independent authority (or an industry gremium like the OMG).But even if sun is bad, MS is yet much worse.
After all, it doesn't seem clear to me, what is the exact purpose of the proposal. Of course, it's about advocating free software, and encouraging users to use as many free software as possible.
I Think,we all agree upon that. What is controversial is the strategy of the proponent. As far as i understand it, he seems to enforce some coercion into debian: Using non-free software should be labeled a non-acceptable behavior.
Such an attitude implies one of the following assumptions:
- You don't need any non-free software
- Even if you need it, it is not acceptable to use it
Seveval postings here, seem to share the first assuptiomn: the claim is made, that for any non-free software, there is a free replacement available, that might not yet be as comfortable or stable, but completely sufficient for everyone's basic needs.
It is quite easy to propagate assumptions about other people's needs, when you haven't to do their work. But is much more difficult to judge, what is actually needed.
Form the viewpoint of a java-porgrammer (yes, i admit, i develop COMMERCIAL software for my employer, so anyone is invited to deny me the legitimity to participate in this debate), i can't agree to this at all. Standard in software developement in the multimedia/internet-industry are rapidly changing. Java-Servlets and JSP are quite new technologies, but they have quickly become some kind of de-facto-standard, that couldn't be easyly ignored. Kaffee is not yet an adequate alternative to the JDK, simply because it doesn't yet implement today's state of java technology.
The free software community has achieved quite a lot to be proud of, and in many regards, free software components could be regard as technically superior. But that is not yet true for all kinds of software. Software developmenent cycles in the free software community seem slow in impelemnting some aspects of evolving programming paradigms: Partuculary object orientation.
Most GNU people advocate plain C as the state of the art. C++ is considered evil, and Java is mostly ignored. Instead a philosphy is propagated, that states: "The best way to do object-oriented programming is to avoid using a programming language that supports it". The gnome project is built around this paradigm.
Of course, gnome is great software. But it doesn't prove, that its style of programming is suitable for everyone's needs. So, as long as we still have to live in an non-free software-world, even advocators of free software sometimes have to use non-free software. P.S.: What about wine? This emulator is mostly used to run non-free software in a free OS. So, even if wine is free itself, its purpose is not. Could it be included in purified free-only-distribution?