Of course, you can mitigate that by using typedefs, and then you only have to change the typedef, but it can still get a bit wordy.
Typedefs are the work of the devil himself. I have spent way too long searching through header files to find out someone decided it would be a good idea to typedef std::vector<std::dtring> to string_list.
The topic of this thread is "What are the drawbacks to the STL", and everyone that has mentioned drawbacks to the STL has gotten moded as flaimbait. Amazing.
What the parent said is true; the usability of the STL vaies greatly from vender to vender, compiler to compiler. I have spent hours trying to figure out what was wrong with my code, only to find ou thtat Forte had bitten FUMed me again.
Alos, try reading a compiler error that mentions an std::vector > >;
std:string itself expands to std::basic_string. I;m sure there was a good reason for it, but I'll be darned if I can figure it out.
The STL sets out to do some very useful things, and by and large accompilshes that. You do, however, need to be careful about which version of the STL you are using; some are more standard than others.
If you want a container of intgers in a Java container (i think) you have to have a container of "Int" rather than "int".
Integer, actually, but otherwise you are correct. They are implmenting an auto-wrap feature in Java 1.5, but even then, primitives will still be wrapped with objects; it will just happen behinde the scenes.
My brother caught a virus from a warzed copy of Norton from Kazaa. I thought it was the funniest thing I had seen in ages.
Re:AND fusion power is soooo close...
on
Lunar Power
·
· Score: 1
(sadly, if his convictions are true, it'll remain at 1 forever)
At first, I was kind of surprised that I didn't get modded into the abyss, but the more I think about it, the more I think people really do want someone to take a stand for things like this.
My pastor says things like this. Someone once told him that he was never going to build a church that way. His reply was that yes, he would build a church, a real church, grounded in real faith. We average about 800 people a week, so he must be doing something right.
And, like the saying goes, what the hell, it's only karma.
Re:AND fusion power is soooo close...
on
Lunar Power
·
· Score: 1
"Family" no longer means what it once did, but that's not entirely a bad thing.
Yes, it is. Now, I do not want people to think I am looing down on people that are caught in these situations; not at all. I am very close to some people that are single parents, and just about everyone I know comes from some sort of broken home. The people that find themselves in these situations and still try to make the best life possible could rightly be regarded as heros. Still, many of the problems with crime, drugs, and poverty can be traced to the breakdown in the family. There was a time when one's family would keep you straight, give you encouragment, and help you out in times of need. Now, that is seen as more the government's job, and the fact that it doesn't work that way is painfully obvious.
"God" is a mythical concept. It isn't real. Get over it and stop being so damn ignorant and superstitious.
No, He is not. There is far and above more proof for His existance than against. I've already posted about this recently, so just take a look at this. Basically, it takes more faith to be an athiest than a Christian.
This is your life: live it. Keep any god you choose to worship in your personal life, and OUT of public life and politics.
Well, you see, that's not how this county was founded. The sepertion of church and state was desgined to keep the government out of religion, not the other way around. My God is a driving force in my life, and suggesting I keep Him out of public life and politics is like suggesting I keep morality and common sense out, as well. I will not try and force you to believe what I believe; God Himself will not do that, and there is no reason for me to do so, either. I will, however, do my best to see that this country remains, or more appropriatly, becomes again, a place of morals, virtues, and justice.
This country was founded on Judeao-Christian principles. There was a time when status was awarded based on how hard you worked, not how much you ammased, and morality meant holding oneself to a higher standard, not constantly redefining new lows. If we do not return to our roots, this country is in trouble.
Stop feeling entitled. America was founded on the concept of "meritocracy". EARN your living.
Personal freedom IS more important than corporate profit. Dammit, get active, demand your rights, stop allowing yourself to be bought off for a pittence.
Absolutly right.
Re:AND fusion power is soooo close...
on
Lunar Power
·
· Score: 1
Unfortunatly, our concernes are much more mundane these days.
Our country hs lost it's focus and it's heritage. We are in decline, and no matter how stirring a "let's get a man on the moon" type of speach might be, it would only be a cosmetic fix. What we really need is someone to stand up and say
America was made great by it's work ethic, so let's get back to work.
"Family" no longer means what it once did. 60% of marriages end in divorce, and too many kids grow up without a monther or father.
All these people that seem to get a kick out of killing innocents need to no longer be alive.
"God" isn't a dirty word.
You are much more capable than you are giving yourself credit for. You can take care of yourself, and your family. You do not need the government to do it for you.
Personal freedom is more imporant than corporate profit. There was a time when people would die for their freedom; now they won't even write their congressman.
I could go on, but you get the point. We don't need a "Let's get to the moon" speach, we need a "Pull your head out of the sand and get your butt off the couch" speach.
The problem is, any frequency that is safe for things to pass through would also be too weak to harness for power. There is all kinds of fun radiation floating around us right now, all totally safe, but also too weak to do us any good.
Re:Doesn't the earth receive more?
on
Lunar Power
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Yes the earth recieves much more then the moon, but...
All very good points, but the costs of getting all the building materials to the moon, having people on the moon to run it, and then getting the power back down to the earth would make lunar power well nigh impossible.
I think solar power is going to grow, but I don't forsee it as being huge solar farms in Arizona, or anywhere else. I see it as being much smaller units that people use to help lower their home's dependency on fossile fules and the electric company.
Last I heard, solar power wasn't very affordable or efficient, but was getting better. I don't think it would take very much, relativly speaking, to develop solar power that is attracive enough for widespread home use, at least in areas that are rich in sunlight. People stuck in less clement areas will probably move towards things like hydro-electric power, wind power, etc.
Actually, hydroelectric is probably more realistic than any other alternative power source. It is already in use in some places, and is proven to be effective. You don't need the large surface areas of solar or wind power, and distribution works just like any other electrical transmission. The only hinderence is lack of waterfalls or powerful rivers.
It's also important to point out that these thigns are not going to replace fossile fules, merely augment them, at least for the time being. There is too much investment and inertia in fossile fules to change overnight.
The earth is full of resources that we can use and replenish; all it takes is enough public interest to get the government involoved or, more likely, give private business reason to start developing those areas. Environmental benifits aside, this would also lower our dependency on the OPEC countries who's distant cousins we are currently waging war on.
There is a reason it is called "work." If you are so bored with your job that you need to play games all the time, you are in the wrong line of work. If your boss is too uptight to realize that sometimes the brain needs to leave a problem lie for a while, and that there is nothing wrong with playing a game or surfing the web when you are just spinning your wheels, you are working for the wrong people.
Well, then you have my appologies. I was respnding to everyone who seemes to think that a law was suddenly passed that forced you to pass on everything that came with the computer when it comes time for you to get rid of it. You (at least apparently) were the tenth or so post I read about this, hence my, er, turse response. No hard feelings, I hope...
* They don't have to use the software; they just have to keep it attached to the PC somehow. They can stick it in a library and run any OS they like on the PC.
For one, they do not have to do anything. For another, the entity donating the PC is under no obligation to give the software to the new users. They loose the rights to the software themselves, but if they choose to destroy the CDs, etc, that is all well and legal.
A. It is a legal requirement that pre-installed operating systems remain with a machine for the life of the machine. If a company or individual donates a machine to your school, it must be donated with the operating system that was installed on the PC. If you donate the computer, the OS has to come with it.
NO IT DOES NOT.
You loose the rights to that OS when you sell it/give it away BUT YOU DO NOT HAVE TO TRANSFER THOSE RIGHTS TO ANYONE. Microsoft is mistaken or lying.
It is a legal requirement to keep the same OS? I'm not so sure....
No, it is not. Just for kicks
buy computer with WindowsWhatever
format hard drive
install Linux, BSD, etc
burn WindowsWhatever CDs and docs
donate machine
There is absolutly nothing illegal about this. Most licensing agreements state that the copy of Windows that comes pre-installed on a machine is only good for that machine. In other words, if you want to use that OS, it must remain with that machine. If you donate a machine w/o the pre-installed copy of Windows, you are, esentially, declaring that neither party has the right to use that copy of Windows.
This should read "if you donate a computer, you no longer have the right to use the Windows operating system that it came installed with. We recommend donating it with the PC." And it should be targeted at the people donating, not the schools.
While I think it's possible to learn everything from a college CS program on one's own, I don't think it probable. When learning on one's own it is very easy to miss topics that aren't sexy or immediately useful. You may get pragmatic knowledge, but stuff like computability theory and compiler and OS design is important. Most people aren't going to hit everything in a casual self-education.
One of the things I keep saying is that a degree program will show you what you need to know, but htat it is up to you to learn it. College has shown me a lot of cool areas that I might not have looked into otherwise, but for the most part, th eskills I have came from a lot of late night code runs.
If you can't get through the intro course with just the instructors help, you don't belong in that major.
Not necessarily. There are, I will agree, a whole lot of people that got into this field because "that's where the money is, now what's this 'mouse' thingy?" These people should be driven out of the program as soon as possible, for everyone's benifit. I would much rather not have to cover loops again in my senior year, and they will be a lot happier, and successful, somewhere else.
These are not the only people who have dificulty in the program, however. I tutored a few of the people in my data structures course a while back; that's how I got my job. These were capable, intelligent people, aready working in the field, just not as programmers. The material was not too difficult for them to understand; the professor was. If you can't get through a course without just the instructor's help, perhaps you (or more likely the instructor) don't belong at that university, but it doesn't necessarily reflect on the talent of the people taking the course.
The goal of a college should be "tech these people what they need to know." If student collaboration is not allowed, this will not happen. Period, full stop, end of story. I have learned a ton of stuff from people in my classes and at my job. I have learned comparitivly little from a guy standing at the front of a room pontificating. CS is a very hands-on thing, and to maximize learning, you need someone there to ask questions of and get advice from as you are working. There are not enough TAs or professors for everyone to do that, but there are almost always guys across the hall. Fortunatly, my college allows such collaboration. I grok Java real good, but FORTRAN isn't my thing; we can help each other out, cover each other's weaknesses. All of my code goes up on my web site, GPLed. Want it, take it, just stick my name in the header file. That's esentially what one of the intro professors said; "I don't care if you work together, just tell me you worked together."
Also, CS is full of people that know what they are talking about, and have no idea how to talk about it. Lots of us speak C better than English, which is just great when you need them to code something. When you need to get some information out of them, on the other hand...
There does come a point where it is time to put up or shut up; by the end of the course, you should be able to do what is listed in the syllabus on your own. That, though, is what finals are for. That is where you demonstrate that you have learned that material; the rest of the year should be spent actually learning it.
The first time I heard about something like this, I was just impressed by the technology...kind of a throwback to ELIZA. An IM-based AI would make for a fun project, I think. Knowing what they are using it for, though...
I suppose this is part of the two-edged sword that geeks have to deal with; corporate adoption of a technology can help speed its growth, but we may not always like the purposes it is put to. I really doubt that the people who were writing the first AI alogrithms were thinking "hey, what a great way to deliver spam!"
I don't disagree, but if Mac OSX came out for an intel processor, I would bet dollars to doughnuts that one of the first things Microsoft would do would be to stop supporting it.
Apple is good for Microsoft, as you said, as long as they aren't too competitive.
I dont understand how people get that the ruling is "suppose to hurt" anyone. It is "suppose" to correct the wrongs done by a criminal monopolist, and restore fair and competitive business practices in the industry affected. M$ has been proved guilty of monopoly, the remedies are of course going to turn "unfairly" gained business over to competitors who have been affected by the monopoly.
Correcting thier illegal business practices will hurt their business, if it is done correctly. Restoring fair competition will hurt their business, if it is done correctly.
When I say "hurt Microsoft," I am not talking about a public spanking; I am simply trying to explain why a "penalty" that does not benefit the competition is not a penalty at all.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, you can mitigate that by using typedefs, and then you only have to change the typedef, but it can still get a bit wordy.
Typedefs are the work of the devil himself. I have spent way too long searching through header files to find out someone decided it would be a good idea to typedef std::vector<std::dtring> to string_list.
The topic of this thread is "What are the drawbacks to the STL", and everyone that has mentioned drawbacks to the STL has gotten moded as flaimbait. Amazing.
What the parent said is true; the usability of the STL vaies greatly from vender to vender, compiler to compiler. I have spent hours trying to figure out what was wrong with my code, only to find ou thtat Forte had bitten FUMed me again.
Alos, try reading a compiler error that mentions an std::vector > >;
std:string itself expands to std::basic_string. I;m sure there was a good reason for it, but I'll be darned if I can figure it out.
The STL sets out to do some very useful things, and by and large accompilshes that. You do, however, need to be careful about which version of the STL you are using; some are more standard than others.
If you want a container of intgers in a Java container (i think) you have to have a container of "Int" rather than "int".
Integer, actually, but otherwise you are correct. They are implmenting an auto-wrap feature in Java 1.5, but even then, primitives will still be wrapped with objects; it will just happen behinde the scenes.
And which OS would be a successor for Windows?
OSX
My brother caught a virus from a warzed copy of Norton from Kazaa. I thought it was the funniest thing I had seen in ages.
(sadly, if his convictions are true, it'll remain at 1 forever)
At first, I was kind of surprised that I didn't get modded into the abyss, but the more I think about it, the more I think people really do want someone to take a stand for things like this.
My pastor says things like this. Someone once told him that he was never going to build a church that way. His reply was that yes, he would build a church, a real church, grounded in real faith. We average about 800 people a week, so he must be doing something right.
And, like the saying goes, what the hell, it's only karma.
"Family" no longer means what it once did, but that's not entirely a bad thing.
Yes, it is. Now, I do not want people to think I am looing down on people that are caught in these situations; not at all. I am very close to some people that are single parents, and just about everyone I know comes from some sort of broken home. The people that find themselves in these situations and still try to make the best life possible could rightly be regarded as heros. Still, many of the problems with crime, drugs, and poverty can be traced to the breakdown in the family. There was a time when one's family would keep you straight, give you encouragment, and help you out in times of need. Now, that is seen as more the government's job, and the fact that it doesn't work that way is painfully obvious.
"God" is a mythical concept. It isn't real. Get over it and stop being so damn ignorant and superstitious.
No, He is not. There is far and above more proof for His existance than against. I've already posted about this recently, so just take a look at this. Basically, it takes more faith to be an athiest than a Christian.
This is your life: live it. Keep any god you choose to worship in your personal life, and OUT of public life and politics.
Well, you see, that's not how this county was founded. The sepertion of church and state was desgined to keep the government out of religion, not the other way around. My God is a driving force in my life, and suggesting I keep Him out of public life and politics is like suggesting I keep morality and common sense out, as well. I will not try and force you to believe what I believe; God Himself will not do that, and there is no reason for me to do so, either. I will, however, do my best to see that this country remains, or more appropriatly, becomes again, a place of morals, virtues, and justice.
This country was founded on Judeao-Christian principles. There was a time when status was awarded based on how hard you worked, not how much you ammased, and morality meant holding oneself to a higher standard, not constantly redefining new lows. If we do not return to our roots, this country is in trouble.
Stop feeling entitled. America was founded on the concept of "meritocracy". EARN your living.
Personal freedom IS more important than corporate profit. Dammit, get active, demand your rights, stop allowing yourself to be bought off for a pittence.
Absolutly right.
Our country hs lost it's focus and it's heritage. We are in decline, and no matter how stirring a "let's get a man on the moon" type of speach might be, it would only be a cosmetic fix. What we really need is someone to stand up and say
I could go on, but you get the point. We don't need a "Let's get to the moon" speach, we need a "Pull your head out of the sand and get your butt off the couch" speach.
The problem is, any frequency that is safe for things to pass through would also be too weak to harness for power. There is all kinds of fun radiation floating around us right now, all totally safe, but also too weak to do us any good.
Yes the earth recieves much more then the moon, but...
All very good points, but the costs of getting all the building materials to the moon, having people on the moon to run it, and then getting the power back down to the earth would make lunar power well nigh impossible.
I think solar power is going to grow, but I don't forsee it as being huge solar farms in Arizona, or anywhere else. I see it as being much smaller units that people use to help lower their home's dependency on fossile fules and the electric company.
Last I heard, solar power wasn't very affordable or efficient, but was getting better. I don't think it would take very much, relativly speaking, to develop solar power that is attracive enough for widespread home use, at least in areas that are rich in sunlight. People stuck in less clement areas will probably move towards things like hydro-electric power, wind power, etc.
Actually, hydroelectric is probably more realistic than any other alternative power source. It is already in use in some places, and is proven to be effective. You don't need the large surface areas of solar or wind power, and distribution works just like any other electrical transmission. The only hinderence is lack of waterfalls or powerful rivers.
It's also important to point out that these thigns are not going to replace fossile fules, merely augment them, at least for the time being. There is too much investment and inertia in fossile fules to change overnight.
The earth is full of resources that we can use and replenish; all it takes is enough public interest to get the government involoved or, more likely, give private business reason to start developing those areas. Environmental benifits aside, this would also lower our dependency on the OPEC countries who's distant cousins we are currently waging war on.
Oh please.
There is a reason it is called "work." If you are so bored with your job that you need to play games all the time, you are in the wrong line of work. If your boss is too uptight to realize that sometimes the brain needs to leave a problem lie for a while, and that there is nothing wrong with playing a game or surfing the web when you are just spinning your wheels, you are working for the wrong people.
Well, then you have my appologies. I was respnding to everyone who seemes to think that a law was suddenly passed that forced you to pass on everything that came with the computer when it comes time for you to get rid of it. You (at least apparently) were the tenth or so post I read about this, hence my, er, turse response. No hard feelings, I hope...
I should mention that by "burn" I mean "set fire to and reduce to carbon," not "copy onto a CD". Sorry about that.
* They don't have to use the software; they just have to keep it attached to the PC somehow. They can stick it in a library and run any OS they like on the PC.
For one, they do not have to do anything. For another, the entity donating the PC is under no obligation to give the software to the new users. They loose the rights to the software themselves, but if they choose to destroy the CDs, etc, that is all well and legal.
A. It is a legal requirement that pre-installed operating systems remain with a machine for the life of the machine. If a company or individual donates a machine to your school, it must be donated with the operating system that was installed on the PC.
If you donate the computer, the OS has to come with it.
NO IT DOES NOT.
You loose the rights to that OS when you sell it/give it away BUT YOU DO NOT HAVE TO TRANSFER THOSE RIGHTS TO ANYONE. Microsoft is mistaken or lying.
No, it is not. Just for kicks
- buy computer with WindowsWhatever
- format hard drive
- install Linux, BSD, etc
- burn WindowsWhatever CDs and docs
- donate machine
There is absolutly nothing illegal about this. Most licensing agreements state that the copy of Windows that comes pre-installed on a machine is only good for that machine. In other words, if you want to use that OS, it must remain with that machine. If you donate a machine w/o the pre-installed copy of Windows, you are, esentially, declaring that neither party has the right to use that copy of Windows.This should read "if you donate a computer, you no longer have the right to use the Windows operating system that it came installed with. We recommend donating it with the PC." And it should be targeted at the people donating, not the schools.
Since you can throw away the original disks if you install say, Linux, wouldn't this document be misleading in a legal sense and thus be illegal?
Couldn't you say the same thing about half of slashdot posts?
While I think it's possible to learn everything from a college CS program on one's own, I don't think it probable. When learning on one's own it is very easy to miss topics that aren't sexy or immediately useful. You may get pragmatic knowledge, but stuff like computability theory and compiler and OS design is important. Most people aren't going to hit everything in a casual self-education.
One of the things I keep saying is that a degree program will show you what you need to know, but htat it is up to you to learn it. College has shown me a lot of cool areas that I might not have looked into otherwise, but for the most part, th eskills I have came from a lot of late night code runs.
I work in a UNIX shop. .NET need not apply.
You need the piece of paper, but you also need the books. All of the compenent programmers I know have an extensive library.
If you can't get through the intro course with just the instructors help, you don't belong in that major.
Not necessarily. There are, I will agree, a whole lot of people that got into this field because "that's where the money is, now what's this 'mouse' thingy?" These people should be driven out of the program as soon as possible, for everyone's benifit. I would much rather not have to cover loops again in my senior year, and they will be a lot happier, and successful, somewhere else.
These are not the only people who have dificulty in the program, however. I tutored a few of the people in my data structures course a while back; that's how I got my job. These were capable, intelligent people, aready working in the field, just not as programmers. The material was not too difficult for them to understand; the professor was. If you can't get through a course without just the instructor's help, perhaps you (or more likely the instructor) don't belong at that university, but it doesn't necessarily reflect on the talent of the people taking the course.
The goal of a college should be "tech these people what they need to know." If student collaboration is not allowed, this will not happen. Period, full stop, end of story. I have learned a ton of stuff from people in my classes and at my job. I have learned comparitivly little from a guy standing at the front of a room pontificating. CS is a very hands-on thing, and to maximize learning, you need someone there to ask questions of and get advice from as you are working. There are not enough TAs or professors for everyone to do that, but there are almost always guys across the hall. Fortunatly, my college allows such collaboration. I grok Java real good, but FORTRAN isn't my thing; we can help each other out, cover each other's weaknesses. All of my code goes up on my web site, GPLed. Want it, take it, just stick my name in the header file. That's esentially what one of the intro professors said; "I don't care if you work together, just tell me you worked together."
Also, CS is full of people that know what they are talking about, and have no idea how to talk about it. Lots of us speak C better than English, which is just great when you need them to code something. When you need to get some information out of them, on the other hand...
There does come a point where it is time to put up or shut up; by the end of the course, you should be able to do what is listed in the syllabus on your own. That, though, is what finals are for. That is where you demonstrate that you have learned that material; the rest of the year should be spent actually learning it.
For the most part, the people at my college can get better help from the other students than they can from the faculty.
The first time I heard about something like this, I was just impressed by the technology...kind of a throwback to ELIZA. An IM-based AI would make for a fun project, I think. Knowing what they are using it for, though...
I suppose this is part of the two-edged sword that geeks have to deal with; corporate adoption of a technology can help speed its growth, but we may not always like the purposes it is put to. I really doubt that the people who were writing the first AI alogrithms were thinking "hey, what a great way to deliver spam!"
I don't disagree, but if Mac OSX came out for an intel processor, I would bet dollars to doughnuts that one of the first things Microsoft would do would be to stop supporting it.
Apple is good for Microsoft, as you said, as long as they aren't too competitive.
I dont understand how people get that the ruling is "suppose to hurt" anyone. It is "suppose" to correct the wrongs done by a criminal monopolist, and restore fair and competitive business practices in the industry affected. M$ has been proved guilty of monopoly, the remedies are of course going to turn "unfairly" gained business over to competitors who have been affected by the monopoly.
Correcting thier illegal business practices will hurt their business, if it is done correctly. Restoring fair competition will hurt their business, if it is done correctly.
When I say "hurt Microsoft," I am not talking about a public spanking; I am simply trying to explain why a "penalty" that does not benefit the competition is not a penalty at all.