I'm not sure if your post is meant as satire or not. Assuming it's not let me suggest you are a `tard. Lossless compared to What? any recording of anything is "lossy" in that playing it back does not cause an experience indistinguishable from live music. Indeed some music an never even be played live. So what is lossy?
if the music sounds the way the artist meant it, and the artist is satisfied then that's the music. What you are buying is not "missing" anything the artist wanted you to hear. You are getting full value.
In this case if you are quibbling that 128bit AAC sounds jarring to you tuned ears, well know that they are going to offer higher bit rates too. Moreover, for the 12 people like you, just buy the CD and stop whining that he needs to sell something that satisfies your illusions before you will buy.
On the other hand if your post was satirizing those lossless whiner-clowns then good job. too subtle perhaps.
If one is going to compile code to an "executable" form, in this case java script, why does it actually matter what form it is. Why not compile it to java?
Because every browser has a roughly adequate JavaScript interpreter that is integrated with page rendering.
Are you saying that in this day and age that most computers and their browsers don't support a cross platform java sandbox? Surely we are not still living in the early 90s.
If one is going to compile code to an "executable" form, in this case java script, why does it actually matter what form it is. Why not compile it to java?
Trying to answer my own questions the relevant issues are: 1) is the size of the javascript smaller or larger? 2) is java faster or slower for sophisticated operations?
I don't actually know which will be true. While normally i'd expect java to be faster than an interpered language, it's not so obvious for code sent across the web. While simple things like loops will be faster in Java, maybe more sophistcated operations like spawning a new web page will be faster in javascript. Javascript can for example embed a very sophisticated operation--for example "sort"-- into just as few characters, and it will execute at the speed of optimized c-code native to the platform. Javabyte code must encode the whole sort and will execute at the speed of the java interpreter.
3) perhaps the virtue of compileing to javascript is that it's nominally easier for humans to modify 4) is java not as cross platform portable these days compared to java script? 5) are their functions in javascript not available to java?
I'd say that was a fair if hilarious summary. But the reason people buy new Offices is NOT to _write_ letters. It's to _read_ letters. Every time a new office comes out, eventually I start getting letters my old copy can't read. I have to respond so I buy office++.
If the above theory is right-- with vista people are going to hold onto their XP boxes longer-- then what's going to happen is that down the road a bit there's going to be a lot of boxes out there that are just too slow to be worth upgrading. People will buy new boxes.
So what do they do with their old ones? Linux should aim to get people to install linux on these.
There's three reasons I can see to do this:.
One is if there were some reason people needed a server in their homes. Probably not a huge market but one that linux can serve if there was a really nice user friendly server version, which there isn't right now. Server editions are tuned for the expert linux users. What could this application be. Just guessing but suppose everyone had an Xbox 360 in each room, and they needed a common place to put all the music and videos?
Two is what I did, namely put on DSL linux onto my ancient win98 computer. Man what a difference!!! it was liek having a new computer. It suddenly booted in less than 30 seconds. Apps opened instantly. The interface was clean and crisp. Even networking functioned better. It became a very servicable laptop and is still in use when my wife needs something to take notes at a meeting. So there needs to be a version of linux (and as important: the applications) that is so lightweight it makes old hardware feel sprightly again. However the major distros and major apps are all going the opposite direction. Heavy feature laden and resource hungry. DSL would be good but it's not really a comsumer distro. We need a stripped consumer friendly distro.
Third is as a game machine for the little kids. But there's no software.
I think option 1 or 2 could be a killer app for linux in the home: All these computers that will be retiring.
On a more sober note. Maybe this is a testament to the quality of XP. Up until win2000 windows sucked. With win2000 the interface still sucked. XP made big strides in making the interface less sucky.
The point is that every generation of Windows (excluding Bob and ME) has not only an enormous improvement over the last, but almost at the level of an emergency repair that could not be foregone any longer. Thus it drove sales. Any idiot could see why each generation was desirable over the hell they where in.
Maybe with XP the quality finally reach a level where migrating to the next big thing was no longer an emergency. XP had sufficiently good behaviour that the operating system no longer drives sales.
So this time it's going to be the applications that drive sales. You won't upgrade your existing system till the apps start to need whatever Vista has that XP does not do well. Probably this will be some combination of 64bits/video/big memory or....drum roll...DRM. If not then you wait till your harddrive seems puny or you get so rooted that your faced with wiping the disk and reinstalling XP then a chain of service packs. At that point buying a new machine looks attractive.
So Microsoft's big need is the Killer App that only runs well on Vista. You got it?
Boy I shudder at how wrong that is. You mean to say that you never encounter collections of inhomogeneous objects? Ever used a database? I'll give you two examples:
I probably do use such a list, but only rarely; I can't think of the last time I have (well, apart from writing Lisp code, where the code itself is such a list). And yes, my job is writing and using an object-oriented database with Python. Is what I do. Where you get nonhomogeneous objects is in the values of the {key:value} dict of attributes attached to each object in the database, not the database object keys (which would be silly). No it's not silly. it's not at all uncommon to want to sort a list on values. Moreover, sometimes the point is to reconcile lists of things gathered from multiple databases or tables that do have different key types.
I guess we work in different arenas. I assume in your work you are used to dealing with your own curated data bases. In the Bioscience arena one is always interacting with multiple databases from all of the world trying to gather records in whatever form they come in and reconcile differences and similarities in the storage formats for the same entity.
So you sort the list of keys. The type of sort does not matter just as long as it always produces the same rank order for the same collection.
I suppose if I ever needed to do this, I'd take the extra 0.1 second to type ", key=id". They're guaranteed to be unique, unlike the result of a stable sort (which you seem to call "unstable"). This would fail. the ID of two identical instances of an object are not identical. It's not guaranteed in python that two identical immutables will _always_ share the same ID. (python tries to do so when it can). Moreover in computer science one generally wants comparisons to be fast because comparing a million objects against a million objects always takes more than "0.1" seconds. That dimissall is uncalled for.
Or you could sort the two lists in some stable way.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
I'm afraid I do. But I'll give you that the word is being tossed about colloquially here, though I think its meaning is clear in context.
One could go on all day.
All these examples presuppose you have an object database which has as a primary key a value which is sometimes a Unicode string, sometimes a number, sometimes an octet array... WTF kind of database is this? Not all data base keys need to be typed homogenously. That's rather narrow thinking. The only primary attribute of a database key is that it be immutable or at least hashable to an immutable. If you want to go on and require that the type must also be homogenous then that's a higher order definition. And not one that occurs universally in the real world. It can only occur in well curated monolithic databases where it can be enforced. Moreover, it's not always the keys one is sorting, sometimes it's the values.
I've done some pretty crazy things in Python, but I don't know why you'd ever want to sort a list with these things in it. Lists can have any objects as elements, but generally they all have some common interface (especially if you want to sort them!); you've picked things which look similar, but are actually different. Boy I shudder at how wrong that is. You mean to say that you never encounter collections of inhomogeneous objects? Ever used a database? I'll give you two examples:
There's lots of other cases where strings and numbers, unicode strings and raw strings can all be in a list that you want to sort into a rank stable list. Often this occurs when one wants to process a list that was generated from a set of hash keys in a reproducible fashion. You don't want the result to change from run to run. So you sort the list of keys. The type of sort does not matter just as long as it always produces the same rank order for the same collection. The keys could be heterogenueous objects. In many cases you can't reliably anticipate what types the keys might be so even writing your own comparison algorithm can't be done gracefully.
example 2: Suppose you have a collection of objects extracted from two data bases. Now you want to compare them to find all the duplicates. You could do an all-against-all comparison of the two sets. That would be an N^2 operation. Or you could sort the two lists in some stable way. It makes no difference what the order is just as long as it's rank preserving. Now you can do a merge compare. That's more like N log N. Humungous difference.
x = set((1,2,4.0+0.0j, 4)) y = set(( 1,3,4, 4.0+0.0j))
a = y | x b = x | y a == b # result is TRUE
yx = list(a) xy = list(b)
xy == yx # result is TRUE
sorted(xy) # not an error sorted(yx) # is an error
The funny thing is that you are not even guarnteed which of those will work and which will be an error. This is because the storage order of the set is not stable so it can change the order of the underlying lists.
oddly enough for some reason the lists come out of the set the same order they went in. This is appropos the topic of this discussion of a non-guarentteed feature that I am relying on.
As for the 'problem' of list sort results depending on order of the original list, this only happens where there is computational equality between members of the original list, so what's the problem really? try sorting:
Perl is perhaps one large bug that works so well that it's a great feature. For example in perl when you compare two things you get an answer that is stable no matter what the items are. In python you can't and even when you can the answer is not stable. The order of a sorted list can depend on it's orginal ordering! You cant compare floats to Complex numbers but you can compare strings to complex numbers. Sets are grouped by equality not identity so 4.0 and 4 are the same thing for a set. Which one stays and which one get added to the set depends on the ordering of the lists that were put in the set. it's nuts. And the origin of the nutty ness is an obsessive desire not to have default behaviours. Whereas perl is all default behaviours. In the end perl does what you really meant, and python does what you told it.
in case you think I'm python bashing google what python evangelist david mertz says about python warts.
He lists lots of open ports for macs. Some that he lists are actually not open on the default mac config, so it's weird that they show up on the nmap scan. When I scan my own box I don't see these.
Now for vulnerabilities there is exactly one on a mac. are you ready. cause this one is soooo scarey:
"Nessus: The web server permits user enumeration through evaluating the time response to fail on particular queries."
The problem with GoogleFS was that it was a lot of work for relatively little, slow storage. Thus it's main utility -- offsite backups--was of little value. Now with unlimited E-mail storage the value of it for offsite backups is realizable. So would someone please create YahooFS so that I can mount my yahooMail-based file system on my desktop and drag my files across?
Up until now I have been using my own hand rolled SlashdotFS. It works by encoding data into comments. It uses a Markov chain sentence generator to encode data in english looking sentences then writes them as comments in slashdot. I use a redudancy system to prevent data loss if comments are deleted. The other problem is that because the system is write-only, it's means lots of bandwidth for files I change frequently. Even so it works. But the results has been that I feel kinda guilty about all the gibberish comments I insert into slashdot. The good news is that because of the english markov sentence generator, no one can actually tell that it's data so they just think it's some person they need to begin flaming immediately.
In the last version of the program I actually made the post somwhat on-topic by retraining the markov genewrator based on the word field distribution of the thread itself. Slightly slower, but then it looks like a conversation.
I'd feel a lot less guilty if I could use YahooFS instead.
Okay here's my comparison. If you are going to have anything less than 20 computers, and you actually have a bussiness in which time is valuable and you don't have IT-class people with time on their hands, then Linux is insanley expensive to maintain. Get the apple even if the cost per node is higher.
Okay now you say you have 50 to 100 nodes. most of these are behind a cluster router so don't have to be locked down. They all don't have to be running services or what they do run is identical. Well then get Linux. There's zero need to get the apple cost per node. And to boot they will probably reun just a tad faster since you can strip out all those services you don't need. At 100 nodes, having a machine run 10% faster is like 10 extra nodes, so it's worth the optimization at that level of use.
People who claim different, must consider their time has no value, the risk to their bussniess from uncertainty about the patch level of their system has no value, or they have free access to high level sys admin.
Re:Been demoing it myself. compare to BBEDIT
on
TextMate
·
· Score: 1
cool! Not exactly one-stop shopping but How many times do I need to do it right? Now how about ornamenting the tab stops.
Re:Been demoing it myself. compare to BBEDIT
on
TextMate
·
· Score: 1
Not better per se. They both expose different functionality. Each obscures certain functionality too. For example, the comment/uncomment feature in Textmate I just learned about is hidden several menus deep in textmate.
bbedit has way more features and tweaks since it's older. As it ages it's hard for users to keep track when they slide in a new feature. So much documentation obfuscated by every growing backward compatible cruft. When there are new things like say, column selection, that one might have not have noticed got added. Go looking for it and it's there. Just press the option key.
One can see that of the too, textmate's menu layout is not as well worked out, but since it has less features it's not cluttered yet. But Some menus are already getting too long or too deep. But for now it's leaner and meaner, having no cruft to obfuscate things. Come back in a year and I bet there will be a major re-write of the textmate interface once it sports as many tweaks and features as BBEDIT.
Hopefully bbedit will steal the autocomplete and active templating.
Re:Been demoing it myself. compare to BBEDIT
on
TextMate
·
· Score: 1
(copied from another reply) Thanks for the tips--helps a lot. Hiding the comment modification in the source selection was pretty obfuscated.
Now how about a couple more things: 1) How come in python the class and function roll-ups often don't work right if I have a muli-line doc string after class/function definition? If I have one it does not let me roll up the class.
2) sometimes on already created files, the roll-ups are in the wrong places or missing. After I edit the files sometimes they show up.
3) is there any way to have some visual indicator of where column 80 is? (I don't want to soft wrap but I do want to see where column 80 is
4) how can I see the tab columns. If I turn on show invisibles this looks like crap. What I want is some grey vertical bars showing me where the tab stops are so I can match up things indented at the same level with my eye. is this psoosible
5) is there a nice way to visually diff two documents?
thanks is advance:
Re:Been demoing it myself. compare to BBEDIT
on
TextMate
·
· Score: 1
Thanks for the tips--helps a lot. Hiding the comment modification in the source selection was pretty obfuscated.
Now how about a couple more things: 1) How come in python the class and function roll-ups often don't work right if I have a muli-line doc string after class/function definition? If I have one it does not let me roll up the class.
2) sometimes on already created files, the roll-ups are in the wrong places or missing. After I edit the files sometimes they show up.
3) is there any way to have some visual indicator of where column 80 is? (I don't want to soft wrap but I do want to see where column 80 is
4) how can I see the tab columns. If I turn on show invisibles this looks like crap. What I want is some grey vertical bars showing me where the tab stops are so I can match up things indented at the same level with my eye. is this psoosible
5) is there a nice way to visually diff two documents?
thanks is advance:
Been demoing it myself. compare to BBEDIT
on
TextMate
·
· Score: 4, Informative
I've been running it side by side with BBEDIT this last week. Made a serious commitment to write real code in it.
If I did not already have BBEDIT i'd have been very impressed. It also spurred me to look for features I liked to see if they were actually in BBEDIT and surprise they were there all along, I just had not noticed them. On the whole BBEDIT is more powerful and with more thoughtful distribution of things across the menus for easy access. But each has some specific features that might make or break the difference to specific users.
The big selling point of TextMate, is it's powerful active templating and macros. BBEDIT has text factories and lets you write filters so in principle simmilar behaviour might be possible. But TextMate has huge libraries of these already.
For example, when writing python, pull down the python template for a class and it gives you boilerplate class text, but then as you fill in the dummy fields it, for example, the args, it also automatically typing self.arg = arg in the function. Is that helpful? well probably yes in most cases.
likewise tabbing, will move between he dummy fields. And you can ask it to autocomplete a variable name for you and it will do the autocompletion from a dictionary it builds from scanning the document itself and finding variable names. In python which allows silent typos, that could be helpful.
Both BBEdit and Textmate have roll-up functions and oddly enough both implementations are buggy and don't properly recognize the ends of functions.
Both have emacs key bindings avaialble.
as textmate grows and add more and more language templates, it's ironically making those hard to access since the menus are getting too long.
both have grep search. Beedit has multi-file search too.
BBEDIT does a better job of exposing some basic text ops like, zapping invisible chars or converting line endings. It also shows tabs stops better.
A couple of things I have not yet figured out how to do in Textmate yet that I really am jonesing for are Line numbering, and the ability to mark a set of lines and change them to comment lines in a language aware fashion.
A big marketing advantage for BBEDIT is that there's a free version. This way I can use the full price bbedit on my main computer but still have a nearly idendtical envirnoment on all the computers I use less often without paying for it. (for example, I can't legally use my work lic on my home computer, but I can use the free one).
So far I'm much preferring BBEDIT, though I wish it had the autocompletion and the active templating. My productivity is still higher in BBEDIT. But part of that is familiarity.
Both have command line invocation.
both are very good text editors and I could live with either. I suspect BBEDIT will be the winner of my test. THe free lite-version I use at at home forces me to continue using it even if I select TextMate for work.
For those of you in the Linux and Windows World who never had BBEDIT. I pity you.
Star gate is such mind sucking 10-year-old-boy drivel. It does not rise above the level of say "Speed racer" in terms of either sci- or fi-. It's acting is abominable. (don't get me wrong--I like speed racer in its context. But speed racer does not aspire to be what it is not).
Why make more of this dog food, composed of the rendered remains of dead sci fi generes. How about something fresh like the first two seasons of Battle star galactica, which really does have both Sci and Fi and actually good acting?
Hell even a remake of Barbarella would have more redeedming value that the SG tripe.
SG is a lot like that silly show about the submarine (remember the flying sub) from the early 70s.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not sure if your post is meant as satire or not. Assuming it's not let me suggest you are a `tard. Lossless compared to What? any recording of anything is "lossy" in that playing it back does not cause an experience indistinguishable from live music. Indeed some music an never even be played live. So what is lossy?
if the music sounds the way the artist meant it, and the artist is satisfied then that's the music. What you are buying is not "missing" anything the artist wanted you to hear. You are getting full value.
In this case if you are quibbling that 128bit AAC sounds jarring to you tuned ears, well know that they are going to offer higher bit rates too. Moreover, for the 12 people like you, just buy the CD and stop whining that he needs to sell something that satisfies your illusions before you will buy.
On the other hand if your post was satirizing those lossless whiner-clowns then good job. too subtle perhaps.
Because every browser has a roughly adequate JavaScript interpreter that is integrated with page rendering.
Are you saying that in this day and age that most computers and their browsers don't support a cross platform java sandbox? Surely we are not still living in the early 90s.
If one is going to compile code to an "executable" form, in this case java script, why does it actually matter what form it is. Why not compile it to java?
Trying to answer my own questions the relevant issues are:
1) is the size of the javascript smaller or larger?
2) is java faster or slower for sophisticated operations?
I don't actually know which will be true. While normally i'd expect java to be faster than an interpered language, it's not so obvious for code sent across the web. While simple things like loops will be faster in Java, maybe more sophistcated operations like spawning a new web page will be faster in javascript. Javascript can for example embed a very sophisticated operation--for example "sort"-- into just as few characters, and it will execute at the speed of optimized c-code native to the platform. Javabyte code must encode the whole sort and will execute at the speed of the java interpreter.
3) perhaps the virtue of compileing to javascript is that it's nominally easier for humans to modify
4) is java not as cross platform portable these days compared to java script?
5) are their functions in javascript not available to java?
It's not a win unless you reward them with your custom. Better buy now.
I'd say that was a fair if hilarious summary. But the reason people buy new Offices is NOT to _write_ letters. It's to _read_ letters. Every time a new office comes out, eventually I start getting letters my old copy can't read. I have to respond so I buy office++.
If the above theory is right-- with vista people are going to hold onto their XP boxes longer-- then what's going to happen is that down the road a bit there's going to be a lot of boxes out there that are just too slow to be worth upgrading. People will buy new boxes.
So what do they do with their old ones? Linux should aim to get people to install linux on these.
There's three reasons I can see to do this:.
One is if there were some reason people needed a server in their homes. Probably not a huge market but one that linux can serve if there was a really nice user friendly server version, which there isn't right now. Server editions are tuned for the expert linux users. What could this application be. Just guessing but suppose everyone had an Xbox 360 in each room, and they needed a common place to put all the music and videos?
Two is what I did, namely put on DSL linux onto my ancient win98 computer. Man what a difference!!! it was liek having a new computer. It suddenly booted in less than 30 seconds. Apps opened instantly. The interface was clean and crisp. Even networking functioned better. It became a very servicable laptop and is still in use when my wife needs something to take notes at a meeting. So there needs to be a version of linux (and as important: the applications) that is so lightweight it makes old hardware feel sprightly again. However the major distros and major apps are all going the opposite direction. Heavy feature laden and resource hungry. DSL would be good but it's not really a comsumer distro. We need a stripped consumer friendly distro.
Third is as a game machine for the little kids. But there's no software.
I think option 1 or 2 could be a killer app for linux in the home: All these computers that will be retiring.
For Macs and Linux.
/big memory or....drum roll...DRM. If not then you wait till your harddrive seems puny or you get so rooted that your faced with wiping the disk and reinstalling XP then a chain of service packs. At that point buying a new machine looks attractive.
On a more sober note. Maybe this is a testament to the quality of XP. Up until win2000 windows sucked. With win2000 the interface still sucked. XP made big strides in making the interface less sucky.
The point is that every generation of Windows (excluding Bob and ME) has not only an enormous improvement over the last, but almost at the level of an emergency repair that could not be foregone any longer. Thus it drove sales. Any idiot could see why each generation was desirable over the hell they where in.
Maybe with XP the quality finally reach a level where migrating to the next big thing was no longer an emergency. XP had sufficiently good behaviour that the operating system no longer drives sales.
So this time it's going to be the applications that drive sales. You won't upgrade your existing system till the apps start to need whatever Vista has that XP does not do well. Probably this will be some combination of 64bits/video
So Microsoft's big need is the Killer App that only runs well on Vista. You got it?
I probably do use such a list, but only rarely; I can't think of the last time I have (well, apart from writing Lisp code, where the code itself is such a list). And yes, my job is writing and using an object-oriented database with Python. Is what I do. Where you get nonhomogeneous objects is in the values of the {key:value} dict of attributes attached to each object in the database, not the database object keys (which would be silly). No it's not silly. it's not at all uncommon to want to sort a list on values. Moreover, sometimes the point is to reconcile lists of things gathered from multiple databases or tables that do have different key types. I guess we work in different arenas. I assume in your work you are used to dealing with your own curated data bases. In the Bioscience arena one is always interacting with multiple databases from all of the world trying to gather records in whatever form they come in and reconcile differences and similarities in the storage formats for the same entity.
I suppose if I ever needed to do this, I'd take the extra 0.1 second to type ", key=id". They're guaranteed to be unique, unlike the result of a stable sort (which you seem to call "unstable"). This would fail. the ID of two identical instances of an object are not identical. It's not guaranteed in python that two identical immutables will _always_ share the same ID. (python tries to do so when it can). Moreover in computer science one generally wants comparisons to be fast because comparing a million objects against a million objects always takes more than "0.1" seconds. That dimissall is uncalled for.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. I'm afraid I do. But I'll give you that the word is being tossed about colloquially here, though I think its meaning is clear in context.
All these examples presuppose you have an object database which has as a primary key a value which is sometimes a Unicode string, sometimes a number, sometimes an octet array
Powered WiFI is going to take over!
There's lots of other cases where strings and numbers, unicode strings and raw strings can all be in a list that you want to sort into a rank stable list. Often this occurs when one wants to process a list that was generated from a set of hash keys in a reproducible fashion. You don't want the result to change from run to run. So you sort the list of keys. The type of sort does not matter just as long as it always produces the same rank order for the same collection. The keys could be heterogenueous objects. In many cases you can't reliably anticipate what types the keys might be so even writing your own comparison algorithm can't be done gracefully.
example 2: Suppose you have a collection of objects extracted from two data bases. Now you want to compare them to find all the duplicates. You could do an all-against-all comparison of the two sets. That would be an N^2 operation. Or you could sort the two lists in some stable way. It makes no difference what the order is just as long as it's rank preserving. Now you can do a merge compare. That's more like N log N. Humungous difference.
One could go on all day.
another example:
create identical sets in different orders.
x = set((1,2,4.0+0.0j, 4))
y = set(( 1,3,4, 4.0+0.0j))
a = y | x
b = x | y
a == b
# result is TRUE
yx = list(a)
xy = list(b)
xy == yx
# result is TRUE
sorted(xy) # not an error
sorted(yx) # is an error
The funny thing is that you are not even guarnteed which of those will work and which will be an error. This is because the storage order of the set is not stable so it can change the order of the underlying lists.
oddly enough for some reason the lists come out of the set the same order they went in. This is appropos the topic of this discussion of a non-guarentteed feature that I am relying on.
u'a', 'b', '\xf0'
and then the same list in a different order.
'\xf0', u'a', 'b'
--> exceptions.UnicodeDecodeError
Look at the set
( 4,4.0, 4.0+0j)
and the same set in a different order.
should 4.0+0.0j and 4.0 be equal? Python does not think so. should 4L and 4.0 be equal? python does not always think so
mertz article
Perl is perhaps one large bug that works so well that it's a great feature. For example in perl when you compare two things you get an answer that is stable no matter what the items are. In python you can't and even when you can the answer is not stable. The order of a sorted list can depend on it's orginal ordering! You cant compare floats to Complex numbers but you can compare strings to complex numbers. Sets are grouped by equality not identity so 4.0 and 4 are the same thing for a set. Which one stays and which one get added to the set depends on the ordering of the lists that were put in the set.
it's nuts. And the origin of the nutty ness is an obsessive desire not to have default behaviours. Whereas perl is all default behaviours. In the end perl does what you really meant, and python does what you told it.
in case you think I'm python bashing google what python evangelist david mertz says about python warts.
He lists lots of open ports for macs. Some that he lists are actually not open on the default mac config, so it's weird that they show up on the nmap scan. When I scan my own box I don't see these.
Now for vulnerabilities there is exactly one on a mac. are you ready. cause this one is soooo scarey:
"Nessus: The web server permits user enumeration through evaluating the time response to fail on particular queries."
wow! I'm shakin.
By the way, the above post was just an encoded version of my secret egg salad recipe.
The problem with GoogleFS was that it was a lot of work for relatively little, slow storage. Thus it's main utility -- offsite backups--was of little value. Now with unlimited E-mail storage the value of it for offsite backups is realizable. So would someone please create YahooFS so that I can mount my yahooMail-based file system on my desktop and drag my files across?
Up until now I have been using my own hand rolled SlashdotFS. It works by encoding data into comments. It uses a Markov chain sentence generator to encode data in english looking sentences then writes them as comments in slashdot. I use a redudancy system to prevent data loss if comments are deleted. The other problem is that because the system is write-only, it's means lots of bandwidth for files I change frequently. Even so it works. But the results has been that I feel kinda guilty about all the gibberish comments I insert into slashdot. The good news is that because of the english markov sentence generator, no one can actually tell that it's data so they just think it's some person they need to begin flaming immediately.
In the last version of the program I actually made the post somwhat on-topic by retraining the markov genewrator based on the word field distribution of the thread itself. Slightly slower, but then it looks like a conversation.
I'd feel a lot less guilty if I could use YahooFS instead.
Okay here's my comparison.
If you are going to have anything less than 20 computers, and you actually have a bussiness in which time is valuable and you don't have IT-class people with time on their hands, then Linux is insanley expensive to maintain. Get the apple even if the cost per node is higher.
Okay now you say you have 50 to 100 nodes. most of these are behind a cluster router so don't have to be locked down. They all don't have to be running services or what they do run is identical. Well then get Linux. There's zero need to get the apple cost per node. And to boot they will probably reun just a tad faster since you can strip out all those services you don't need. At 100 nodes, having a machine run 10% faster is like 10 extra nodes, so it's worth the optimization at that level of use.
People who claim different, must consider their time has no value, the risk to their bussniess from uncertainty about the patch level of their system has no value, or they have free access to high level sys admin.
cool! Not exactly one-stop shopping but How many times do I need to do it right? Now how about ornamenting the tab stops.
Not better per se. They both expose different functionality. Each obscures certain functionality too. For example, the comment/uncomment feature in Textmate I just learned about is hidden several menus deep in textmate.
bbedit has way more features and tweaks since it's older. As it ages it's hard for users to keep track when they slide in a new feature. So much documentation obfuscated by every growing backward compatible cruft. When there are new things like say, column selection, that one might have not have noticed got added. Go looking for it and it's there. Just press the option key.
One can see that of the too, textmate's menu layout is not as well worked out, but since it has less features it's not cluttered yet. But Some menus are already getting too long or too deep. But for now it's leaner and meaner, having no cruft to obfuscate things. Come back in a year and I bet there will be a major re-write of the textmate interface once it sports as many tweaks and features as BBEDIT.
Hopefully bbedit will steal the autocomplete and active templating.
(copied from another reply) Thanks for the tips--helps a lot. Hiding the comment modification in the source selection was pretty obfuscated.
Now how about a couple more things:
1) How come in python the class and function roll-ups often don't work right if I have a muli-line doc string after class/function definition? If I have one it does not let me roll up the class.
2) sometimes on already created files, the roll-ups are in the wrong places or missing. After I edit the files sometimes they show up.
3) is there any way to have some visual indicator of where column 80 is? (I don't want to soft wrap but I do want to see where column 80 is
4) how can I see the tab columns. If I turn on show invisibles this looks like crap. What I want is some grey vertical bars showing me where the tab stops are so I can match up things indented at the same level with my eye. is this psoosible
5) is there a nice way to visually diff two documents?
thanks is advance:
Thanks for the tips--helps a lot. Hiding the comment modification in the source selection was pretty obfuscated.
Now how about a couple more things:
1) How come in python the class and function roll-ups often don't work right if I have a muli-line doc string after class/function definition? If I have one it does not let me roll up the class.
2) sometimes on already created files, the roll-ups are in the wrong places or missing. After I edit the files sometimes they show up.
3) is there any way to have some visual indicator of where column 80 is? (I don't want to soft wrap but I do want to see where column 80 is
4) how can I see the tab columns. If I turn on show invisibles this looks like crap. What I want is some grey vertical bars showing me where the tab stops are so I can match up things indented at the same level with my eye. is this psoosible
5) is there a nice way to visually diff two documents?
thanks is advance:
I've been running it side by side with BBEDIT this last week. Made a serious commitment to write real code in it.
If I did not already have BBEDIT i'd have been very impressed. It also spurred me to look for features I liked to see if they were actually in BBEDIT and surprise they were there all along, I just had not noticed them. On the whole BBEDIT is more powerful and with more thoughtful distribution of things across the menus for easy access. But each has some specific features that might make or break the difference to specific users.
The big selling point of TextMate, is it's powerful active templating and macros. BBEDIT has text factories and lets you write filters so in principle simmilar behaviour might be possible. But TextMate has huge libraries of these already.
For example, when writing python, pull down the python template for a class and it gives you boilerplate class text, but then as you fill in the dummy fields it, for example, the args, it also automatically typing self.arg = arg in the function. Is that helpful? well probably yes in most cases.
likewise tabbing, will move between he dummy fields. And you can ask it to autocomplete a variable name for you and it will do the autocompletion from a dictionary it builds from scanning the document itself and finding variable names. In python which allows silent typos, that could be helpful.
Both BBEdit and Textmate have roll-up functions and oddly enough both implementations are buggy and don't properly recognize the ends of functions.
Both have emacs key bindings avaialble.
as textmate grows and add more and more language templates, it's ironically making those hard to access since the menus are getting too long.
both have grep search. Beedit has multi-file search too.
BBEDIT does a better job of exposing some basic text ops like, zapping invisible chars or converting line endings. It also shows tabs stops better.
A couple of things I have not yet figured out how to do in Textmate yet that I really am jonesing for are
Line numbering, and the ability to mark a set of lines and change them to comment lines in a language aware fashion.
A big marketing advantage for BBEDIT is that there's a free version. This way I can use the full price bbedit on my main computer but still have a nearly idendtical envirnoment on all the computers I use less often without paying for it. (for example, I can't legally use my work lic on my home computer, but I can use the free one).
So far I'm much preferring BBEDIT, though I wish it had the autocompletion and the active templating. My productivity is still higher in BBEDIT. But part of that is familiarity.
Both have command line invocation.
both are very good text editors and I could live with either. I suspect BBEDIT will be the winner of my test. THe free lite-version I use at at home forces me to continue using it even if I select TextMate for work.
For those of you in the Linux and Windows World who never had BBEDIT. I pity you.
Star gate is such mind sucking 10-year-old-boy drivel. It does not rise above the level of say "Speed racer" in terms of either sci- or fi-. It's acting is abominable. (don't get me wrong--I like speed racer in its context. But speed racer does not aspire to be what it is not).
Why make more of this dog food, composed of the rendered remains of dead sci fi generes. How about something fresh like the first two seasons of Battle star galactica, which really does have both Sci and Fi and actually good acting?
Hell even a remake of Barbarella would have more redeedming value that the SG tripe.
SG is a lot like that silly show about the submarine (remember the flying sub) from the early 70s.