Enough of this namby pamby "let them do what they want" stuff. The first time you catch them lying, ban them from the PC for 2 months. The second time, make it 6 months. Children have to have respect for their parents.
(Note: this is NOT offtopic -- because this is a comment about something obvious that everyone knows except for the poster)
I did consider myself a C guru until today when I was surprised to find that if
char z[] = "\x0012345678"; then sizeof(z) is 2 (rather than 10, as I expected). It also seems that "\x00f" has size 2, but "\x00g" has size 3.
I had always believed that '\x' in a string introduced a 2-hex-digit byte constant (similar to how \0 introduces a 3-octal-digit constant).
I looked in my copy of K&R but it doesn't even mention '\x'.
Can someone fill me in on what the exact rule is, why is it like that, and when (and by whom) it was added to the C standard?
I used NTBackup.exe to make daily backups on a former employer's NT4 system (direct to backup tapes). It all seemed to be working fine, until one time the harddrive crashed. I went to restore the backups, and found that he had ejected the tape during the previous backup becuase the noise was annoying him (!) Byebye database.
Why does it matter if the masses adopt linux? Sure, it would be cool, but so is gumdrop icecream. I use linux because I like it best etc. etc., but I couldn't give a flying fuck what joe down the road uses on his PC.
Widespread business adoption could even be a bad thing. Remember how everyone said "oh I can't wait until all my friends, john doe, etc. use IRC too", look how shit it is now. The same happened to Napster. Let's not let Linux go down the same road!
(This is not to be xenophobic or anything -- but let's stop wasting effort attracting people who don't want to be attracted).
Yeah same here. I have a several-page document of C++Builder quirks, in case anyone else ever takes over my projects (or if I come back to it after an absence). We should join efforts and make a webpage on the topic, or something.
The most awful part of it all is the AnsiStrings and TStringList -- since I figured out how the SCL works, I have stopped using those two. They can't even fix the bugs in those because it will break lots of existing code that (accidentally) relies on the bugs.
Re. your problems: 1) I think you could fix it with a bit of effort / source file reorganization.
2) use the command-line linker to try and isolate it. Of course, you could attach the IDE as a debugger to see what is going on:)
4) turn it off and press ctrl-space when you do need it.. I agree it is awful, they could take a leaf out of VC++ for this one
5) dont bother with the builtin TODO features:)
6) yeah
7) took me a while to figure out how to enter stuff in the type library editor in such a way that it doesn't generate invalid code. I never have to edit the makefiles, just take care. You can't really blame them for that; COM is such a dog and only MS really knows what all goes on under the hood, so they have a headstart in getting it right in their compiler. I'm sure they just don't have the resource to fine-tune it any more. My solution is to develop without COM (either a VCL component, or some such), and maintain a simple COM wrapper as a separate project (that way, any COM-related errors, crashes, BSTR allocation probs, etc. are all easy to track down; or you can even throw away the whole wrapper and make a new one). This strategy has saved me dozens (if not hundreds) of hours.
I wonder if someone can enlighten me on this obscure bug (and if it carries over to the new version).
one time when I completed level 1, it took me straight to level 12. I then did that and had 57 minutes remaining when I completed the game (a record, as far as I know).
I don't know if this was a bug, or if I accidentally activated a cheat?
Has anyone got any more details on the mysterious C++BuilderX ? It has all the hallmarks of vapourware, except that it actually seems to have been released. Borland's website doesn't give any useful information.
I currently use C++Builder 5 (most of the time, without VCL). Is C++BuilderX a "step up" , or should I be sticking where I am? Is it even similar to the older versions of C++Builder at all? Does it use wxWindows similarly to how the older versions used VCL? (ie. can I design RAD forms and stick controls on them, etc.). Does it still have all the debugger features?
It would be nice if there was a review somewhere from somebody who had actually used the product.. or even just some screenshots?
Actually, there is. Laws are coming in that will require a user to divulge passwords, keys etc. to police with a search warrant (or else face arrest etc.). If you don't know your own key then you can't give it to the feds.
I did a fair bit of programming in BASIC on a ZX Spectrum 48K (and a bit later on on the 128K version).
I did some assembly reading (sufficient to hack games for infy-lives etc.) but it was beyond my patience to do any coding (writing FOR loops in basic to print out the machine code from address, then translate it to opcodes from the back of the Z80 manual, then use POKE to put some new opcodes in, etc. etc. etc.)
How is shutting your site down supposed to be a protest? All it means is that I can't access the sites I want (and, what's more, now I think this one OSS project is stupid because its site was shot down for protest on the day I found out about it).
Do the lawmaker people use any of these shut down sites? I doubt it. Whose mind is changed here? Not mine, I was already against software patents. Who would have converted from in-favour to against, based on this?
This is not even comparable to a hunger strike. The site owners sure aren't suffering (in fact they might enjoy the lower traffic bill).
You may well own the hardware and a copy of the software it comes with, but you still don't own any intellectual property rights for either.
By creating a hardware or software modification you may be infringing on MS patents, copyrights, and/or software licences.
If it were a standard PC and you hacked some games that it came with on the harddrive, and re-released them, nobody would try to raise the defence 'I paid for these games so I can do what I like'.
I don't agree with what I've just said, of course, but there does seem to be a lot of leeway for the MS lawyer team to get stuck into.
How do you explain Doppler redshift in terms of the photon model?
Is the photon red-shifted at the source, or when you see it? Presumably when you see it, because when it is emitted it doesn't yet 'know' how far it's going to travel before it hits something, or how fast that something is going to be moving. (A galaxy that appears redshifted to us would not appear redshifted to eg. a stationary (wrt it.) observer close to it, even though it might be the same photons that get seen).
But when you see the photon, it's a photon, and it has no memory of how fast the object it was going was actually moving, so how does it know how much to get redshifted?
Someone else on this thread claimed that this explanation is wrong - the rotation comes because the heat radiating off the black side causes convection currents in the air, which make it rotate; and therefore, if it's done in a complete vacuum then no rotation occurs.
Have you got reliable references for experiments to confirm your view rather than this other view?
Here's my question. In the article, Gold says that yes, if the reflected photon has lower energy then the sail will move, but if it has the same energy then it won't move.
You seem to be saying that reflected photons will always have a lower energy? Does this mean that when I look at myself in the mirror, I am actually seeing the colours with a slightly longer wavelength than they are? And if I set up 2 opposing mirrors, can I shine a blue light and see green , red etc. too as the light reflects back and forth and gradually loses energy?
Finally, how does temperature relate to momentum, exactly? I was under the impression that temperature meant internal kinetic energy, which photons can't have (but obviously they do, otherwise the COBE wouldn't have anything to measure). So how do you incorporate temperature when you write the equation for a photon's total energy?
Slashdot Mirror
Enough of this namby pamby "let them do what they want" stuff. The first time you catch them lying, ban them from the PC for 2 months. The second time, make it 6 months. Children have to have respect for their parents.
(Note: this is NOT offtopic -- because this is a comment about something obvious that everyone knows except for the poster)
I did consider myself a C guru until today when I was surprised to find that if
char z[] = "\x0012345678";
then sizeof(z) is 2 (rather than 10, as I expected). It also seems that "\x00f" has size 2, but "\x00g" has size 3.
I had always believed that '\x' in a string introduced a 2-hex-digit byte constant (similar to how \0 introduces a 3-octal-digit constant).
I looked in my copy of K&R but it doesn't even mention '\x'.
Can someone fill me in on what the exact rule is, why is it like that, and when (and by whom) it was added to the C standard?
The tooth fairy was unavailable
He uses that "char const *" syntax too. Does anyone else use it?
Why do
(Score:2, Flamebait)
when you can do
(Score:5, Informative)
I think it's easier to grep for "operator+" (or "operator[ \t]*\+" or whatever) than "add".
Or you could whip open your IDE and click go-to-definition, or run the debugger and go step-into.
Is there any difference between that and: /dev/hdb1
cat
I used NTBackup.exe to make daily backups on a former employer's NT4 system (direct to backup tapes). It all seemed to be working fine, until one time the harddrive crashed. I went to restore the backups, and found that he had ejected the tape during the previous backup becuase the noise was annoying him (!) Byebye database.
(This isn't supposed to be flamebait, btw)
Why does it matter if the masses adopt linux? Sure, it would be cool, but so is gumdrop icecream. I use linux because I like it best etc. etc., but I couldn't give a flying fuck what joe down the road uses on his PC.
Widespread business adoption could even be a bad thing. Remember how everyone said "oh I can't wait until all my friends, john doe, etc. use IRC too", look how shit it is now. The same happened to Napster. Let's not let Linux go down the same road!
(This is not to be xenophobic or anything -- but let's stop wasting effort attracting people who don't want to be attracted).
It used to be "I have to get my 8 year old to program the VCR", now it is "I have to get my 8 year old to install Linux"
(or, for extra points, "I have to get my 8 year old to install Linux on my VCR")
Yeah same here. I have a several-page document of C++Builder quirks, in case anyone else ever takes over my projects (or if I come back to it after an absence). We should join efforts and make a webpage on the topic, or something.
:)
:)
The most awful part of it all is the AnsiStrings and TStringList -- since I figured out how the SCL works, I have stopped using those two. They can't even fix the bugs in those because it will break lots of existing code that (accidentally) relies on the bugs.
Re. your problems:
1) I think you could fix it with a bit of effort / source file reorganization.
2) use the command-line linker to try and isolate it. Of course, you could attach the IDE as a debugger to see what is going on
4) turn it off and press ctrl-space when you do need it.. I agree it is awful, they could take a leaf out of VC++ for this one
5) dont bother with the builtin TODO features
6) yeah
7) took me a while to figure out how to enter stuff in the type library editor in such a way that it doesn't generate invalid code. I never have to edit the makefiles, just take care. You can't really blame them for that; COM is such a dog and only MS really knows what all goes on under the hood, so they have a headstart in getting it right in their compiler. I'm sure they just don't have the resource to fine-tune it any more. My solution is to develop without COM (either a VCL component, or some such), and maintain a simple COM wrapper as a separate project (that way, any COM-related errors, crashes, BSTR allocation probs, etc. are all easy to track down; or you can even throw away the whole wrapper and make a new one). This strategy has saved me dozens (if not hundreds) of hours.
I wonder if someone can enlighten me on this obscure bug (and if it carries over to the new version).
one time when I completed level 1, it took me straight to level 12. I then did that and had 57 minutes remaining when I completed the game (a record, as far as I know).
I don't know if this was a bug, or if I accidentally activated a cheat?
Has anyone got any more details on the mysterious C++BuilderX ? It has all the hallmarks of vapourware, except that it actually seems to have been released. Borland's website doesn't give any useful information.
I currently use C++Builder 5 (most of the time, without VCL). Is C++BuilderX a "step up" , or should I be sticking where I am? Is it even similar to the older versions of C++Builder at all? Does it use wxWindows similarly to how the older versions used VCL? (ie. can I design RAD forms and stick controls on them, etc.). Does it still have all the debugger features?
It would be nice if there was a review somewhere from somebody who had actually used the product.. or even just some screenshots?
Seeing as the VCL has been around for 5+ years (before .NET was a gleam in the monopolists' eye), I would not call one a wrapper for the other.
.NET.
VCL is, however, a snazzy wrapper for the Windows API.
It sounds like you are the one caught in the
Is this the same Psion as in Psion Flight Simulator, Psion Chequered Flag, etc. ?
If so, then maybe Nokia is onto something for its builtin games. I think I have my original cassettes somewhere..
No, they couldn't find the right Page
</MONDAY_MORNING_HUMOUR>
Actually, there is. Laws are coming in that will require a user to divulge passwords, keys etc. to police with a search warrant (or else face arrest etc.). If you don't know your own key then you can't give it to the feds.
whoever owns sourceforge just has to grep all the applications for wait4 , and that may lead straight to the guy..
You got a bit of hardware that does ASL ?
don't tell Undernet
I did a fair bit of programming in BASIC on a ZX Spectrum 48K (and a bit later on on the 128K version).
I did some assembly reading (sufficient to hack games for infy-lives etc.) but it was beyond my patience to do any coding (writing FOR loops in basic to print out the machine code from address, then translate it to opcodes from the back of the Z80 manual, then use POKE to put some new opcodes in, etc. etc. etc.)
Why? WHY?
How is shutting your site down supposed to be a protest? All it means is that I can't access the sites I want (and, what's more, now I think this one OSS project is stupid because its site was shot down for protest on the day I found out about it).
Do the lawmaker people use any of these shut down sites? I doubt it. Whose mind is changed here? Not mine, I was already against software patents. Who would have converted from in-favour to against, based on this?
This is not even comparable to a hunger strike. The site owners sure aren't suffering (in fact they might enjoy the lower traffic bill).
You may well own the hardware and a copy of the software it comes with, but you still don't own any intellectual property rights for either.
By creating a hardware or software modification you may be infringing on MS patents, copyrights, and/or software licences.
If it were a standard PC and you hacked some games that it came with on the harddrive, and re-released them, nobody would try to raise the defence 'I paid for these games so I can do what I like'.
I don't agree with what I've just said, of course, but there does seem to be a lot of leeway for the MS lawyer team to get stuck into.
How do you explain Doppler redshift in terms of the photon model?
Is the photon red-shifted at the source, or when you see it? Presumably when you see it, because when it is emitted it doesn't yet 'know' how far it's going to travel before it hits something, or how fast that something is going to be moving. (A galaxy that appears redshifted to us would not appear redshifted to eg. a stationary (wrt it.) observer close to it, even though it might be the same photons that get seen).
But when you see the photon, it's a photon, and it has no memory of how fast the object it was going was actually moving, so how does it know how much to get redshifted?
Someone else on this thread claimed that this explanation is wrong - the rotation comes because the heat radiating off the black side causes convection currents in the air, which make it rotate; and therefore, if it's done in a complete vacuum then no rotation occurs.
Have you got reliable references for experiments to confirm your view rather than this other view?
Here's my question. In the article, Gold says that yes, if the reflected photon has lower energy then the sail will move, but if it has the same energy then it won't move.
You seem to be saying that reflected photons will always have a lower energy? Does this mean that when I look at myself in the mirror, I am actually seeing the colours with a slightly longer wavelength than they are? And if I set up 2 opposing mirrors, can I shine a blue light and see green , red etc. too as the light reflects back and forth and gradually loses energy?
Finally, how does temperature relate to momentum, exactly? I was under the impression that temperature meant internal kinetic energy, which photons can't have (but obviously they do, otherwise the COBE wouldn't have anything to measure). So how do you incorporate temperature when you write the equation for a photon's total energy?