Less than 50, sure, but, anyway, you can quickly get to that if you decide to ask for a name in order to say hello to a person instead of the world.
Java was never meant to be concise. It's foolish to try to pass it as so.
And, BTW, a language that requires you to define a class with a static method (we may as well call them functions) in order to print something to standard output is something vile.
You mean they must be using different quality standards for different kernels? That they use different code bases and improvements and fixes do not migrate between products?
"If MS switches over to OOXML and Linux can support it just as well as Windows who needs Windows?"
The whole point of OOXML is only Microsoft can ever fully support it as it's full of dependencies on Microsoft quirky and slightly undefinable technologies.
And, BTW, Miguel has eroded any credibility he had by, apparently, sabotaging his turf of the open software thing.
I too feel Z3 is a bit too much on the configuration over convention side.
Grok seems promising - it makes debeloping Zope 3 stuff quite fun. You really should try it.
And Django is very interesting, but it has that "relational thing" Zope has not, at least not in the ZODB. I like the object nature of the ZODB when objects make more sense. You know, there is more to life than tables.
"They don't need fucking laptops. They need clean water, food, peace, basic health infrastructure, peace, and educational/vocational/agricultural training."
And the part the XO addresses is in making that educational/vocational/agricultural education high quality without making it more expensive.
Lots of people need clean water, food, heath care and peace. Many more people need just the education part. The XO is designed to help on that.
Which is quite understandable, as his professional value stands on how many people he can piss off enough they read his articles and, maybe, click on those banners.
I don't think you are stuck with their way of doing it. Rails is not a language - it's a framework. It's very common that, in order to gain the advantages a given framework offers, one also has to work with it, not against it.
If you want to do things in any other way, feel free to write your own framework.
If you really dislike the Rails way, I would suggest you pick another one - there are plenty. I don't know of any using Ruby, but, if you are into Python, you could use Zope 3 (I will give Zope 3 classes for the next week) or Grok and, if you need relational mapping, you could go with Storm instead of the ZODB.
While normalization is a very good thing, an artificial identifier for every object (mind you, those lines represent objects in the program space - they are only persisted in the database and no operations should be done directly on the database itself) makes a lot of sense when you are doing OOP with persistence relational databases.
I would risk the jury is still out on this one. It may violate strict normalization rules but it also seems too useful to simply disregard the idea as Something Inherently Bad. The consequences are not clear and we need to explore this idea a little more.
"Give Moore's Law some time and we will see exactly what you describe appear. And it will totally RULE."
I can hardly wait.
Heck. The brains of an XO are good enough for what we want. I don't mind having LCD instead of e-paper. I just want to read comfortably in my couch and to have a sensible way to put documents on the device.
A lot of people started with BASIC: that was just about the only choice for 8-bit computers with no real mass storage back in the 70s and early 80s. No way I could conjure the money for a real CP/M computer.
And the IBM-PC was, already, the same sorry inelegant mess it is today, so I won't get started. And it was very expensive too.
I learned to program in a Texas calculator and my first computer was an Apple II+ (after a Sinclair ZX-81 clone that was not a real computer) and, or course, I learned BASIC with it.
But like many others, I went on to learn more interesting stuff. Perl got my interest in about 1996, but lost its appeal when I had contact with other cleaner, less concise but far more readable and maintainable options.
Keep in mind I learned APL in college. I _know_ a write-only programming language when I see one.
I think "scripting language" refers to the idea that what you write in the program happens in that order. Another idea is that you can write the program with a text editor and run the text file directly from your shell without further steps.
That's not like C or Java, when what happens when the program runs is what is inside the main function (or static method). And that happens only after you turned your text file into something else.
I think we may be creating a category where there is none or, better, we are joining a whole lot of different things under a single name for no better reason than to separate them from other languages that are even more different.
The idea of the EVDO modem is having the device to update its content (rss, newspapers) without any user intervention. I see a good case for that, but a GSM thing would be much better.
BTW, there is little need for lifetime agreements with phone companies: the cost for the download could be easily incorporated in the book or subscription price itself.
To me, the inability to function as a printer and the utter incompetence on displaying PDFs renders both the Kindle and Sony's offerings more or less useless.
I really want a reader that can zoom-in and out of PDFs, search on its contents and pretend to be both a usb disk when you want to transfer files and a printer when you just need to print something to it (where it becomes a PDF file you can read from the disk part) and that doesn't cost more than a fully functional notebook computer.
Is that too much to ask for? Can it be that hard to do?
Thanks for destroying my belief the 6502 was perfect.;-)
I guess I never ran across any of those problems (that, or my distant memories have already faded to pink). Were all 6502s like that or there were differences between MOS and Rockwell and the later 65c02 processors?
And, AC, yes. The 6502 is very RISC-ish. But, at that time, being RISC was not considered cool enough to be marketed as such, not to say I don't know if the acronym had already been invented.
I loved that page zero thing. Very, very fast. One could do things in a 1 MHz 6502 people wouldn't touch in a 4 MHz Z-80...
It would be funny to observe the psycho-social consequences of a community where most of the litigations are patent lawsuits from companies that are not located anywhere close and who have no relationship with their population.
It must be somewhat surreal, with the judges and jurors feeling like they, of all the world, have some unique insight into intellectual property nobody else has that drives companies to seek their wisdom and sense of justice about all things patentable.
"Every CPU made for the past (insert very long time in the computer world here) has had a big list of errata publicly published."
Well... I can't remember any for my beloved 6502. Since the specs were five pages long, I can't imagine it having a long list of design flaws. It didn't even have a long list of features;-)
Slashdot Mirror
Your lack of perception of humor in specific fields is a reliable indicative of social inadequacies. You must be glad you posted as AC.
Of course, a simple hello world can be built in few lines and Java would allow such a program to be written in one line if you really push it (as would C, C++ and many others). What I was thinking was more in the lines of the sample Swing hello world program in http://java.sun.com/docs/books/tutorial/uiswing/examples/start/HelloWorldSwingProject/src/start/HelloWorldSwing.java which is 37 lines long, including a bunch of comments.
Less than 50, sure, but, anyway, you can quickly get to that if you decide to ask for a name in order to say hello to a person instead of the world.
Java was never meant to be concise. It's foolish to try to pass it as so.
And, BTW, a language that requires you to define a class with a static method (we may as well call them functions) in order to print something to standard output is something vile.
"the general robustness of a server os"
You mean they must be using different quality standards for different kernels? That they use different code bases and improvements and fixes do not migrate between products?
Oh my...
"he pulls up the MUMPS command prompt and writes 2 lines to do stuff that would probably take me alteast 50 lines of Java code."
Big deal. A Hello World in Java takes up 50 lines of Java code.
"If MS switches over to OOXML and Linux can support it just as well as Windows who needs Windows?"
The whole point of OOXML is only Microsoft can ever fully support it as it's full of dependencies on Microsoft quirky and slightly undefinable technologies.
And, BTW, Miguel has eroded any credibility he had by, apparently, sabotaging his turf of the open software thing.
I too feel Z3 is a bit too much on the configuration over convention side.
Grok seems promising - it makes debeloping Zope 3 stuff quite fun. You really should try it.
And Django is very interesting, but it has that "relational thing" Zope has not, at least not in the ZODB. I like the object nature of the ZODB when objects make more sense. You know, there is more to life than tables.
"They don't need fucking laptops. They need clean water, food, peace, basic health infrastructure, peace, and educational/vocational/agricultural training."
And the part the XO addresses is in making that educational/vocational/agricultural education high quality without making it more expensive.
Lots of people need clean water, food, heath care and peace. Many more people need just the education part. The XO is designed to help on that.
Nobody is so worthless that's not usable as a bad example.
Dvorak is one of many.
Which is quite understandable, as his professional value stands on how many people he can piss off enough they read his articles and, maybe, click on those banners.
Anyway, this doesn't surprise me a bit.
I don't think you are stuck with their way of doing it. Rails is not a language - it's a framework. It's very common that, in order to gain the advantages a given framework offers, one also has to work with it, not against it.
If you want to do things in any other way, feel free to write your own framework.
If you really dislike the Rails way, I would suggest you pick another one - there are plenty. I don't know of any using Ruby, but, if you are into Python, you could use Zope 3 (I will give Zope 3 classes for the next week) or Grok and, if you need relational mapping, you could go with Storm instead of the ZODB.
Well...
While normalization is a very good thing, an artificial identifier for every object (mind you, those lines represent objects in the program space - they are only persisted in the database and no operations should be done directly on the database itself) makes a lot of sense when you are doing OOP with persistence relational databases.
I would risk the jury is still out on this one. It may violate strict normalization rules but it also seems too useful to simply disregard the idea as Something Inherently Bad. The consequences are not clear and we need to explore this idea a little more.
So, it was you who had the bright idea of making that much noise while _not_ making any heavier elements until we had the first batch of stars...
where are my modpoints when I need them?
You spoiled kids. When I was young, we had only Hydrogen and Helium. We had to build everything.
"Give Moore's Law some time and we will see exactly what you describe appear. And it will totally RULE."
I can hardly wait.
Heck. The brains of an XO are good enough for what we want. I don't mind having LCD instead of e-paper. I just want to read comfortably in my couch and to have a sensible way to put documents on the device.
Can't take _that_ long.
A lot of people started with BASIC: that was just about the only choice for 8-bit computers with no real mass storage back in the 70s and early 80s. No way I could conjure the money for a real CP/M computer.
And the IBM-PC was, already, the same sorry inelegant mess it is today, so I won't get started. And it was very expensive too.
I learned to program in a Texas calculator and my first computer was an Apple II+ (after a Sinclair ZX-81 clone that was not a real computer) and, or course, I learned BASIC with it.
But like many others, I went on to learn more interesting stuff. Perl got my interest in about 1996, but lost its appeal when I had contact with other cleaner, less concise but far more readable and maintainable options.
Keep in mind I learned APL in college. I _know_ a write-only programming language when I see one.
He really annoyed you, didn't he?
I think "scripting language" refers to the idea that what you write in the program happens in that order. Another idea is that you can write the program with a text editor and run the text file directly from your shell without further steps.
That's not like C or Java, when what happens when the program runs is what is inside the main function (or static method). And that happens only after you turned your text file into something else.
I think we may be creating a category where there is none or, better, we are joining a whole lot of different things under a single name for no better reason than to separate them from other languages that are even more different.
The idea of the EVDO modem is having the device to update its content (rss, newspapers) without any user intervention. I see a good case for that, but a GSM thing would be much better.
BTW, there is little need for lifetime agreements with phone companies: the cost for the download could be easily incorporated in the book or subscription price itself.
To me, the inability to function as a printer and the utter incompetence on displaying PDFs renders both the Kindle and Sony's offerings more or less useless.
I really want a reader that can zoom-in and out of PDFs, search on its contents and pretend to be both a usb disk when you want to transfer files and a printer when you just need to print something to it (where it becomes a PDF file you can read from the disk part) and that doesn't cost more than a fully functional notebook computer.
Is that too much to ask for? Can it be that hard to do?
"You did read the actual article before rebutting to a comment that told you the summary was inaccurate, right?"
Of course not. Besides this being Slashdot and RTFAing being discouraged, it would ruin my opportunity to be wildly inaccurate.
I read it later.
Exactly how can you accidentally open up Photoshop and move a crater from one place to another?
Maybe, but the sword will be billed on his family.
Thanks for destroying my belief the 6502 was perfect. ;-)
I guess I never ran across any of those problems (that, or my distant memories have already faded to pink). Were all 6502s like that or there were differences between MOS and Rockwell and the later 65c02 processors?
And, AC, yes. The 6502 is very RISC-ish. But, at that time, being RISC was not considered cool enough to be marketed as such, not to say I don't know if the acronym had already been invented.
I loved that page zero thing. Very, very fast. One could do things in a 1 MHz 6502 people wouldn't touch in a 4 MHz Z-80...
Let the fangeezer wars begin.
It would be funny to observe the psycho-social consequences of a community where most of the litigations are patent lawsuits from companies that are not located anywhere close and who have no relationship with their population.
It must be somewhat surreal, with the judges and jurors feeling like they, of all the world, have some unique insight into intellectual property nobody else has that drives companies to seek their wisdom and sense of justice about all things patentable.
It's impossible they never noticed that.
"Every CPU made for the past (insert very long time in the computer world here) has had a big list of errata publicly published."
;-)
Well... I can't remember any for my beloved 6502. Since the specs were five pages long, I can't imagine it having a long list of design flaws. It didn't even have a long list of features