A lot of large performance-sensitive projects implement custom allocators in the form of arenas and freelists. Lots of platforms have a fast malloc implementation these days, but none of them will be as fast as this for the simple reason that the program knows more about its memory usage patterns than any general-purpose allocator ever could.
Not to say I can't understand Theo's point of view -- if he wants maximum security, then a program which bypasses one of his layers in the name of performance might not be the best for him.
On the flip side, the standards have no notion of such security layers and I feel it is perfectly reasonable for a team to not throw away performance in the interests of some platform-specific behavior. This was a bug, pure and simple. There's nothing wrong with using custom allocators. To say that "OpenSSL is not developed by a responsible team" is simply nonsense.
People who buy TRD are generally going for either aesthetics (the TRD exhaust for GT86 is rather unique looking), warranty/insurance, or loans. Increase my payment by $10/mo for the TRD catback? Warrantied and insured without question? Awesome, go for it!
People looking for perf will always go third party. You'll never see a TRD intake that gives large gains because it needs to work with the stock ECU. Go third party and you can get a giant intake that requires MAF scaling or a catless header etc. -- so many more options that TRD simply won't offer.
If you replace "functional" with "object oriented" and went back in time 20 years ago, your dismissive, skeptical attitude would have fit right in that era as well.
I think you've misread my comment, or perhaps I've not expressed my position well enough. You're speaking like I've dismissed functional programming. I haven't. In fact, I really love it! The parts of it that have bled through into the more imperative/OO-focused languages, like C#'s LINQ and your Python example, are phenomenal and a joy to use.
So, here it is again: not saying functional is bad. Certainly not being dismissive or skeptical of it. I'd just like to see what compelling features haven't yet bled through. What makes pure functional or even just mostly-functional languages useful, that isn't yet in other languages? What is the killer feature, the killer problem they can still solve way easier?
If a good, experienced programmer dives deep into a language for a month and doesn't surface with anything compelling, how much more time should they spend? I'm not looking to master F#, I'm looking for a reason to master F#.
F#, like it's other ML-based dialects, is amazing for solving certain problems in a expressive and concise manner... it is still a joy to use when you can.
Can you give some examples? Many C-based languages have benefited by gaining strong functional aspects. With that, I haven't really found a reason to use a functional-focused language.
A while ago I decided to dedicate a month to coding in nothing but F# (my usual choices are C++ or C#) in attempt to find the areas they really kick-ass in, and just couldn't land on anything. There are some rare circumstances that I found it to be useful, but I just didn't find it compelling enough to warrant applying elsewhere. I'd never done functional programming before, I'm fully aware a month isn't long enough to master anything, but usually it's enough to discover if something has a really cool, earth-shattering aspect about it. So I'm honestly interested here -- what did I miss?
apps will get deployed on end-user devices as fully self-contained natively compiled code (when.NET Native enters production), and will not have a dependency on the.NET Framework on the target device/machine.
Every few months someone announces a new fad language despite them rarely bringing anything new to the table, or the new things they do bring not being significant enough to warrant switching from some other well-established one.
I'm actually happy with this one, because it serves an easier to justify purpose: migrating your existing PHP codebase and developers to something that is immediately better and familiar.
That said, I think what Julie Ann Horvath did was highly unprofessional. You do not badmouth your former employer, no matter what they did. You may sue them or come to an agreement that makes suing them unnecessary. I would not hire her now for the sole reason that she seems to believe discretion and loyalty to a company becomes optional after you leave. Not so.
I wouldn't badmouth a former employer, specifically because future hiring managers would see it as a huge red flag. And that's kind of pathetic, if you think about it -- if you're having a terrible experience that your higher-ups show no care of fixing, is it not ethical to warn others away from a poisonous company? The industry has scored fear into us under a facade of "professionalism".
I guess it's a bit of a crapshoot if you get a bad seller, but the fact that prices are 1/4rd of what you'd pay to buy something similar domestically is a pretty good lure.
I've ordered twice from Ali Express -- once for a RTL2832 tuner, and once for a mini-Gorillapod knockoff. Both times I received exactly what the page advertised, in perfect condition and they continue to work great today.
it wouldn't surprise me if we see a few more proprietary systems in the next few years.
It's already happening in the States. AT&T recently put its support behind Powermat, a competing and incompatible standard. They actually stripped Qi from a number of the phones they sell -- phones that on other carriers support it natively -- and instead offer Powermat charging cases for them.
You appear to be at least as knowledgable as me, so please correct me if my technical understanding is wrong here.
I doubt I'd even be able to perceive the lower amplitudes in a 96dB dynamic range. The reason for wanting 24-bit samples is that some music has low passages and high passages (HTTYD comes to mind) that allow your ears time to adjust to the volume. I'd like music to be able to do this and still have fine detail in each section.
You don't need the best IEMs to get 23dB of isolation. Etymotic's range, even their cheaper ones, all claim 35dB or better, without having a custom mold.
I just want a proper DAC without audiophile markup!
Check out the ODAC. Built to be cheap, and objectively transparent at the jack, unlike most DACs which just quote the specs of a high-end DAC chip inside of them and ignore a mess of other crap on the PCB that degrades the signal.
FLAC has native support for gapless playback, but the player still needs to explicitly take advantage of it by not waiting until your current song finishes to start decoding the next one.
Gapless is more common among FLAC players, I guess simply because if you care enough to support FLAC you've probably got a higher chance of caring about the rest of the feature set, but it's far from guaranteed.
Caveat: self-identifying audiophile here, happy to admit I've spent way too much money for very little gain.
What's the output voltage and impedance? Crosstalk? Noise? THD? Dynamic range? If I plug to charge via USB while I'm playing it, will it isolate the noisy power line? You're trying to sell something "audiophile" without mentioning any of this? Really?
He makes a big deal about 192kHz audio. If you're targeting human ears, this is just a waste of space. I'd say the perfect format would be 48kHz/24bit. 48kHz to have plenty of room for a nice frequency cutoff, and 24-bit for music with a high dynamic range, like film scores and orchestral.
How about some features anyone can enjoy, like support for ReplayGain and gapless playback? Maybe make your store highlight music with a high dynamic range instead of offering a 24-bit copy of something with 8 bits of range and frequencies we can't hear?
I would absolutely love to have a compact, objectively transparent player that I can bring with me to the office or anywhere else. I just can't help feeling this won't be it. Too jaded?
Certainly not all of.NET -- as a whole it's anything but legacy and evolves at a fairly rapid pace -- but it also includes a lot of old cruft and a few poor design choices that affect even modern code.
Other legacy tech I'd love to get rid of: SSIS/SSRS -- terrible SQL Server drag-and-drop technologies that do a lot of stuff badly. 1D barcodes like Code 39 and Code 128 -- dead simple to implement but take up a lot of space and are prone to poor reads.
This isn't quite the same net neutrality issue here. Netflix isn't paying to stop service degradation or increase priority of their traffic -- they're basically just switching service providers and paying Comcast to host their servers. It may even end up cheaper for Netflix.
It's always been the applications that have driven users to a platform, and right now Microsoft doesn't have those.
You seem to have missed where I mentioned this in my post. I even put it there with the specific intent of stopping misinformed "there are no apps" replies.
Android has 20 apps that duplicate the same functionality, and Windows Phone has 5. But the functionality is there. It doesn't work to just compare a raw count. In terms of big-name apps, there are still a number of holdouts but for every one that's missing, there's something identical to replace it.
In the Windows Phone 7 times, I definitely felt limited in app selection. Not anymore.
My Windows phone (Lumia 920) runs faster and more fluid and it has significantly less power than my Android tablet (Nexus 7, 1st gen). Each update has added features without making it slower. There are less apps but I have yet to not find what I'm looking for and they generally feel more consistently designed. WP 8 brought native C++ programming. The only thing left is ditching their Direct3D stuff for OpenGL/OpenCL support to make porting games easier (which will admittedly probably never happen).
In terms of geek factor Android is of course far more customizable and rootable, but I and I'd assume the great majority of users are not interested in doing that.
There's so much focus on Microsoft forking Android, but I really don't see the point. They've got a long way to go to get to Android levels of market share, but it's by no means a failure that deserves to be trashed.
The app is comparing DNS records with a client-side database of cheat sites, and if it finds a match sending it to Valve's servers for verification & ban-hammer. It's not sending every site you visit, unless the only sites you visit were via DNS records used by cheat developers.
They'll work only if they aren't a sloppy, slapped together gimmick designed to rubber stamp "programmers" and install them in cubicles like spare parts.
I really can't imagine any good a 3 month crash course would accomplish. At best you'll get someone dangerous who thinks they know how to code, and a nightmareish scenario of either picking up the pieces or having someone in management now tell you your job is so easy they can do it.
Kids 2-3 years into college with no prior experience are just barely starting to write code that does anything interesting, let alone writing it properly. 3 months? Give me a break. The only proper way to increase the number of coders is to introduce kids to it early on and find/encourage the ones who show interest.
Slashdot Mirror
This is security software. You don't sacrifice the library's core functionality to make it run a bit faster on the old Celeron 300 running Windows 98.
malloc's core functionality is to allocate memory. Any security additions are platform-specific and irrelevant.
A lot of large performance-sensitive projects implement custom allocators in the form of arenas and freelists. Lots of platforms have a fast malloc implementation these days, but none of them will be as fast as this for the simple reason that the program knows more about its memory usage patterns than any general-purpose allocator ever could.
Not to say I can't understand Theo's point of view -- if he wants maximum security, then a program which bypasses one of his layers in the name of performance might not be the best for him.
On the flip side, the standards have no notion of such security layers and I feel it is perfectly reasonable for a team to not throw away performance in the interests of some platform-specific behavior. This was a bug, pure and simple. There's nothing wrong with using custom allocators. To say that "OpenSSL is not developed by a responsible team" is simply nonsense.
People who buy TRD are generally going for either aesthetics (the TRD exhaust for GT86 is rather unique looking), warranty/insurance, or loans. Increase my payment by $10/mo for the TRD catback? Warrantied and insured without question? Awesome, go for it!
People looking for perf will always go third party. You'll never see a TRD intake that gives large gains because it needs to work with the stock ECU. Go third party and you can get a giant intake that requires MAF scaling or a catless header etc. -- so many more options that TRD simply won't offer.
If you replace "functional" with "object oriented" and went back in time 20 years ago, your dismissive, skeptical attitude would have fit right in that era as well.
I think you've misread my comment, or perhaps I've not expressed my position well enough. You're speaking like I've dismissed functional programming. I haven't. In fact, I really love it! The parts of it that have bled through into the more imperative/OO-focused languages, like C#'s LINQ and your Python example, are phenomenal and a joy to use.
So, here it is again: not saying functional is bad. Certainly not being dismissive or skeptical of it. I'd just like to see what compelling features haven't yet bled through. What makes pure functional or even just mostly-functional languages useful, that isn't yet in other languages? What is the killer feature, the killer problem they can still solve way easier?
If a good, experienced programmer dives deep into a language for a month and doesn't surface with anything compelling, how much more time should they spend? I'm not looking to master F#, I'm looking for a reason to master F#.
F#, like it's other ML-based dialects, is amazing for solving certain problems in a expressive and concise manner ... it is still a joy to use when you can.
Can you give some examples? Many C-based languages have benefited by gaining strong functional aspects. With that, I haven't really found a reason to use a functional-focused language.
A while ago I decided to dedicate a month to coding in nothing but F# (my usual choices are C++ or C#) in attempt to find the areas they really kick-ass in, and just couldn't land on anything. There are some rare circumstances that I found it to be useful, but I just didn't find it compelling enough to warrant applying elsewhere. I'd never done functional programming before, I'm fully aware a month isn't long enough to master anything, but usually it's enough to discover if something has a really cool, earth-shattering aspect about it. So I'm honestly interested here -- what did I miss?
apps will get deployed on end-user devices as fully self-contained natively compiled code (when .NET Native enters production), and will not have a dependency on the .NET Framework on the target device/machine.
Allow me to introduce you to C+= and ArnoldC.
Every few months someone announces a new fad language despite them rarely bringing anything new to the table, or the new things they do bring not being significant enough to warrant switching from some other well-established one.
I'm actually happy with this one, because it serves an easier to justify purpose: migrating your existing PHP codebase and developers to something that is immediately better and familiar.
It's a USB Audio Class 1 device, which means it works out of the box on just about anything, no special drivers required. Even Android!
That said, I think what Julie Ann Horvath did was highly unprofessional. You do not badmouth your former employer, no matter what they did. You may sue them or come to an agreement that makes suing them unnecessary. I would not hire her now for the sole reason that she seems to believe discretion and loyalty to a company becomes optional after you leave. Not so.
I wouldn't badmouth a former employer, specifically because future hiring managers would see it as a huge red flag. And that's kind of pathetic, if you think about it -- if you're having a terrible experience that your higher-ups show no care of fixing, is it not ethical to warn others away from a poisonous company? The industry has scored fear into us under a facade of "professionalism".
I guess it's a bit of a crapshoot if you get a bad seller, but the fact that prices are 1/4rd of what you'd pay to buy something similar domestically is a pretty good lure.
I've ordered twice from Ali Express -- once for a RTL2832 tuner, and once for a mini-Gorillapod knockoff. Both times I received exactly what the page advertised, in perfect condition and they continue to work great today.
it wouldn't surprise me if we see a few more proprietary systems in the next few years.
It's already happening in the States. AT&T recently put its support behind Powermat, a competing and incompatible standard. They actually stripped Qi from a number of the phones they sell -- phones that on other carriers support it natively -- and instead offer Powermat charging cases for them.
You appear to be at least as knowledgable as me, so please correct me if my technical understanding is wrong here.
I doubt I'd even be able to perceive the lower amplitudes in a 96dB dynamic range. The reason for wanting 24-bit samples is that some music has low passages and high passages (HTTYD comes to mind) that allow your ears time to adjust to the volume. I'd like music to be able to do this and still have fine detail in each section.
You don't need the best IEMs to get 23dB of isolation. Etymotic's range, even their cheaper ones, all claim 35dB or better, without having a custom mold.
I just want a proper DAC without audiophile markup!
Check out the ODAC. Built to be cheap, and objectively transparent at the jack, unlike most DACs which just quote the specs of a high-end DAC chip inside of them and ignore a mess of other crap on the PCB that degrades the signal.
FLAC has native support for gapless playback, but the player still needs to explicitly take advantage of it by not waiting until your current song finishes to start decoding the next one.
Gapless is more common among FLAC players, I guess simply because if you care enough to support FLAC you've probably got a higher chance of caring about the rest of the feature set, but it's far from guaranteed.
Caveat: self-identifying audiophile here, happy to admit I've spent way too much money for very little gain.
What's the output voltage and impedance? Crosstalk? Noise? THD? Dynamic range? If I plug to charge via USB while I'm playing it, will it isolate the noisy power line? You're trying to sell something "audiophile" without mentioning any of this? Really?
He makes a big deal about 192kHz audio. If you're targeting human ears, this is just a waste of space. I'd say the perfect format would be 48kHz/24bit. 48kHz to have plenty of room for a nice frequency cutoff, and 24-bit for music with a high dynamic range, like film scores and orchestral.
How about some features anyone can enjoy, like support for ReplayGain and gapless playback? Maybe make your store highlight music with a high dynamic range instead of offering a 24-bit copy of something with 8 bits of range and frequencies we can't hear?
I would absolutely love to have a compact, objectively transparent player that I can bring with me to the office or anywhere else. I just can't help feeling this won't be it. Too jaded?
Without something to anchor your 500-1000 number, who will know how outraged they need to be?
Certainly not all of .NET -- as a whole it's anything but legacy and evolves at a fairly rapid pace -- but it also includes a lot of old cruft and a few poor design choices that affect even modern code.
Other legacy tech I'd love to get rid of: SSIS/SSRS -- terrible SQL Server drag-and-drop technologies that do a lot of stuff badly. 1D barcodes like Code 39 and Code 128 -- dead simple to implement but take up a lot of space and are prone to poor reads.
It sounds like they're put in a separate virtual wlan than you are, and are given a separate IP.
This isn't quite the same net neutrality issue here. Netflix isn't paying to stop service degradation or increase priority of their traffic -- they're basically just switching service providers and paying Comcast to host their servers. It may even end up cheaper for Netflix.
It's always been the applications that have driven users to a platform, and right now Microsoft doesn't have those.
You seem to have missed where I mentioned this in my post. I even put it there with the specific intent of stopping misinformed "there are no apps" replies.
Android has 20 apps that duplicate the same functionality, and Windows Phone has 5. But the functionality is there. It doesn't work to just compare a raw count. In terms of big-name apps, there are still a number of holdouts but for every one that's missing, there's something identical to replace it.
In the Windows Phone 7 times, I definitely felt limited in app selection. Not anymore.
My Windows phone (Lumia 920) runs faster and more fluid and it has significantly less power than my Android tablet (Nexus 7, 1st gen). Each update has added features without making it slower. There are less apps but I have yet to not find what I'm looking for and they generally feel more consistently designed. WP 8 brought native C++ programming. The only thing left is ditching their Direct3D stuff for OpenGL/OpenCL support to make porting games easier (which will admittedly probably never happen).
In terms of geek factor Android is of course far more customizable and rootable, but I and I'd assume the great majority of users are not interested in doing that.
There's so much focus on Microsoft forking Android, but I really don't see the point. They've got a long way to go to get to Android levels of market share, but it's by no means a failure that deserves to be trashed.
The app is comparing DNS records with a client-side database of cheat sites, and if it finds a match sending it to Valve's servers for verification & ban-hammer. It's not sending every site you visit, unless the only sites you visit were via DNS records used by cheat developers.
They'll work only if they aren't a sloppy, slapped together gimmick designed to rubber stamp "programmers" and install them in cubicles like spare parts.
I really can't imagine any good a 3 month crash course would accomplish. At best you'll get someone dangerous who thinks they know how to code, and a nightmareish scenario of either picking up the pieces or having someone in management now tell you your job is so easy they can do it.
Kids 2-3 years into college with no prior experience are just barely starting to write code that does anything interesting, let alone writing it properly. 3 months? Give me a break. The only proper way to increase the number of coders is to introduce kids to it early on and find/encourage the ones who show interest.