It's very rare for it to be okay to not write a trailing 0 terminator, or need unused buffer space padded with 0's. and that's exactly what the 'n' functions can do - the number of coders who don't know this and choose to blindly assume the functions protect them is astounding.
Really, though. If you need the buffer space, you need the buffer space. Truncation is usually not an option. This is sloppy coding, but not due to lack of using 'n' functions. Resize as needed or reject the request if it gets too big.
It is flawed because the ISP just needs to look at your HTTP usage and see you connect to a tracker. They can even get the port you are listening on from there! Even if you connect to the tracker via HTTPS, they can still see you connecting to a known tracker IP. Once they know you are on a tracker they can start limiting all traffic that looks like it's encrypted with RC4, because apparently this is identifiable.
It is too much because you don't actually need strong encryption to stop traffic limiting. Simply adding some random padding and XORing the protocol with the torrent's infohash would be enough - it is a private key random enough that they couldn't check them all. The RC4 encryption was seriously over-thought, and what did it give us? Nothing, because apparently it is still identifiable as bittorrent (or at least as RC4 encrypted traffic).
The only solution is to replace the current encryption and always connect to trackers via Tor or some other encrypted proxy. And even then it wouldn't be perfect, because it's plausible they could start limiting traffic on listening ports that get a lot of traffic.
Obviously nobody got my obscure reference toward The Fifth Element, where Korben Dallas (Bruce Willis) helps to save the planet from the Ultimate Evil (which turns into a massive fireball aimed at Earth).
A lot of C++ developers are fans of header-only libraries. What can I say, I am too - it makes use of these libraries so much easier. Having assembly files breaks this when writing a library.
I agree that a good developer will almost never need to use assembly. Unfortunately there are some (very few, but still some) things you just can't do efficiently in C++ - be it a limitation of the language or the compiler.
Believe me, I wish Microsoft could implement intrinsic functions for everything I need (like CMPXCHG16B mentioned previously). But they don't. I want nothing more than to not have to touch assembly!
These are complaints, not trolls. I develop primarily in C++ and am ecstatic about C++0x, and dread seeing my favorite IDE/compiler get put on the backburner and not implement modern unmanaged programming. I don't want to wait 10 years to see C++0x and TR1. They could have easily included Dinkumware's TR1 implementation with it, even in a seperate tr1 namespace, and be sure - everyone would be much much happier.
C++ was not meant to be RAD like C#, but VC++'s compiler and IDE are _far_ from perfect. There are still several annoying little issues you come across when you play with real C++. My point was that there is so much room for improvement in the C++ compiler but they have completely neglected it and the IDE to implement features for their proprietary languages. Which all in all, this being Microsoft, is not that surprising - but it is still a shame.
You got one thing right - I did mean inline assembly (sorry, typos happen). It would be just as non-portable as using seperate.asm files - the functionality was there in the x86 compiler, am I to assume they completely rewrote the compiler enough that it would take vast effort to enable this basic functionality for x64?
C++ has adopted Boost's function class in the TR1 library - you will be able to use std::function, etc. No more member function pointers if you don't want them.
Is that they have given 95% of the development time toward managed languages.
If you look at the new Visual Studio 2008 - in the three years since 2005 was released, what does Orcas have for C/C++? Still no C99, with open admission that there are no plans to support it. No TR1 for C++. No significant compiler changes. Intellisense is still slow and quite easily stops working all together. Still no assembly support in the 64-bit compiler, missing intrinsic functions for important instructions such as CMPXCHG16B.
What we get is a newer bundled Windows SDK (which you can download NOW), updated MFC libraries (yuck), and a few new options for Vista compatibility.
In three years,.NET has advanced from 2.0 to 3.5 with huge changes like WPF, WCF, LINQ, etc. They have all but forgotten C++.
The researchers say more work needs to be done, but are unclear if this involves archaeology or experiments involving skewing the data in the local female population.
In the name of science, I volunteer for any experiments involving "skewing" "data" into the local female population.
If an ISP decided it would be cool to allow uncapped transfer over their network (ie, no cost of switching to another ISP), would that be considered preference?
The source explicitly says version 2. The "any later version" clause was left out.
Threading Building Blocks is free software; you can redistribute it
and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License
version 2 as published by the Free Software Foundation.
It's called a service pack. And you can slipstream them right into the install (new XP discs sold today include SP2). There is no need to split it into a different product.
Farscape's super-long story arcs meant you had to be watching from the start, or at least for a very long time, if you wanted to understand what was going on. I fear this doomed it in the end, as people weren't able to just channel surf and get into it.
I wish they'd bring back the show, but I guess this will do.
If it's not good and still getting accepted, that is a problem with the editors. But so long as the article provides something interesting, what does it matter if the person who submits it gets a profit off the site?
What the hell? People should just ignore things they don't like instead of discussing the problems? Is that how things get fixed where you live?
You seem to have missed my point- the lang is usable just all programmers. That's why it is so popular.
The problem is the noobs don't know any pitfalls to look out for yet and PHP has provided a lot to hang yourself on that other languages don't have. If you feel I insulted your pet language, how about discussing it now instead of ranting on what you think programmers should (not) do.
The reason is simple: PHP makes it exceedingly easy to get away with things. Things that programming and web development newbies love because it lets them hack together a quick app. Things that experienced programmers will cringe at because they know full well that it will likely cause a headache later.
They've done some good work in stomping out these bad practices in recent times, but they still have a while to go.
If you want to setup a dedicated database server, you want to know what software with what hardware will run the fastest.
So while the benchmarks may not be useful to people wanting to setup a small multi-purpose server, it can still be useful for some people.
We have the CPU power to do so much more now. We shouldn't need to manually wrap our lines - why can't the IDE intelligently wrap it for us, so that everyone gets their screen used to the fullest.
no mention on how much energy it takes to run the thing, or how much energy it puts out. it's not of much use if it costs a fraction to just bury the old plastic and make new stuff from scratch.
Slashdot Mirror
It's very rare for it to be okay to not write a trailing 0 terminator, or need unused buffer space padded with 0's. and that's exactly what the 'n' functions can do - the number of coders who don't know this and choose to blindly assume the functions protect them is astounding.
Really, though. If you need the buffer space, you need the buffer space. Truncation is usually not an option. This is sloppy coding, but not due to lack of using 'n' functions. Resize as needed or reject the request if it gets too big.
Unless something has changed, cable internet is not a common carrier.
It is flawed because the ISP just needs to look at your HTTP usage and see you connect to a tracker. They can even get the port you are listening on from there! Even if you connect to the tracker via HTTPS, they can still see you connecting to a known tracker IP. Once they know you are on a tracker they can start limiting all traffic that looks like it's encrypted with RC4, because apparently this is identifiable.
It is too much because you don't actually need strong encryption to stop traffic limiting. Simply adding some random padding and XORing the protocol with the torrent's infohash would be enough - it is a private key random enough that they couldn't check them all. The RC4 encryption was seriously over-thought, and what did it give us? Nothing, because apparently it is still identifiable as bittorrent (or at least as RC4 encrypted traffic).
The only solution is to replace the current encryption and always connect to trackers via Tor or some other encrypted proxy. And even then it wouldn't be perfect, because it's plausible they could start limiting traffic on listening ports that get a lot of traffic.
Obviously nobody got my obscure reference toward The Fifth Element, where Korben Dallas (Bruce Willis) helps to save the planet from the Ultimate Evil (which turns into a massive fireball aimed at Earth).
/.!
You aught to be ashamed,
Perhaps this is just a ramped up version of the Ultimate Evil. Someone better call Bruce.
A lot of C++ developers are fans of header-only libraries. What can I say, I am too - it makes use of these libraries so much easier. Having assembly files breaks this when writing a library.
I agree that a good developer will almost never need to use assembly. Unfortunately there are some (very few, but still some) things you just can't do efficiently in C++ - be it a limitation of the language or the compiler.
Believe me, I wish Microsoft could implement intrinsic functions for everything I need (like CMPXCHG16B mentioned previously). But they don't. I want nothing more than to not have to touch assembly!
These are complaints, not trolls. I develop primarily in C++ and am ecstatic about C++0x, and dread seeing my favorite IDE/compiler get put on the backburner and not implement modern unmanaged programming. I don't want to wait 10 years to see C++0x and TR1. They could have easily included Dinkumware's TR1 implementation with it, even in a seperate tr1 namespace, and be sure - everyone would be much much happier.
.asm files - the functionality was there in the x86 compiler, am I to assume they completely rewrote the compiler enough that it would take vast effort to enable this basic functionality for x64?
C++ was not meant to be RAD like C#, but VC++'s compiler and IDE are _far_ from perfect. There are still several annoying little issues you come across when you play with real C++. My point was that there is so much room for improvement in the C++ compiler but they have completely neglected it and the IDE to implement features for their proprietary languages. Which all in all, this being Microsoft, is not that surprising - but it is still a shame.
You got one thing right - I did mean inline assembly (sorry, typos happen). It would be just as non-portable as using seperate
C++ has adopted Boost's function class in the TR1 library - you will be able to use std::function, etc. No more member function pointers if you don't want them.
Is that they have given 95% of the development time toward managed languages.
.NET has advanced from 2.0 to 3.5 with huge changes like WPF, WCF, LINQ, etc. They have all but forgotten C++.
If you look at the new Visual Studio 2008 - in the three years since 2005 was released, what does Orcas have for C/C++? Still no C99, with open admission that there are no plans to support it. No TR1 for C++. No significant compiler changes. Intellisense is still slow and quite easily stops working all together. Still no assembly support in the 64-bit compiler, missing intrinsic functions for important instructions such as CMPXCHG16B.
What we get is a newer bundled Windows SDK (which you can download NOW), updated MFC libraries (yuck), and a few new options for Vista compatibility.
In three years,
In the name of science, I volunteer for any experiments involving "skewing" "data" into the local female population.
If an ISP decided it would be cool to allow uncapped transfer over their network (ie, no cost of switching to another ISP), would that be considered preference?
Anyone wondering what he's talking about should check out these examples.
They haven't mentioned a license anywhere, but if it is Open Source more likely than not you can take the source and make your own non-profit with it.
It's called a service pack. And you can slipstream them right into the install (new XP discs sold today include SP2). There is no need to split it into a different product.
The original was from Jim Henson Company, and it had several muppets in it >:)
Farscape's super-long story arcs meant you had to be watching from the start, or at least for a very long time, if you wanted to understand what was going on. I fear this doomed it in the end, as people weren't able to just channel surf and get into it.
I wish they'd bring back the show, but I guess this will do.
At least they're trying to innovate. It's a lot better than sueing their fanbase or shutting down internet radio like mainstream music has been doing.
Don't knock them for trying, I say. It's about time a music group tried to use the internet for something new.
If it's not good and still getting accepted, that is a problem with the editors. But so long as the article provides something interesting, what does it matter if the person who submits it gets a profit off the site?
What the hell? People should just ignore things they don't like instead of discussing the problems? Is that how things get fixed where you live?
You seem to have missed my point- the lang is usable just all programmers. That's why it is so popular.
The problem is the noobs don't know any pitfalls to look out for yet and PHP has provided a lot to hang yourself on that other languages don't have. If you feel I insulted your pet language, how about discussing it now instead of ranting on what you think programmers should (not) do.
The reason is simple: PHP makes it exceedingly easy to get away with things. Things that programming and web development newbies love because it lets them hack together a quick app. Things that experienced programmers will cringe at because they know full well that it will likely cause a headache later.
They've done some good work in stomping out these bad practices in recent times, but they still have a while to go.
If you want to setup a dedicated database server, you want to know what software with what hardware will run the fastest. So while the benchmarks may not be useful to people wanting to setup a small multi-purpose server, it can still be useful for some people.
We have the CPU power to do so much more now. We shouldn't need to manually wrap our lines - why can't the IDE intelligently wrap it for us, so that everyone gets their screen used to the fullest.
no mention on how much energy it takes to run the thing, or how much energy it puts out. it's not of much use if it costs a fraction to just bury the old plastic and make new stuff from scratch.