Someone should write an article with the headline "Is it reasonable to mention Betteridge's law of headlines every time an article appears whose headline is a question?"
It modified the file by writing a new file and then replacing the old file by the new file. So far, so good. The problem was that writing the new file didn't complete because it hit quota limits. The correct thing in that case would have been to keep the old file, remove the partially written new file and give an error message informing me that modifying the file didn't succeed. After all, that's the fucking point of that technique; otherwise they could just have written over the old file (ironically, had they done that, I would not have had any data loss, because the new file would have been smaller even if written completely). What it did was to ignore the problem, delete the old file and replace it with the partially written new file. The new file, if written completely, would still have contained all the data I cared about. The new file, as written, was lacking most of that data.
From that article: "You splash yourself, they claim. I don't think this is possible."
I can tell you it is very much possible. Indeed, the first thing I do when taking a crap on a non-flat toilet is to cover the water surface with toilet paper. Because that way the probability of splashing yourself is greatly reduced. Not completely eliminated, mind you.
Wouldn't buttprints be identified by buttbook instead? I mean, facebook is about faces, isn't it? Hmmm... I smell another identification method... with identification done by fecebook...:-)
Yes, and then, when the developer moves on to somewhere else, all the stuff he learned about this clever system is useless because the other company has developed a different clever system. On the other hand, the C++ developer has to learn the stuff once and can expect to be able to use that knowledge at his next job as well because it is part of the standard.
I harbor no thoughts of superiority with C++, but I have used a book called Effective C++: 55 Specific Ways to Improve Your Programs and Designs and get very good results. I haven't benchmarked against equivalent C programs because I am not getting paid to write two versions of the same program. If you have any additional tips for good C++ performance, I would be very grateful.
You might want to read the book More Effective C++ by the same author.
Actually the correct comparison is to not only disable exceptions in the compiler, but in addition adding hand-crafted error handling to the code. Because manual error handling also costs performance. And without error handling, your application is broken, period (and yes, I have been bitten by applications doing improper error handling. And yes, that included data loss. Loss of data stored on the hard disk, because the application didn't do any error checking when replacing the file with a new version. Fortunately I could get back most of it from the nightly backup).
Without C compatibility, there would have been no chance that GCC was ever rewritten in C++. It would have been too much of a task. As is, the C could gradually be amended to be C++ compatible (because C++ is not completely compatible to C) while at the same time continuing normal development, with the only restriction that all new C code must also compile as C++. And now the switch to C++ just means that from now on code that doesn't compile with C will be accepted.
I'm of course talking about the constitution of 1949. While it is named "Grundgesetz", it is a constitution. Otherwise, why is the court called "Bundesverfassungsgericht" (Federal Constitution Court), not "Bundesgrundgesetzgericht"? And why is there a "Verfassungsschutz" and not a "Grundgesetzschutz"?
The constitution was named "Grundgesetz" to make clear that it was meant to be provisoric. However it is a constitution, and more importantly, it's the only federal constitution which is currently operative.
It turns out that very specific patterns of internet use are reliably related to depressive tendencies. For example, peer-to-peer file sharing,
So the next time the RIAA sues you, you'll have the defence of not being liable because that's just a symptom of your depression, and there's nothing you can do about it?:-)
I am sorry, but lots of people drive with 1 person in their car, look at the Top Gear episode that during mid-day traffic, he would Clarkson would give 1 pound for every car he saw with someone in the back. Amount of money he spent after an hour of looking, 4 pounds.
Of course in cars with 2 people, both tend to sit in the front, so the number of cars with no one in the back is higher than the number of cars with ony one person inside. Possibly significantly higher, but you cannot tell from the evidence given.
Well, if there are no cars driving on the ground because they are all flying in the air, you actually might feel safer on the ground. The only danger would be from defective cars falling from the sky.
Slashdot Mirror
Someone should write an article with the headline "Is it reasonable to mention Betteridge's law of headlines every time an article appears whose headline is a question?"
You realize that since this is classical music that the composers are dead, right?
See? They all died because there was no copyright back in the days. Had there been copyright, they'd still alive today! :-)
Ah, but then, why didn't the summary mention this? It's not as if the web site's name gave a hint about this.
It's weird that the article doesn't link to the Homepage of the project or at least to the main music browsing page which features, besides others, a list of composers to select from.
What's it like to have knowledge that you don't understand? That concept doesn't make sense to me.
For example, I know that some people hate math, but I don't understand it.
In other news, they are now sued for copyright infringment. :-)
It modified the file by writing a new file and then replacing the old file by the new file. So far, so good. The problem was that writing the new file didn't complete because it hit quota limits. The correct thing in that case would have been to keep the old file, remove the partially written new file and give an error message informing me that modifying the file didn't succeed. After all, that's the fucking point of that technique; otherwise they could just have written over the old file (ironically, had they done that, I would not have had any data loss, because the new file would have been smaller even if written completely). What it did was to ignore the problem, delete the old file and replace it with the partially written new file. The new file, if written completely, would still have contained all the data I cared about. The new file, as written, was lacking most of that data.
From that article: "You splash yourself, they claim. I don't think this is possible."
I can tell you it is very much possible. Indeed, the first thing I do when taking a crap on a non-flat toilet is to cover the water surface with toilet paper. Because that way the probability of splashing yourself is greatly reduced. Not completely eliminated, mind you.
Wouldn't buttprints be identified by buttbook instead? ... I smell another identification method ... with identification done by fecebook ... :-)
I mean, facebook is about faces, isn't it?
Hmmm
Apparently the effect slows the rate of decay, meaning the isotopes are actually slightly older than estimated.
True believers are above such mundane details. ;-)
Or in yet other words: Atomic clocks are indeed atomic, unlike most things commonly labelled "atomic" which are actually nuclear.
Since GCC already uses a home-grown garbage collector, I guess they'll extend that to deal with C++ objects as well.
Then hide your bit array in a nice class interface and show off as the hero of OOP.
Or note that this already has been done by the developers of C++, and packaged into a nice class with name bitset.
Yes, and then, when the developer moves on to somewhere else, all the stuff he learned about this clever system is useless because the other company has developed a different clever system. On the other hand, the C++ developer has to learn the stuff once and can expect to be able to use that knowledge at his next job as well because it is part of the standard.
C++? seriously?
That's it, I'm switching to LLVM!
In which language is LLVM written again?
I harbor no thoughts of superiority with C++, but I have used a book called Effective C++: 55 Specific Ways to Improve Your Programs and Designs and get very good results. I haven't benchmarked against equivalent C programs because I am not getting paid to write two versions of the same program. If you have any additional tips for good C++ performance, I would be very grateful.
You might want to read the book More Effective C++ by the same author.
Actually the correct comparison is to not only disable exceptions in the compiler, but in addition adding hand-crafted error handling to the code. Because manual error handling also costs performance. And without error handling, your application is broken, period (and yes, I have been bitten by applications doing improper error handling. And yes, that included data loss. Loss of data stored on the hard disk, because the application didn't do any error checking when replacing the file with a new version. Fortunately I could get back most of it from the nightly backup).
You could also get an earlier g++ as C++ compiler. I guess they don't allow C++11 features yet.
Alternatively you can cross-compile it from a Linux system.
Without C compatibility, there would have been no chance that GCC was ever rewritten in C++. It would have been too much of a task. As is, the C could gradually be amended to be C++ compatible (because C++ is not completely compatible to C) while at the same time continuing normal development, with the only restriction that all new C code must also compile as C++. And now the switch to C++ just means that from now on code that doesn't compile with C will be accepted.
I'm of course talking about the constitution of 1949. While it is named "Grundgesetz", it is a constitution. Otherwise, why is the court called "Bundesverfassungsgericht" (Federal Constitution Court), not "Bundesgrundgesetzgericht"? And why is there a "Verfassungsschutz" and not a "Grundgesetzschutz"?
The constitution was named "Grundgesetz" to make clear that it was meant to be provisoric. However it is a constitution, and more importantly, it's the only federal constitution which is currently operative.
So the next time the RIAA sues you, you'll have the defence of not being liable because that's just a symptom of your depression, and there's nothing you can do about it? :-)
Of course in cars with 2 people, both tend to sit in the front, so the number of cars with no one in the back is higher than the number of cars with ony one person inside. Possibly significantly higher, but you cannot tell from the evidence given.
Well, if there are no cars driving on the ground because they are all flying in the air, you actually might feel safer on the ground. The only danger would be from defective cars falling from the sky.
AFAIK the resolution of VLT isn't sufficient for that.
Sorry, but the Goatse black hole is not on the list of objects.