there's a middle ground between all or no logic in the "storage layer"
of course. brilliant observation.
tables thems selves contain application logic
not my tables, and not any tables from the developers on my team.
checking row types, etc.
this isn't application logic, it's data integrity.
"hey, you're using that querry quite a bit, how about we just compile it all up in the database for you and speed things up a bit, eh?".. bang, code reuse.
sorry, that's not code reuse at all, not even close. give me a [stored proc|view|table] that i can inherit from or subclass, and that would be reuse.
but those who spend 500,000$ for their RDBMS software package will keep it around for a tad.
and one of the reasons that they'll "keep it around" is because they paid so damn much for it. why lock in an implementation decision for so long? it doesn't promote agility, nor does it promote flexibility. quite the opposite, it encourages poor SQL coding (i.e., vendor-specific features). it's called the "Golden Hammer" Anit-Pattern. look into it.
most companies have terabytes of data stored in their schemas
um, no. gigabytes, maybe, but most companies have databases in the terabyte range? i don't think so.
you might find that if you take out all those i's and use lots of we's for the good of the compnay, you'll still get some credit
funny, it sounds as if you haven't read _The Mythical Man-Month_, wherein Brooks asserts that the best software systems come from a single mind. if you're a professional software developer (it's hard to tell from your post), i strongly suggest you read it.
as to credit, i'm not in it for that. rather, what motivates me is implementing solutions that help achieve the objectives of the company for which i work. see, i'm a stock holder as well as an employee, and i'm just as motivated by profit as the CEO.
on another point, maybe should note that a great sense of ownership leads to pride in work and higher quality. (to be sure, there are pitfalls associated with too great a sense of ownership, but experienced developers know when and how to cut the cord, so to speak)
The OP is completely correct: triggers and such are rubbish (except to enforce data integrity when the integral RDBMS mechanisms cannot). DBs are for storage, period. You claim that a DB is a great place to shoe horn logic, but that leads to problems.
1. The bloat is in a functional-programming layer (SQL) instead of a procedural/OO layer. Given a choice between lotsa logic down in a DB and lotsa logic in my app, I'll take the logic in my app any day of the week. SQL does not promote code reuse, whereas most procedural and OO languages do promote it to some degree.
2. The more code you put in a DB, the less portable your schema is -- and I'm not talking about platform portability, I'm talking about RDBMS portability. Nothing is worse than [IBM|MS|ORA] database lock-in.
3. The poor performance you site may be common in your experience, but code in the middle layer(s) is not the cause of that: bad design and poor testing are the causes. Don't confuse correlation with causation.
These points are backed with experience: I've been programming for 15 years, 7 years of that using databases heavily. The company I work for now has terabytes of data stored in the schemas I've developed for my apps, and no one has ever complained about maintenance or performance on one of my designs.
The problem with Python is that its GUI features are not fully cross-platform yet.
Not true: wxPython. Sure, it doesn't come bundled with official Python distributions, but wxPython is cross-platform and quite capable, and blows the socks off Tk.
You're welcome to try, but instead, I think you'll sit in your parents basement, whine and snivel, and continue to spew your self-righteous crap, all the while posting to./ as an AC.
He never has, and he never will. In a small (population-wise) state like Alaska, it really pays to have as much seniority as the Alaskan congressional delegation does. We've had the same congressional delegation as long as I can remember... 20 years at least.
Full disclosure: I'm an Alaskan, registered voter, and I vote Republican (I consider myself anarchist-come-libertarian-but-still -very-pragmatic:) I oppose DMCA and all that crap, but tomorrow, I'll vote for Stevens. Right, wrong, or indifferent, it's more important for me to have my state, a very small and often forgotten place, to wield some degree of power in Washington.
...and it is utter crap, a complete pile of stinking shit. I was the original engineer on the implementation project, and I switched jobs just to get away from it.
Top it all off with draconian licensing and grotesque consulting fees, and you have every IT managers worst nightmare.
I cannot say this more forcefully: Avaya software sucks.
What they're doing here is simple and clever. The idea is to run an executable, trap it's privileged system calls, and then create a policy file (call to uid map) from the run. After the policy is in place and the executable is run again, the system promotes the calls listed in the policy to the appropriate privilege level. Any new privileged calls generate an error, as they're most likely a security breach or some part of the executable that never got executed the first time.
it's a service that runs on top of Windows in much the same way that Apache runs on top of whatever OS it's running on.
Wrong. Apache is cleanly separated from the OS upon which it runs. IIS is not, nor can it be, separate from windows.
MS could port it to other OS's if they wanted to.
You can't prove this without the source. Do you have it? Uh-huh. I counter that it cannot be ported, and in the same vein, you can't prove that statement to be false.
Gnome == Linux because it's installed with it.
Not on my disto.
KDE == Linux because it's installed with it.
Ditto there.
Apache != Linux because it can be installed on Windows
Well, duh.
Emacs == Linux because it's installed with it
Again, not in my distro.
Sorry, but your argument does little for me but show ya hate MS, but don't really know what you're talking about.
I'd bet my house that I know more about windows (the NT-2k-XP strain) than you do. But for the record, yes, I hate MS as of late.
Really? IIS now runs on a platform other than windows?
I counter that "windows != IIS" and yet "IIS == windows". Windows can exist without IIS (even if it's installed and you don't know it), but IIS cannot exist without Windows.
To be sure, the majority of the flaws in IIS have done little more than reveal flaws in the OS upon which it runs.
...until John Carmack responds with his take on the card.
I'm serious. How many of us base our video card purchases on the recommendations he makes? He knows the cards in detail, knows what features they support and how well, and he sure as hell knows how well they'll perform with the next id game.
I risk of answering incorrectly for the Carmack, but here goes:
Why not keep the API static as much as possible across engine releases? Divorcing the API from the engine would increase the shelf life of the content creation paradigm, if that is a goal.
Nope, nadda, can't do it. What you're asking is for a software system designed such that it meets future requirements. What are those requirements? I'll tell you what they are: they're impossible to know! You certainly can future-proof a design *cough* X11 *cough* but to do so is difficult, time consuming, and sacrifices the current system for a nebulous one.
It also paints the developer into a corner as they've invested so much time in an existing system that they are unable or unwilling to wipe the slate clean and start over when they should (apologies for the mixed metaphor). Nine times out of ten, when the future requirements are eventually known, they don't match what the developer thought they would be, which leads back to square one (where you've lost all that time future-proofing the original system!) or it leads to a new system shoe-horned with invalid assumptions.
Having said that, I think it's clear that id is getting at least a modicum of content reuse. They've reused sounds and graphics between Doom and Quake versions quite liberally in the past. I don't think that really applies in the context of the new engine, but I'd be surprised if they weren't reusing at least some of their existing tools/textures/sounds/whatever.
Ta Da! Instant upgrade for yesterday's game.
You don't work in the software field, do you?:) I'm not trying to be glib, but I've only heard that type of statement from folks who don't do a lot of programming.
Will not the next generations of hardware support another SW layer if required?
Of course, yes they will. The problem is in that extra software layer because it adds development time and bloat to the application that is very, very performance sensitive as it is.
This would serve to greatly reduce application development timeframes and costs, maximizing the amount of cool games in my hands (CFOs read "profits").
The methodology of creating a phenomenal game engine, releasing a flag ship product on of it, and subsequently licensing it to other game developers has worked very well for id software up until now. They all have Ferrari's, you know, and the lead programmer is the CEO.:)
Just another example of the coolness that is Mozilla: Bannerblind. It removes graphics / objects from web pages that match pre-determined sizes. Very cool!
Back in my day, we had to parse ugly, non-conforming HTML by hand for every site and we liked it! None of this fancy-shmancy "valid" or "conformant" SML for us, no-siree.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, give a kid a parser and he'll never learn how to parse himself.
You might as well argue that sentences shouldn't begin with conjunctions.
And just what in the hell is that supposed to mean?
Re:problems with games, some computers
on
USB KVMs Compared
·
· Score: 2
I currently run FreeBSD 4.3, Win2K and Debian Woody machines on my KVM. The Win2K and Debian boxes have VIA chipsets and the FreeBSD machine is an old intel board.
None have given me trouble, and all find the keyboard and mouse combo (Linux after loading the USB drivers, of course). I play Q3 and related mods exclusively on the Win2K machine, again with nary a problem. I've got a MS Natural keyboard and a MS optical mouse.
I had to resort to a PS/2 keyboard during installation of most of operating systems, and I keep it around for booting, BIOS tweaks and whatnot. I fear the PS/2 keyboard will be a necessity for several years to come.
Slashdot Mirror
there's a middle ground between all or no logic in the "storage layer"
of course. brilliant observation.
tables thems selves contain application logic
not my tables, and not any tables from the developers on my team.
checking row types, etc.
this isn't application logic, it's data integrity.
"hey, you're using that querry quite a bit, how about we just compile it all up in the database for you and speed things up a bit, eh?".. bang, code reuse.
sorry, that's not code reuse at all, not even close. give me a [stored proc|view|table] that i can inherit from or subclass, and that would be reuse.
but those who spend 500,000$ for their RDBMS software package will keep it around for a tad.
and one of the reasons that they'll "keep it around" is because they paid so damn much for it. why lock in an implementation decision for so long? it doesn't promote agility, nor does it promote flexibility. quite the opposite, it encourages poor SQL coding (i.e., vendor-specific features). it's called the "Golden Hammer" Anit-Pattern. look into it.
most companies have terabytes of data stored in their schemas
um, no. gigabytes, maybe, but most companies have databases in the terabyte range? i don't think so.
you might find that if you take out all those i's and use lots of we's for the good of the compnay, you'll still get some credit
funny, it sounds as if you haven't read _The Mythical Man-Month_, wherein Brooks asserts that the best software systems come from a single mind. if you're a professional software developer (it's hard to tell from your post), i strongly suggest you read it.
as to credit, i'm not in it for that. rather, what motivates me is implementing solutions that help achieve the objectives of the company for which i work. see, i'm a stock holder as well as an employee, and i'm just as motivated by profit as the CEO.
on another point, maybe should note that a great sense of ownership leads to pride in work and higher quality. (to be sure, there are pitfalls associated with too great a sense of ownership, but experienced developers know when and how to cut the cord, so to speak)
No, no, no... how do I say this? NO!
The OP is completely correct: triggers and such are rubbish (except to enforce data integrity when the integral RDBMS mechanisms cannot). DBs are for storage, period. You claim that a DB is a great place to shoe horn logic, but that leads to problems.
1. The bloat is in a functional-programming layer (SQL) instead of a procedural/OO layer. Given a choice between lotsa logic down in a DB and lotsa logic in my app, I'll take the logic in my app any day of the week. SQL does not promote code reuse, whereas most procedural and OO languages do promote it to some degree.
2. The more code you put in a DB, the less portable your schema is -- and I'm not talking about platform portability, I'm talking about RDBMS portability. Nothing is worse than [IBM|MS|ORA] database lock-in.
3. The poor performance you site may be common in your experience, but code in the middle layer(s) is not the cause of that: bad design and poor testing are the causes. Don't confuse correlation with causation.
These points are backed with experience: I've been programming for 15 years, 7 years of that using databases heavily. The company I work for now has terabytes of data stored in the schemas I've developed for my apps, and no one has ever complained about maintenance or performance on one of my designs.
What map are you looking at? All the maps I saw in school clearly depict Alaska as a very small state. No bigger than, say, Washington or Oregon.
That's a joke of course, maybe you'd understand what I meant by "small" if you read the whole comment -- small as in population.
But fuck you, too!
I don't use Macs, so I can't speak to any of the Fink stuff.
But wxPython works very well for win32-linux cross-platform development.
The problem with Python is that its GUI features are not fully cross-platform yet.
Not true: wxPython. Sure, it doesn't come bundled with official Python distributions, but wxPython is cross-platform and quite capable, and blows the socks off Tk.
Die.
./ as an AC.
You're welcome to try, but instead, I think you'll sit in your parents basement, whine and snivel, and continue to spew your self-righteous crap, all the while posting to
Fool.
He doesn't have any serious opposition though...
:) I oppose DMCA and all that crap, but tomorrow, I'll vote for Stevens. Right, wrong, or indifferent, it's more important for me to have my state, a very small and often forgotten place, to wield some degree of power in Washington.
He never has, and he never will. In a small (population-wise) state like Alaska, it really pays to have as much seniority as the Alaskan congressional delegation does. We've had the same congressional delegation as long as I can remember... 20 years at least.
Full disclosure: I'm an Alaskan, registered voter, and I vote Republican (I consider myself anarchist-come-libertarian-but-still -very-pragmatic
HP is one of Python's largest corporate sponsors. IIRC, they commissioned the Unicode support in Python not too long ago.
Be that as it may, a man named Guido (maybe GvR, maybe not) is gonna break your legs for this!
That is a multi-million dollar idea if i ever heard one.
I'm off to write my patent!
...and it is utter crap, a complete pile of stinking shit. I was the original engineer on the implementation project, and I switched jobs just to get away from it.
Top it all off with draconian licensing and grotesque consulting fees, and you have every IT managers worst nightmare.
I cannot say this more forcefully: Avaya software sucks.
And Slashdot's favorite whipping boy Microsoft
Don't forget, MS pays Slashdot to serve you this page.
Who needs who?
What they're doing here is simple and clever. The idea is to run an executable, trap it's privileged system calls, and then create a policy file (call to uid map) from the run. After the policy is in place and the executable is run again, the system promotes the calls listed in the policy to the appropriate privilege level. Any new privileged calls generate an error, as they're most likely a security breach or some part of the executable that never got executed the first time.
b in_httpd.
A sample apache policy is here: http://www.citi.umich.edu/u/provos/systrace/usr_s
US$ 0 / month for 1024x512.
:)
Working for an ISP has it's perks.
IIS is a service. IIS is not Windows,
Yes and yes.
it's not a feature of Windows,
I agree. It's not a feature. It's a liability.
it's a service that runs on top of Windows in much the same way that Apache runs on top of whatever OS it's running on.
Wrong. Apache is cleanly separated from the OS upon which it runs. IIS is not, nor can it be, separate from windows.
MS could port it to other OS's if they wanted to.
You can't prove this without the source. Do you have it? Uh-huh. I counter that it cannot be ported, and in the same vein, you can't prove that statement to be false.
Gnome == Linux because it's installed with it.
Not on my disto.
KDE == Linux because it's installed with it.
Ditto there.
Apache != Linux because it can be installed on Windows
Well, duh.
Emacs == Linux because it's installed with it
Again, not in my distro.
Sorry, but your argument does little for me but show ya hate MS, but don't really know what you're talking about.
I'd bet my house that I know more about windows (the NT-2k-XP strain) than you do. But for the record, yes, I hate MS as of late.
Really? IIS now runs on a platform other than windows?
I counter that "windows != IIS" and yet "IIS == windows". Windows can exist without IIS (even if it's installed and you don't know it), but IIS cannot exist without Windows.
To be sure, the majority of the flaws in IIS have done little more than reveal flaws in the OS upon which it runs.
Wrong.
4. Soft updates, as someone else has mentioned.
5. Hello? SMP support has been in there for what, 4 years now?
Stop the FUD train, please. I want off.
You can view some screenshots on this page.
Rather than looking at that page, you could always install mozilla and try out the menu yourself.
I read the title "Violence, Video Games And Donahue" and thought, "Finally! A video game where I can kick Donahues ass! Cool!"?
I can't be the only one...
...until John Carmack responds with his take on the card.
I'm serious. How many of us base our video card purchases on the recommendations he makes? He knows the cards in detail, knows what features they support and how well, and he sure as hell knows how well they'll perform with the next id game.
So John, is this card worthy?
I risk of answering incorrectly for the Carmack, but here goes:
:) I'm not trying to be glib, but I've only heard that type of statement from folks who don't do a lot of programming.
:)
Why not keep the API static as much as possible across engine releases? Divorcing the API from the engine would increase the shelf life of the content creation paradigm, if that is a goal.
Nope, nadda, can't do it. What you're asking is for a software system designed such that it meets future requirements. What are those requirements? I'll tell you what they are: they're impossible to know! You certainly can future-proof a design *cough* X11 *cough* but to do so is difficult, time consuming, and sacrifices the current system for a nebulous one.
It also paints the developer into a corner as they've invested so much time in an existing system that they are unable or unwilling to wipe the slate clean and start over when they should (apologies for the mixed metaphor). Nine times out of ten, when the future requirements are eventually known, they don't match what the developer thought they would be, which leads back to square one (where you've lost all that time future-proofing the original system!) or it leads to a new system shoe-horned with invalid assumptions.
Having said that, I think it's clear that id is getting at least a modicum of content reuse. They've reused sounds and graphics between Doom and Quake versions quite liberally in the past. I don't think that really applies in the context of the new engine, but I'd be surprised if they weren't reusing at least some of their existing tools/textures/sounds/whatever.
Ta Da! Instant upgrade for yesterday's game.
You don't work in the software field, do you?
Will not the next generations of hardware support another SW layer if required?
Of course, yes they will. The problem is in that extra software layer because it adds development time and bloat to the application that is very, very performance sensitive as it is.
This would serve to greatly reduce application development timeframes and costs, maximizing the amount of cool games in my hands (CFOs read "profits").
The methodology of creating a phenomenal game engine, releasing a flag ship product on of it, and subsequently licensing it to other game developers has worked very well for id software up until now. They all have Ferrari's, you know, and the lead programmer is the CEO.
Just another example of the coolness that is Mozilla: Bannerblind.
It removes graphics / objects from web pages that match pre-determined sizes. Very cool!
But aren't java threads synchronized? Ew...
I agree, tho, java is a perfect language for toilet algorithms.
You kids!
Back in my day, we had to parse ugly, non-conforming HTML by hand for every site and we liked it! None of this fancy-shmancy "valid" or "conformant" SML for us, no-siree.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, give a kid a parser and he'll never learn how to parse himself.
You might as well argue that sentences shouldn't begin with conjunctions.
And just what in the hell is that supposed to mean?
I currently run FreeBSD 4.3, Win2K and Debian Woody machines on my KVM. The Win2K and Debian boxes have VIA chipsets and the FreeBSD machine is an old intel board.
None have given me trouble, and all find the keyboard and mouse combo (Linux after loading the USB drivers, of course). I play Q3 and related mods exclusively on the Win2K machine, again with nary a problem. I've got a MS Natural keyboard and a MS optical mouse.
I had to resort to a PS/2 keyboard during installation of most of operating systems, and I keep it around for booting, BIOS tweaks and whatnot. I fear the PS/2 keyboard will be a necessity for several years to come.