The more telephony/hardware companies we see releasing Linux hardware (with a portable programming language running on top of it) then the greater the market share Linux will get.
Programming classes may encourage a 'black box' approach to programming, depending on what language you use. The reason for this is that it all relies on how high-level the language is; if you're using PHP then chances are you won't be worrying nearly as much about the hardware of your system than if you're using C, assembler, or machine code.
...if this box is just for encryption of messages between the shuttle and the US, why would it be some top-secret ultra-1337 souped-up encryption hardware? For all we know, it could just be a bit of hardware optimised for doing, say, triple-DES encryption of the messages. It's not as if the communications have to stay totally secret for the next few years/centuries/millennia.
Anything which allows a Perl program to access their website more than once should be banned. Guess we'd better get rid of telnet. And FTP. And web browsers. Heck, let's get rid of ping just to make sure. Better get rid of modems and the programmers while we're at it. Screw it, just ban computers all together. Then there's no way those evil hackers can fuck with their website!
Aren't the rules such that if you use #defines in that stupid way your entry is disqualified? Or is that just me being bitter because someone used #define in an annoying manner?
Making jokes when 7 brave people die is not appropriate.
Many more than seven brave people die every day and I don't hear you slapping everybody who makes comments about them.
Especially when these 7 people are astronauts who have prepared and trained most of their adult lives for their mission into the new frontier.
What about the people who spend their entire life doing what they've been told to do - go to school, get a job, get married, have kids - then find that one day they've been downsized because the CEO wants a new condo in France, their spouse tells them they want a divorce and they can't get a new job because they're obsolete, overskilled and no longer economically viable, so they kill themselves? What do you say about them? These people are probably just as valuable as these astronauts and yet I don't hear anybody mourning them.
...somebody takes each of these lines of Engrish and makes them into a fortune cookie file? ...someone writes a shell script which randomly sticks the sentences together with random bits of punctuation to make a crappy 'Lord of the Rings dialogue generator'? ...someone writes a Perl script which connects to random IRC channels and starts conversations with people, spouting random sentences of it? ...someone makes a program which uses the Engrish subtitles to create pseudorandom data for an entropy pool? ...someone grep's the subtitles against random bits of source code and publishes their findings on their website?
You call that elegant? THIS is elegant.
on
Immortal Code
·
· Score: 1
/* This will actually compile, and it uses neat li'l tabs! */
#include <stdio.h>
int main() { printf("Hello, world!\n"); return 0; }
Some of you seem to have slightly misinterpreted my comments. I didn't mean to say that a debugger isn't at all necessary or wouldn't be helpful; I was just saying that I've found PHP is the kind of language where with sufficient planning you can eliminate the need for a special debugger in 80/90/99% of cases.
Of course, having a debugger for PHP would be very useful, but I wouldn't consider it to be a very high priority, especially as someone else in this thread seems to have posted a link to a reasonable (though still alpha) PHP debugger prototype which works well.
I wholeheartedly agree. That's how I learned PHP; I read the code of others, skimmed the manual, started editing the code of others, read the manual for bits I didn't understand, skimmed the whole thing again, then started making my own projects, using nothing but the manual (and the occasional snippet of other people's code) for reference. When you get good enough you can start to get a feel for the idiosyncracies of your favourite language; in my case, PHP. I know when you'd use $_POST instead of $HTTP_POST_VARS and why you should use $_POST["subject"] instead of $subject.
That's what happens when I just skim a function's manual page. I misread 4.0.1 as 4.1.0. Sorry to all who read my parent; it's got a factual inaccuracy error in it. (Insert embarassment here.)
1. I've always found that the comments are helpful marginalia which can point out obscure cases where PHP might fall over, an alternative function which will work better than the one you're looking up, etc.
and...
2. If the user notes bother you, you can download the entire manual in HTML as a BZ2 archive (it's about 830KB) from the PHP website.
And so it's very out of date. This may go without saying, but PHP has had a lot of improvements and general tweaks made from then. Some of these tweaks may prove frustrating.
For example, in php.ini register_globals is now set to 'Off' by default (from 4.2 onwards) instead of 'On' and if the examples in the book assume that it is turned 'On' it means that the code samples in the book will cease to work. (For example, if the book uses '$subject' as opposed to '$_POST["subject"]' they could be in for it.)
Even assuming that the book doesn't assume that register_globals is on, there's another problem. Being of version 4.0, it won't use the get and post array variables $_GET and $_POST but rather the deprecated $HTTP_GET_VARS and $HTTP_POST_VARS.
There are other slight differences. For example, PHP 4.0 doesn't have the functions require_once and include_once, which are useful for making sure you don't accidentally include a file more than once (brilliant for avoiding function redeclaration errors) and the output buffering could be messed up by an incorrect setting in the php.ini file (implicit_flush, if you're wondering).
Plus it doesn't have useful string functions like strcoll and vsprintf).
I know this is going to sound terribly odd (and might make me come off as a total n00b) but I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that PHP doesn't need a debugger (at least not yet). Really, I've been playing around with PHP for months now, playing around with string functions, loops, databases, recursion, and the like and I've never need any debugging tool more advanced from echo.
I've found that it's very hard to make insidious and hidden errors in PHP if you just plan your code well and are familiar with the language. Most of the errors I make in PHP tend to be of the "Oops, missed out a semicolon" variety, so the simple one-line error "Parse error at line X" is generally enough for me. Even the most complex errors I make (such as when mysql_num_rows complains about a variable not being a MySQL result) is due to something boneheaded and reasonably obvious, like forgetting to connect to a database or missing out a line of code.
Even without a debugger, I've never had to puzzle over any PHP problem for more than a few hours.
...don't you have to peridoically stop a PostgreSQL server to run VACUUM() or something similar to clean out old deleted rows or something like that? I know some of you who are actual PostgreSQL users will probably correct me (or tell me I'm talking out of my hat), but I think that this might make it hard to run PostgreSQL in a 24/7/365 environment.
I actually considered it odd to listen to songs or individual tracks rather than albums. Of course, sometimes I'm just in the mood for one song over and over again, but all of the CDs I have are of albums; buying singles just seems pointless and strange to me. £3.50 for a song, a remix and a remix of the remix? Why?
I'm running RedHat 8.0 which has Apache 2.0.40 and PHP 4.2.2 running on it. I'm also running MySQL 3.23.52. Now, I get very very few connections to my webserver, but I do a bit of PHP coding which uses the MySQL database and it runs fine, even when I look at my PHP scripts/pages remotely. So, yeah, my Apache 2 HTTP server works fine with PHP and MySQL - damn stable (but it doesn't get much load at all).
Slashdot Mirror
The more telephony/hardware companies we see releasing Linux hardware (with a portable programming language running on top of it) then the greater the market share Linux will get.
Programming classes may encourage a 'black box' approach to programming, depending on what language you use. The reason for this is that it all relies on how high-level the language is; if you're using PHP then chances are you won't be worrying nearly as much about the hardware of your system than if you're using C, assembler, or machine code.
Are people really that much of a slave to the mighty Dollar that they must do that?
Yes.
...if this box is just for encryption of messages between the shuttle and the US, why would it be some top-secret ultra-1337 souped-up encryption hardware? For all we know, it could just be a bit of hardware optimised for doing, say, triple-DES encryption of the messages. It's not as if the communications have to stay totally secret for the next few years/centuries/millennia.
Anything which allows a Perl program to access their website more than once should be banned. Guess we'd better get rid of telnet. And FTP. And web browsers. Heck, let's get rid of ping just to make sure. Better get rid of modems and the programmers while we're at it. Screw it, just ban computers all together. Then there's no way those evil hackers can fuck with their website!
Why is it so important? Does it use a totally new operating system paradigm? A new way of kernel development? A better permission system?
Could somebody more knowledgeble than I explain what's great about it?
Aren't the rules such that if you use #defines in that stupid way your entry is disqualified? Or is that just me being bitter because someone used #define in an annoying manner?
As far as I know, nobody speculates on anything they're sure about.
*ducks*
'Cuz if you lose it, you can always bruteforce the encryption key anyway!
*ducks*
Many more than seven brave people die every day and I don't hear you slapping everybody who makes comments about them.
What about the people who spend their entire life doing what they've been told to do - go to school, get a job, get married, have kids - then find that one day they've been downsized because the CEO wants a new condo in France, their spouse tells them they want a divorce and they can't get a new job because they're obsolete, overskilled and no longer economically viable, so they kill themselves? What do you say about them? These people are probably just as valuable as these astronauts and yet I don't hear anybody mourning them.
...somebody takes each of these lines of Engrish and makes them into a fortune cookie file?
...someone writes a shell script which randomly sticks the sentences together with random bits of punctuation to make a crappy 'Lord of the Rings dialogue generator'?
...someone writes a Perl script which connects to random IRC channels and starts conversations with people, spouting random sentences of it?
...someone makes a program which uses the Engrish subtitles to create pseudorandom data for an entropy pool?
...someone grep's the subtitles against random bits of source code and publishes their findings on their website?
/* This will actually compile, and it uses neat li'l tabs! */
#include <stdio.h>
int main()
{
printf("Hello, world!\n");
return 0;
}
In my hand I hold a receipt from PC World for a copy of Red Hat 8.0 personal edition (listed as REDHATLIN PERSV8), costing £34.99.
Some of us like to support the companies that produce cool products by paying for them.
Some of you seem to have slightly misinterpreted my comments. I didn't mean to say that a debugger isn't at all necessary or wouldn't be helpful; I was just saying that I've found PHP is the kind of language where with sufficient planning you can eliminate the need for a special debugger in 80/90/99% of cases.
Of course, having a debugger for PHP would be very useful, but I wouldn't consider it to be a very high priority, especially as someone else in this thread seems to have posted a link to a reasonable (though still alpha) PHP debugger prototype which works well.
I wholeheartedly agree. That's how I learned PHP; I read the code of others, skimmed the manual, started editing the code of others, read the manual for bits I didn't understand, skimmed the whole thing again, then started making my own projects, using nothing but the manual (and the occasional snippet of other people's code) for reference. When you get good enough you can start to get a feel for the idiosyncracies of your favourite language; in my case, PHP. I know when you'd use $_POST instead of $HTTP_POST_VARS and why you should use $_POST["subject"] instead of $subject.
That's what happens when I just skim a function's manual page. I misread 4.0.1 as 4.1.0. Sorry to all who read my parent; it's got a factual inaccuracy error in it. (Insert embarassment here.)
1. I've always found that the comments are helpful marginalia which can point out obscure cases where PHP might fall over, an alternative function which will work better than the one you're looking up, etc.
and...
2. If the user notes bother you, you can download the entire manual in HTML as a BZ2 archive (it's about 830KB) from the PHP website.
And so it's very out of date. This may go without saying, but PHP has had a lot of improvements and general tweaks made from then. Some of these tweaks may prove frustrating.
For example, in php.ini register_globals is now set to 'Off' by default (from 4.2 onwards) instead of 'On' and if the examples in the book assume that it is turned 'On' it means that the code samples in the book will cease to work. (For example, if the book uses '$subject' as opposed to '$_POST["subject"]' they could be in for it.)
Even assuming that the book doesn't assume that register_globals is on, there's another problem. Being of version 4.0, it won't use the get and post array variables $_GET and $_POST but rather the deprecated $HTTP_GET_VARS and $HTTP_POST_VARS.
There are other slight differences. For example, PHP 4.0 doesn't have the functions require_once and include_once, which are useful for making sure you don't accidentally include a file more than once (brilliant for avoiding function redeclaration errors) and the output buffering could be messed up by an incorrect setting in the php.ini file (implicit_flush, if you're wondering).
Plus it doesn't have useful string functions like strcoll and vsprintf).
I know this is going to sound terribly odd (and might make me come off as a total n00b) but I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that PHP doesn't need a debugger (at least not yet). Really, I've been playing around with PHP for months now, playing around with string functions, loops, databases, recursion, and the like and I've never need any debugging tool more advanced from echo.
I've found that it's very hard to make insidious and hidden errors in PHP if you just plan your code well and are familiar with the language. Most of the errors I make in PHP tend to be of the "Oops, missed out a semicolon" variety, so the simple one-line error "Parse error at line X" is generally enough for me. Even the most complex errors I make (such as when mysql_num_rows complains about a variable not being a MySQL result) is due to something boneheaded and reasonably obvious, like forgetting to connect to a database or missing out a line of code.
Even without a debugger, I've never had to puzzle over any PHP problem for more than a few hours.
#!/bin/bash echo "What prime number do you need factorised?" read prime echo echo "The factors of $prime are 1 and $prime."
See? You don't even have to use a new processor!
...don't you have to peridoically stop a PostgreSQL server to run VACUUM() or something similar to clean out old deleted rows or something like that? I know some of you who are actual PostgreSQL users will probably correct me (or tell me I'm talking out of my hat), but I think that this might make it hard to run PostgreSQL in a 24/7/365 environment.
...I was the one who wrote the Slashdot trolling phenomena article. You see in the list of edits the IP address 212.229.115.84? That's me.
I actually considered it odd to listen to songs or individual tracks rather than albums. Of course, sometimes I'm just in the mood for one song over and over again, but all of the CDs I have are of albums; buying singles just seems pointless and strange to me. £3.50 for a song, a remix and a remix of the remix? Why?
I'm running RedHat 8.0 which has Apache 2.0.40 and PHP 4.2.2 running on it. I'm also running MySQL 3.23.52. Now, I get very very few connections to my webserver, but I do a bit of PHP coding which uses the MySQL database and it runs fine, even when I look at my PHP scripts/pages remotely. So, yeah, my Apache 2 HTTP server works fine with PHP and MySQL - damn stable (but it doesn't get much load at all).
I wonder how you operate to remove those?