Reportedly, the SIMD processors can't do loops. Okay, this probably just means they can't Branch. A loop in assembly basically looks like:
loop:/* do some stuff */ branch to loop
However, you can "unroll" loops. If you have a loop that always runs 8 times, instead of doing a for loop you can just put the statement there 8 times. It makes the code larger in memory, but it saves processing time since you don't have to check exit conditions or jump around. This would be something done by the compiler, so OP's point that programming on these things is harder because they require unrolled loops is kind of bunk. It might still be necessary to make your loops more unrollable than otherwise.
Apple BASIC? Lucky git. When I was a kid I plugged my TRS-80 into my television (without the aid of an RCACoax convert, but with the aid of a CoaxAntenna adapter... sometimes) and wrote me some TRS-80 BASIC.
figure out how much it would cost you to barely scrape by for a year without vacations or other discretionary spending, and then talk to your boss on Thursday about reducing your salary
That'd be approximately 6 dollars more per hour than I'm making now. Would you mind talking to my boss for me?
He's probably thinking of word size which, if I'm not mistaken, is, in fact, doubled with 64-bit versus 32-bit. I don't see how this equates to 2GB of DDR3, though...
Yeah, this, plus a lot of the big-name ISPs (Verizon, SBC, etc.) will just refuse to help you at all if they find out you're running Linux, even if the problem is almost certainly on their end. (Say, the DSL modem they gave you is on fire)
I'm reasonably confident that almost all shuttle missions include a wide array of (possibly small but numerous) experiments to be performed. Also, as Quiet_Desperation pointed out, they are resupplying the ISS and bringing refuse back to the surface.
This is already used, in very expensive high-end software. When I worked for Texas A&M Civil Engineering we had one or two packages that required a USB dongle (used to be serial or parallel dongles) for them to run.
You'll pardon me for saying so, but I think SATA RAID is the worst idea ever. Really, SATA pisses me off. Drive technology has taken such steps backwards it kinds of irks me... SCSI supports $LOTS of drives per channel. IDE supports 2.. And now SATA supports 1. Somebody pretty soon is going to think it's a really magnificent idea to multiplex two SATA channels for one drive, and I think I'll stab myself in the eye with a toothpick (don't these things come with directions?!)
I work with a RAID 5 offsite backup machine at my work; it's really a piece of cake. Runs on Linux.. Maybe we don't have a hardware XOR card ot maximize performance, but hey.;) I think there's a fundamental flaw in grandparent's logic... RAID5 isn't really a compromise; it's an optimization born e of necessity, and in my book there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.
For the record, I agree with parent;/usr/local is a very good thing. Now, then. I'd just like to point out that the situation is worse in Windows. "But," you say, "Anything I install goes in C:\Program Files!" And this is true. Except for the configuration, which goes into The Registry (cue evil-sounding organ music). This here is probably the worst idea ever. "Hey, let's have a single place to throw all of the configuration data that needs to be completely parsed repeatedly (I.e., when right-clicking on the desktop), and have no simple, clean way to differentiate who owns what so that entries can be removed when the software is! GRRRRRRRRRRR-EAT!
As "student help" that -does- know things, I take a bit of offense to this... but not too much. I'll go back to setting up servers for my department, now...
(To add something constructive overall, though: Professors are used to having students: I.e., by and large every professor considers himself the president of his own little corporation..)
I type much faster than I write, and I enjoy it much more, and it's a lot readable (to me as well as other people.) Plus, even a small/old word processor like this (TI used to make one; I don't remember what it's called, but I've read stories about how it's solid as a rock and still in use) would have significantly more capacity than a pocket notepad, or anything else of equivalent size.
Yeah, this is pretty much the Proper Debian Way for handling this. I think there's actually a sub-package to do this more specifically, but all in all this is a good solution.
The way I see it, the original series tech was just simplier in its interface, but probably infinitely more complex in its details. I.e., crystal circuitry/data storage and whatnot, whereas Enterprise uses much more conventional technology. I can see original series onward (chronologically) as being way in the future, where was it's easy to see Enterprise being only 50-100 years in the future (not counting e.g., World War 3)
Slashdot Mirror
Reportedly, the SIMD processors can't do loops. Okay, this probably just means they can't Branch. A loop in assembly basically looks like:
/* do some stuff */
loop:
branch to loop
However, you can "unroll" loops. If you have a loop that always runs 8 times, instead of doing a for loop you can just put the statement there 8 times. It makes the code larger in memory, but it saves processing time since you don't have to check exit conditions or jump around. This would be something done by the compiler, so OP's point that programming on these things is harder because they require unrolled loops is kind of bunk. It might still be necessary to make your loops more unrollable than otherwise.
Apple BASIC? Lucky git. When I was a kid I plugged my TRS-80 into my television (without the aid of an RCACoax convert, but with the aid of a CoaxAntenna adapter... sometimes) and wrote me some TRS-80 BASIC.
Any easy out here, for Linux based systems, at least, would be diskless boot with the root partition hosted off the vmware's host computer.
Okay, maybe not easy, but hey, this is slashdot.
figure out how much it would cost you to barely scrape by for a year without vacations or other discretionary spending, and then talk to your boss on Thursday about reducing your salary
That'd be approximately 6 dollars more per hour than I'm making now. Would you mind talking to my boss for me?
Am I the only one that thought his subject was a reference to gedit?
He's probably thinking of word size which, if I'm not mistaken, is, in fact, doubled with 64-bit versus 32-bit. I don't see how this equates to 2GB of DDR3, though...
Nethack has a story... just turn off 'nolegacy'.
'Your search - "6600GT infinite loop" - did not match any documents.'
Why does it have to be a mac? My Dell Inspiron 6000 has onboard firewire, and I can capture IEEE1394 video with linux.
Yeah, this, plus a lot of the big-name ISPs (Verizon, SBC, etc.) will just refuse to help you at all if they find out you're running Linux, even if the problem is almost certainly on their end. (Say, the DSL modem they gave you is on fire)
I always figured Windows was more like a Big Wheel... that's missing one back wheel and has a small angry IRS auditor as the other back wheel.
I'm reasonably confident that almost all shuttle missions include a wide array of (possibly small but numerous) experiments to be performed. Also, as Quiet_Desperation pointed out, they are resupplying the ISS and bringing refuse back to the surface.
I second.
Easy: Build a Tesla coil into the top of the computer.
And, er, tempest harden the CPU..
For the record, I think "Wireless" means everything wireless. Mouse, keyboard, monitor, power supply (...)
This is already used, in very expensive high-end software. When I worked for Texas A&M Civil Engineering we had one or two packages that required a USB dongle (used to be serial or parallel dongles) for them to run.
Hey, bwalling is right! We shouldn't just take what other people say and assume it's true!
Wait...
*brain asplodes*
You'll pardon me for saying so, but I think SATA RAID is the worst idea ever. Really, SATA pisses me off. Drive technology has taken such steps backwards it kinds of irks me... SCSI supports $LOTS of drives per channel. IDE supports 2.. And now SATA supports 1. Somebody pretty soon is going to think it's a really magnificent idea to multiplex two SATA channels for one drive, and I think I'll stab myself in the eye with a toothpick (don't these things come with directions?!)
I work with a RAID 5 offsite backup machine at my work; it's really a piece of cake. Runs on Linux.. Maybe we don't have a hardware XOR card ot maximize performance, but hey. ;) I think there's a fundamental flaw in grandparent's logic... RAID5 isn't really a compromise; it's an optimization born e of necessity, and in my book there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.
Right, it wouldn't be "breaking and entering"... it'd be "trespass".
For the record, I agree with parent; /usr/local is a very good thing. Now, then. I'd just like to point out that the situation is worse in Windows. "But," you say, "Anything I install goes in C:\Program Files!" And this is true. Except for the configuration, which goes into The Registry (cue evil-sounding organ music). This here is probably the worst idea ever. "Hey, let's have a single place to throw all of the configuration data that needs to be completely parsed repeatedly (I.e., when right-clicking on the desktop), and have no simple, clean way to differentiate who owns what so that entries can be removed when the software is! GRRRRRRRRRRR-EAT!
As "student help" that -does- know things, I take a bit of offense to this... but not too much. I'll go back to setting up servers for my department, now...
(To add something constructive overall, though: Professors are used to having students: I.e., by and large every professor considers himself the president of his own little corporation..)
I type much faster than I write, and I enjoy it much more, and it's a lot readable (to me as well as other people.) Plus, even a small/old word processor like this (TI used to make one; I don't remember what it's called, but I've read stories about how it's solid as a rock and still in use) would have significantly more capacity than a pocket notepad, or anything else of equivalent size.
Yeah, this is pretty much the Proper Debian Way for handling this. I think there's actually a sub-package to do this more specifically, but all in all this is a good solution.
The way I see it, the original series tech was just simplier in its interface, but probably infinitely more complex in its details. I.e., crystal circuitry/data storage and whatnot, whereas Enterprise uses much more conventional technology. I can see original series onward (chronologically) as being way in the future, where was it's easy to see Enterprise being only 50-100 years in the future (not counting e.g., World War 3)