It's a seven-layer abstract model describing the layering of networking protocols. You have levels such as physical (the ethernet cable), application (http), etc., that show how the various protocols layer on top of each other.
However, IIRC, the DoD four-layer model is more like what the TCP/IP suite of protocols is like. Again, IIRC, the OSI seven-layer model was being offered as an alternative to system based on TCP/IP, but as we all know, it did not succeed in displacing TCP/IP.
Your analysis has some flaws. The things you list above, even if they are considered speech, would not be protected speech, since they violate copyright. You have the right to say anything you want in a book - you do not have to write to copy somebody else's book.
Rebroadcasting DSS signals would be a copyright violation, regardless of whether it is speech or not, so it's not a relevant example.
Ok, I suppose this is somewhat off-topic, but I happened to notice it now.
The opensource.org page says: The phrase `open source' has been registered as a certification mark.
I was under the impression that Software in the Public Interest had applied for trademark registration, but that it had not actually yet been registered as a certification mark.
So has it been registered as a certification mark, or is the statement on opensource.org incorrect?
Umm, those 35 reasons are really bad reasons not to vote for him. You count the DOJ case against Microsoft as a bad thing?
As for the drug use, when asked whether he had used marijuana or cocaine when he was young, George W. Bush dodged the question, saying it was not relevant to his campaign. So he probably has.
Cutbacks? Spending reductions? This must be a different Republican Party we're talking about.
Ronald Reagan's failed "Star Wars" defense system cost billions of dollars. His illegal Iran/Contra affair cost us quite a bit more. The war on drugs took billions more.
Overall, Reagan ran up the biggest deficit of any President in United States history, more than tripling the total federal deficit.
Democrats = Big Government. Republicans = Even Bigger Government.
As you probably know, the biggest fiscal deficit in United States history was run up under Republican President Ronald Reagan and his extremely big government policies ("Star Wars" defense system, drug war, Iran/Contra, etc.).
Clinton, despite some tendancy towards big government, has actually reduced the size of government from its high under Ronald Reagan.
But the GOP has stronly supported giving citizens the strong crypto they need to ensure their privacy in our wired world
If they so strongly support it, why do we still have this insane crypto export restrictions? The GOP is in control of both houses of Congress, so if they really cared about this, they would've done something about it by now.
I'd assume the testing and hard data would be included in the report you have to pay for. This is just a summary, so of course there isn't going to be lots of benchmarking in it.
e: What Linux is. The name "Linux" is exactly whatever the majority believes it to be.
It seems that the majority of/. is willing to accept this in the case of "Linux." Why, then, don't they accept the majority's definition of "hacker"? Hypocrisy?
RMS wrote a shitty compiler called gcc 1.0. Cygnus and Linux hackers fixed it as needed, for embedded systems developers (Cygnus) and the kernel (Linux hackers).
"shitty compiler"? if it was so "shitty," why did everybody start using it and enhancing it? If it was so "shitty," why didn't Cygnus go and write their own from scratch?
As for Cygnus's role, sure they've contributed to gcc for a while, but so have many other people, including several people within the Free Software Foundation. So if you want completely non-GNU code, you must write a compiler from scratch, since gcc and egcs are both inextricably tied with the Free Software Foundation and the GNU project.
Not only is EGCS GNU in name (Experimental GNU Compiler System), and in copyright (owned by the Free Software Foundation), but it is also heavily based on gcc, and thus has a whole lot of GNU Project code in it. If you're going to boycott the GNU project, you need to write a new compiler from scratch, not extent an existing GNU project one, as egcs has done.
The term "open source" or "open-source" when used in conjunction with software predates its use by the Open Source Initiative(tm) and its registration as the Open Source(r) trademark. Take a look at dejanews - you'll see several uses of it in reference to Free Software, several of which date from nearly ten years ago. I'm starting to doubt that Eric and Bruce "invented" the term several years ago when other people used it long before.
Somebody had posted a link to a very good article about this issue on slashdot a long time ago, but I don't see to have it bookmarked.
Linux coders are biased against C++, that's why
on
Java for EGCS
·
· Score: 1
Tell them to use reserve(). What I've found is that lots of people are being taught C++ by people who haven't taken the time to understand the language properly themselves, or who are long time C programmers, and are prejudiced against it anyway. C++ is a vastly better programming language than C, and I wouldn't choose C for any project where C++ was available - even if I was planning not to use classes.
Oh, sure they can go use reserve() or one of the many other ways to optimize things like this. The problem is that you don't have to, and a beginner will typically not do things that they don't need to do to get their program working, if they even know those things exist at all. A C beginner will most certainly do things the correct way, simply because they're forced to - it's easier to do things correctly than to do weird things like resize arrays constantly.
As for which language to use when you're not using classes, it depends largely on personal preference I suppose. Several of C++'s C++-as-a-better-C features are nice (such as being able to declare variables just about anywhere), but I prefer using real arrays (what the computer science books call "C-style arrays") rather than range-checked vector/matrix classes.
PS: Prior experience with C is, if anything, a handicap to learning C++, especially is C is the only language the learner has previously used.
I disagree - knowing what is going on internally is always a good idea. If you know how a vector or a string or some other class works internally (and the internals of classes often are very similar to straight C code), you know more about what things to do to more efficiently use the class.
In fact, having a basic idea of computer internals and assembly language is a good idea, IMHO. Extensive programming in assembly or knowledge of minute details of hardware is not necessary, but having a basic idea of how everything works low-level is a good idea. More knowledge rarely hurts.
Linux coders are biased against C++, that's why
on
Java for EGCS
·
· Score: 1
Are schools starting people out with C++? I came to my first Comp Sci class with C under my belt, but was forced to learn Pascal.
Well, in colleges, it really depends...I know of several colleges that start out with C, and several that jump straight into C++. Thanks to the AP board, all high schools now start with C++, since the AP test covers C++ (it switched from Pascal to C++ this year).
Well, reading CNN's little side-by-side interview with Emmanuel Goldstein and some IBM suit, Emmanuel impressed me much more. He seems to know what a hacker is, and what the hacker ethic is, while the IBM guy thinks that "hacker" is synonymous with "cyberterrorist."
I like the IDE of Borland Turbo C/C++. It's a nice textmode interface with great syntax highlighting, quite customizable, and every menu command is mapped to the keyboard for those of us mouse-haters. Sure it's for DOS, and a bit dated (1992), but I still haven't found anything nearly as good. Graphical IDEs just don't sit well with me for some reason...editing text in 800x600 just seems wrong; editing text in 80x50 textmode is much nicer.
Linux coders are biased against C++, that's why
on
Java for EGCS
·
· Score: 1
Well, there are several problems with C++ IMHO, but the main problem is that it's much much easier to write inefficient code in it. Sure, it's possible for there to be both efficient C code and efficient C++ code, but it's much harder to write *really* inefficient C code. That's why I think starting out beginners with C is a good thing.
Take, for example, a string class in C++. Many beginners will build a string from characters by concatenating each character to the end of the string (thestring += thechar). This resizes the string on every character added, as a new array is created (1 char bigger), the old data is copied over, and the old char array is deleted - all internally and automatically by the string class. Sure, this is really easy, and that's the problem - the beginner doesn't realize how much inefficiency is going on behind his back.
Doing the same thing in C leads to much less temptation to be inefficient. A C programmer would not follow the above example because it'd be a pain to keep resizing your char arrays (keep malloc()'ing new arrays and free()'ing old ones). Therefore, the C programmer would be forced to do use the more efficient method of deciding the array size before hand, then just putting the characters into it.
Sure, this is a fairly trivial example, but there's lots more of similar cases. I'm not saying it's not possible to write great, small, fast, C++ code, it's just that it's a lot easier to write big, bloated, slow code in C++ than it is in C.
So even though C++ is easier in many respects for beginners (the compiler automatically takes care of reference parameters, automatically determines the data types for outputting and inputting to/from the console, etc.), I still think it's a good idea to learn C first, to understand how things really work, and then to learn C++. Of course, most schools don't agree with me. Oh well.
Slashdot Mirror
Same here. Does this list actually exist? Every mailing list I've ever been on sends confirmation of your subscription to the list.
What, you don't like reading your email on the toaster?
It's a seven-layer abstract model describing the layering of networking protocols. You have levels such as physical (the ethernet cable), application (http), etc., that show how the various protocols layer on top of each other.
However, IIRC, the DoD four-layer model is more like what the TCP/IP suite of protocols is like. Again, IIRC, the OSI seven-layer model was being offered as an alternative to system based on TCP/IP, but as we all know, it did not succeed in displacing TCP/IP.
Your analysis has some flaws. The things you list above, even if they are considered speech, would not be protected speech, since they violate copyright. You have the right to say anything you want in a book - you do not have to write to copy somebody else's book.
Rebroadcasting DSS signals would be a copyright violation, regardless of whether it is speech or not, so it's not a relevant example.
Ok, I suppose this is somewhat off-topic, but I happened to notice it now.
The opensource.org page says:
The phrase `open source' has been registered as a certification mark.
I was under the impression that Software in the Public Interest had applied for trademark registration, but that it had not actually yet been registered as a certification mark.
So has it been registered as a certification mark, or is the statement on opensource.org incorrect?
Umm, those 35 reasons are really bad reasons not to vote for him. You count the DOJ case against Microsoft as a bad thing?
As for the drug use, when asked whether he had used marijuana or cocaine when he was young, George W. Bush dodged the question, saying it was not relevant to his campaign. So he probably has.
Cutbacks? Spending reductions? This must be a different Republican Party we're talking about.
Ronald Reagan's failed "Star Wars" defense system cost billions of dollars. His illegal Iran/Contra affair cost us quite a bit more. The war on drugs took billions more.
Overall, Reagan ran up the biggest deficit of any President in United States history, more than tripling the total federal deficit.
And you call that spending reduction?
Incorrect.
Democrats = Big Government.
Republicans = Even Bigger Government.
As you probably know, the biggest fiscal deficit in United States history was run up under Republican President Ronald Reagan and his extremely big government policies ("Star Wars" defense system, drug war, Iran/Contra, etc.).
Clinton, despite some tendancy towards big government, has actually reduced the size of government from its high under Ronald Reagan.
But the GOP has stronly supported giving citizens the strong crypto they need to ensure their privacy in our wired world
If they so strongly support it, why do we still have this insane crypto export restrictions? The GOP is in control of both houses of Congress, so if they really cared about this, they would've done something about it by now.
I'd assume the testing and hard data would be included in the report you have to pay for. This is just a summary, so of course there isn't going to be lots of benchmarking in it.
e: What Linux is. The name "Linux" is exactly whatever the majority believes it to be.
/. is willing to accept this in the case of "Linux." Why, then, don't they accept the majority's definition of "hacker"? Hypocrisy?
It seems that the majority of
And add on $150-$200 to get that all shipped to you from the various companies you found on pricewatch.com.
RMS wrote a shitty compiler called gcc 1.0.
Cygnus and Linux hackers fixed it as needed,
for embedded systems developers (Cygnus) and
the kernel (Linux hackers).
"shitty compiler"? if it was so "shitty," why did everybody start using it and enhancing it? If it was so "shitty," why didn't Cygnus go and write their own from scratch?
As for Cygnus's role, sure they've contributed to gcc for a while, but so have many other people, including several people within the Free Software Foundation. So if you want completely non-GNU code, you must write a compiler from scratch, since gcc and egcs are both inextricably tied with the Free Software Foundation and the GNU project.
Not only is EGCS GNU in name (Experimental GNU Compiler System), and in copyright (owned by the Free Software Foundation), but it is also heavily based on gcc, and thus has a whole lot of GNU Project code in it. If you're going to boycott the GNU project, you need to write a new compiler from scratch, not extent an existing GNU project one, as egcs has done.
Well, it's not accurate to call win95 and win98 separate OSs, since they both run the same software. WinNT runs much of the same software as well.
It would be equivalent to saying that GNU/Linux is extremely fragmented because there are several hundred versions of the Linux kernel.
The term "open source" or "open-source" when used in conjunction with software predates its use by the Open Source Initiative(tm) and its registration as the Open Source(r) trademark. Take a look at dejanews - you'll see several uses of it in reference to Free Software, several of which date from nearly ten years ago. I'm starting to doubt that Eric and Bruce "invented" the term several years ago when other people used it long before.
Somebody had posted a link to a very good article about this issue on slashdot a long time ago, but I don't see to have it bookmarked.
Tribute.
Tell them to use reserve(). What I've found is that lots of people are being taught C++ by people who haven't taken the time to understand the language properly themselves, or who are long time C programmers, and are prejudiced against it anyway. C++ is a vastly better programming language than C, and I wouldn't choose C for any project where C++ was available - even if I was planning not to use classes.
Oh, sure they can go use reserve() or one of the many other ways to optimize things like this. The problem is that you don't have to, and a beginner will typically not do things that they don't need to do to get their program working, if they even know those things exist at all. A C beginner will most certainly do things the correct way, simply because they're forced to - it's easier to do things correctly than to do weird things like resize arrays constantly.
As for which language to use when you're not using classes, it depends largely on personal preference I suppose. Several of C++'s C++-as-a-better-C features are nice (such as being able to declare variables just about anywhere), but I prefer using real arrays (what the computer science books call "C-style arrays") rather than range-checked vector/matrix classes.
PS: Prior experience with C is, if anything, a handicap to learning C++, especially is C is the only language the learner has previously used.
I disagree - knowing what is going on internally is always a good idea. If you know how a vector or a string or some other class works internally (and the internals of classes often are very similar to straight C code), you know more about what things to do to more efficiently use the class.
In fact, having a basic idea of computer internals and assembly language is a good idea, IMHO. Extensive programming in assembly or knowledge of minute details of hardware is not necessary, but having a basic idea of how everything works low-level is a good idea. More knowledge rarely hurts.
Are schools starting people out with C++? I came to my first Comp Sci class with C under my belt, but was forced to learn Pascal.
Well, in colleges, it really depends...I know of several colleges that start out with C, and several that jump straight into C++. Thanks to the AP board, all high schools now start with C++, since the AP test covers C++ (it switched from Pascal to C++ this year).
Uhh, the Free Kevin logo has been the intro page to 2600 for the last 8+ months. They put it there themselves on purpose.
Well, reading CNN's little side-by-side interview with Emmanuel Goldstein and some IBM suit, Emmanuel impressed me much more. He seems to know what a hacker is, and what the hacker ethic is, while the IBM guy thinks that "hacker" is synonymous with "cyberterrorist."
A month? I saw this over six months ago, it's probably at least a year or two old.
It's called parody. Many of us find well-done parodies amusing.
I like the IDE of Borland Turbo C/C++. It's a nice textmode interface with great syntax highlighting, quite customizable, and every menu command is mapped to the keyboard for those of us mouse-haters. Sure it's for DOS, and a bit dated (1992), but I still haven't found anything nearly as good. Graphical IDEs just don't sit well with me for some reason...editing text in 800x600 just seems wrong; editing text in 80x50 textmode is much nicer.
Well, there are several problems with C++ IMHO, but the main problem is that it's much much easier to write inefficient code in it. Sure, it's possible for there to be both efficient C code and efficient C++ code, but it's much harder to write *really* inefficient C code. That's why I think starting out beginners with C is a good thing.
Take, for example, a string class in C++. Many beginners will build a string from characters by concatenating each character to the end of the string (thestring += thechar). This resizes the string on every character added, as a new array is created (1 char bigger), the old data is copied over, and the old char array is deleted - all internally and automatically by the string class. Sure, this is really easy, and that's the problem - the beginner doesn't realize how much inefficiency is going on behind his back.
Doing the same thing in C leads to much less temptation to be inefficient. A C programmer would not follow the above example because it'd be a pain to keep resizing your char arrays (keep malloc()'ing new arrays and free()'ing old ones). Therefore, the C programmer would be forced to do use the more efficient method of deciding the array size before hand, then just putting the characters into it.
Sure, this is a fairly trivial example, but there's lots more of similar cases. I'm not saying it's not possible to write great, small, fast, C++ code, it's just that it's a lot easier to write big, bloated, slow code in C++ than it is in C.
So even though C++ is easier in many respects for beginners (the compiler automatically takes care of reference parameters, automatically determines the data types for outputting and inputting to/from the console, etc.), I still think it's a good idea to learn C first, to understand how things really work, and then to learn C++. Of course, most schools don't agree with me. Oh well.