Just curious - in what ways do you think they are more limited? A OS threading mechanism is just a glorified state machine anyway. I agree that these sorts of 'threads' (or 'fibers' as they are known in Windows) run into troubles with blocking I/O, but with async. I/O they are quite useful once you've got some thread management mechanisms incorporated.
If it's anything like microthreads, then it's not inefficient at all. I have played around with microthreads in python and easily achieved over a million 'concurrently-cooperative' threads.
Disclaimer: I haven't read the article yet, so maybe it has nothing to do with microthreads.
I realise in hindsight I ought to have skipped the tutorials. Unfortunately I wasn't sure if there was anything important I would otherwise miss. It would have been nice if the tutorials had provided a more comprehensive overview of what each one covered - then I could have skipped the first four at least. That said, the last two tutorials did contain very useful information but I think that it would only have taken 2 minutes to mention this in a series of tip-o-the-day popups or somesuch.
Did anyone else find the narrator's voice extremely irritating? Also, in the tutorial, he insists on telling you multiple times how to do something simple, and congratulates you patronisingly and annoyingly every time you accomplish these simple tasks. I almost gave up on the game by the end of the tutorial. Instead I played the first mission and gave up after that.
Speaking of which, it took me two hours to get through the tutorials! It might be great for complete newbies but I just wanted to know what made the game different and I wasn't expecting it to take so damn long. (the game does not incorporate two hours of unique features - it was the narrator's fault - see above).
Re:It's similar to Warcraft 3
on
Review: Dragonshard
·
· Score: 4, Informative
You just hit tab when you have a diverse group selected, and the focus moves between each type of unit. You had to do the same thing in Warcraft 3 and it's not too bad.
I would add the condition that it must orbit a star, (to exclude moons)
Uh, the Earth's moon does orbit a star - our sun. It takes a little over 365 earth days to complete a revolution. As do the moons of every other solar planet.
I don't use it because a). I usually run emacs in X11 and it apparently doesn't work well outside of console mode, and b). I leave emacs running 24/7 and use gnuserv to 'send' files to it (e.g. clicking on a.c file in a file browser is configured to run gnuserv which opens the file as a new buffer in an existing emacs session) so I don't require fast startup.
It's not a very usable feature I'm afraid, but I did try it once or twice and thought "cool, I must remember that"...:)
Emacs has a feature where it can save it's entire state to disk as an executable binary. If you subsequently invoke this binary, Emacs starts up extremely quickly with the restored state, bypassing the usual initialisation and dot-emacs processing. A very neat feature IMO.
Your point is generally valid, but in my experience with the 2.6 kernel I haven't noticed any bugs. That doesn't mean they weren't there, but they didn't affect my personal experience.
What it does mean, however, is that I can skip badly bugged versions, and I don't get burned if something goes badly wrong with a release.
I use the vanilla kernels with moderately modern hardware (up to about 4 years old) and I have no stability issues whatsoever. I tend to stay within one or two versions of the bleeding edge release.
The advantages of the 2.6 kernels (udev, nptl, device driver model) outweigh the disadvantages (i.e. risk) for my situation, in my opinion.
That said, I still use linux-2.4 on my headless server, mainly because I haven't been bothered to upgrade it recently. It works fine, so I see little point in changing it.
There was a neat timing-based easter egg in Jedi Knight (Dark Forces 2) where you could find the psychorabbit Max from 'Sam and Max Hit the Road'. He carried an imperial blaster and if you pushed him out of the special room he would even fire at enemies for you. He was pretty immobile however.
I don't recall the name of the level but it was the one with the canals, bridges, houses and market stalls.
Because Google Earth wasn't written by Google - it was written by Keyhole which was subsequently acquired by Google. There's no reason to presume there will never be a Linux version (but there's also no reason to presume there will be, either).
It is now illegal to refuse to divulge your encryption keys or passwords if requested by the New Zealand Police. Before this was passed (last year? Late 2003?) you were not required to incriminate yourself by being compelled to provide access to encrypted data.
This post meant to be useful to you and not condescending:
If you're using Firefox and you were viewing the page in it's own tab, you could install SessionSaver (or some other equivalent extension) and immediately go back and re-open (accidentally?) closed tabs.
I don't think you can use the same set of virtual desktops over multiple monitors, no. Not without some sort of fancy VNC setup. I'd be really interested if anyone can prove me wrong actually...
I meant that you can't move windows from one "Screen" to another - i.e. between heads/monitors. Sure, you can move them between virtual desktops on the same "Screen" no problems.
This statement does not apply if you are using Xinerama.
If you're using X Windows, use a non-xinerama multi-head configuration and put plenty of virtual desktops on each one. Then you can pick-n-mix windows as you please. The downside is you can't move windows from one screen to another (unless you can get that GTK window migration thing working...).
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, it's similar in many respects, but does not require the Stackless infrastructure. I'm not saying either way which is better.
Just curious - in what ways do you think they are more limited? A OS threading mechanism is just a glorified state machine anyway. I agree that these sorts of 'threads' (or 'fibers' as they are known in Windows) run into troubles with blocking I/O, but with async. I/O they are quite useful once you've got some thread management mechanisms incorporated.
Weightless threads in Python:
y thrd.html
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/library/l-p
They are cooperative but far more efficient than Python's own threading model. You can easily create hundreds of thousands of concurrent threads.
If it's anything like microthreads, then it's not inefficient at all. I have played around with microthreads in python and easily achieved over a million 'concurrently-cooperative' threads.
Disclaimer: I haven't read the article yet, so maybe it has nothing to do with microthreads.
I realise in hindsight I ought to have skipped the tutorials. Unfortunately I wasn't sure if there was anything important I would otherwise miss. It would have been nice if the tutorials had provided a more comprehensive overview of what each one covered - then I could have skipped the first four at least. That said, the last two tutorials did contain very useful information but I think that it would only have taken 2 minutes to mention this in a series of tip-o-the-day popups or somesuch.
Did anyone else find the narrator's voice extremely irritating? Also, in the tutorial, he insists on telling you multiple times how to do something simple, and congratulates you patronisingly and annoyingly every time you accomplish these simple tasks. I almost gave up on the game by the end of the tutorial. Instead I played the first mission and gave up after that.
Speaking of which, it took me two hours to get through the tutorials! It might be great for complete newbies but I just wanted to know what made the game different and I wasn't expecting it to take so damn long. (the game does not incorporate two hours of unique features - it was the narrator's fault - see above).
You just hit tab when you have a diverse group selected, and the focus moves between each type of unit. You had to do the same thing in Warcraft 3 and it's not too bad.
I would add the condition that it must orbit a star, (to exclude moons)
Uh, the Earth's moon does orbit a star - our sun. It takes a little over 365 earth days to complete a revolution. As do the moons of every other solar planet.
Also, I just found this:
s
http://www.emacswiki.org/cgi-bin/wiki/DumpingEmac
Some useful bits in there if you want to give it a try.
It's an internal feature called 'dump-emacs':
l
.c file in a file browser is configured to run gnuserv which opens the file as a new buffer in an existing emacs session) so I don't require fast startup.
:)
http://www.zvon.org/other/elisp/Output/SEC661.htm
I don't use it because a). I usually run emacs in X11 and it apparently doesn't work well outside of console mode, and b). I leave emacs running 24/7 and use gnuserv to 'send' files to it (e.g. clicking on a
It's not a very usable feature I'm afraid, but I did try it once or twice and thought "cool, I must remember that"...
If you rebind the control input to the caps lock key (like the old style keyboards) then these 'crazy' keyboard combos become easier.
Emacs has a feature where it can save it's entire state to disk as an executable binary. If you subsequently invoke this binary, Emacs starts up extremely quickly with the restored state, bypassing the usual initialisation and dot-emacs processing. A very neat feature IMO.
Your point is generally valid, but in my experience with the 2.6 kernel I haven't noticed any bugs. That doesn't mean they weren't there, but they didn't affect my personal experience.
What it does mean, however, is that I can skip badly bugged versions, and I don't get burned if something goes badly wrong with a release.
I use the vanilla kernels with moderately modern hardware (up to about 4 years old) and I have no stability issues whatsoever. I tend to stay within one or two versions of the bleeding edge release.
The advantages of the 2.6 kernels (udev, nptl, device driver model) outweigh the disadvantages (i.e. risk) for my situation, in my opinion.
That said, I still use linux-2.4 on my headless server, mainly because I haven't been bothered to upgrade it recently. It works fine, so I see little point in changing it.
There was a neat timing-based easter egg in Jedi Knight (Dark Forces 2) where you could find the psychorabbit Max from 'Sam and Max Hit the Road'. He carried an imperial blaster and if you pushed him out of the special room he would even fire at enemies for you. He was pretty immobile however.
I don't recall the name of the level but it was the one with the canals, bridges, houses and market stalls.
They don't need to do this - it doesn't run under Wine for me anyway - I've tried :(
I wouldn't say not releasing a Linux port is anti-Linux.
:)
I hope I didn't come across negative - I'd definitely like to see a Google Earth for Linux too
I'd like more resolution too - at the moment, the largest sports stadium in my city is 4 green pixels wide.
Because Google Earth wasn't written by Google - it was written by Keyhole which was subsequently acquired by Google. There's no reason to presume there will never be a Linux version (but there's also no reason to presume there will be, either).
It is now illegal to refuse to divulge your encryption keys or passwords if requested by the New Zealand Police. Before this was passed (last year? Late 2003?) you were not required to incriminate yourself by being compelled to provide access to encrypted data.
This post meant to be useful to you and not condescending:
If you're using Firefox and you were viewing the page in it's own tab, you could install SessionSaver (or some other equivalent extension) and immediately go back and re-open (accidentally?) closed tabs.
I don't think you can use the same set of virtual desktops over multiple monitors, no. Not without some sort of fancy VNC setup. I'd be really interested if anyone can prove me wrong actually...
I meant that you can't move windows from one "Screen" to another - i.e. between heads/monitors. Sure, you can move them between virtual desktops on the same "Screen" no problems.
This statement does not apply if you are using Xinerama.
If you're using X Windows, use a non-xinerama multi-head configuration and put plenty of virtual desktops on each one. Then you can pick-n-mix windows as you please. The downside is you can't move windows from one screen to another (unless you can get that GTK window migration thing working...).
Exactly. How could you interpret my comment otherwise?
It's not about what's being done with the score (like the OP said, it's in the public domain), it's about what's being done with the performances.
It is the performances, not the score that is under debate.