With all the hype over design patterns (usually by OO zealots who couldn't code in any other paradigm if their lives depended on it) you'd think no one had managed to write complex systems before they came along. In fact it seems to me that since the false prophet known as OO with all its attendant accolytes came along (design patterns being one of them) programming has actually got harder, less efficient and far more costly.
IMO its time to ditch all this high level buzzword trash coding methodology and go back to something a bit lower level whereby coders actually have to put some thought into what their writing and hopefully produce a fast , efficient end result. Not just use someone elses lego bricks to build some bloatware system thats has all the stability and robustness of a 1 legged stool. Far too many clueless idiots are coders these days. Its a bit like car maintenance - you have the people who can change the oil and air filter and plug in a new alternator out of a parts box and then call themselves mechanics , but the real mechanics know otherwise.
"Why are we still coding in low level 3GLs like Java 47 years after FORTRAN was invented?"
Quite. And why do we still have wheels on vehicles 10,000 years after the wheel was invented? Surely someone could have come up with something better by now!
Indeed. It seems to me we've bred a whole generation of new programmers who are great at thinking up fancy methods to use but useless at actually solving the problem at hand so what you get is bloated code that they've chucked everything in their limited repertoir in to get it working because they can't think "low level" and create a solution on their own. They have to use other peoples algorithms/methods/patterns or they're lost.
Theres no reason to design or use an inefficient protocol whatever the year. Try and get your lonely braincell into gear before you reply you clueless muppet.
True , but implemeting a protocol that can handle 2 streams of data is trivial and since ftp already uses a protocol anyway....
PLus having 2 open TCP streams is wasteful of resources, not so much these days , but imagine if you were running a TCP stack on a machine with only a few dozen K of memory like back in the 70s. Its a bad design.
"It's generally considered common knowledge around these parts"
Oh well it must be true then. After all , who needs empirical evidence when you've got common knowledge. Hell , why did we even bother with the last 200 years of science when we could have just asked local yokels for an explanation for everything!
Agreed. I just wonder what was being smoked at the time when whoever it was decided that 2 open streams were needed and that the server needs in some instances to connect back to the client to make a data connection!
"Language has to evolve, otherwise it's not getting any better"
You're confusing evolution with change. Languages change , they don't "evolve". Theres no natural selection going on with the most efficient word usage etc. If there were then english would never have come out of the far more logical (grammatically and with spelling) anglo-saxon tongue. They simply change by random drift depending on the prevailing societal conditions and fashions at any given time.
"The issue found with HT is that the two logical CPUs on a single core share the same caches "
Thats a seriously nasty hardware "bug"! Didn't anyone at intel even consider the security implications with this or were they just beaten over the head by the marketing guys who were desperate to get one over AMD??
Ok , apple wanted to use the (allegedly) superior processing power of the intel CPU , but does that mean they had to carry over all the antiquated baggage of the generic PC design with it? Could they not have come up with a 21st century for a computer that just happens to use intel rather than do a Me-Too and just create a bog standard PC that simply has an extra chip in to allow MacOS/X to install? Seems to me a very lazy and uninspired way to get a few more MFlops. Has Steve Jobs lost his way perhaps?
>1) How about package management? No one can tell me Slackware has good package management.
It uses.tgz which for me is a godsend. No farting about with irritating package management systems that don't tell you what their doing.
>2) How about lack of hardware detection?
I'll agree thats an issue for a novice but setting up the correct modules for an experienced admin isn't in issue. Besides which hardware detection has a nasty habit of going tits up on install and boot as I've seen in mandrake and redhat occasionally.
3) How about lack of commercial support? Yes some exists but I wouldn't be surprised if Linspire has more than slackware now.
Come on, thats hardly slackwares fault. As for oracle i used to run an Oracle 8.1 server on a slackware box. Apart from tweaking a couple of install files I had no further problems.
>5) How about the lack of good administration tools? Sure somethings like webmin and linuxconf can be installed but I hardly call them good admin tools.
Sorry , you've lost me here. You can't claim to be a serious professional then gripe because something only has standard unix admin tools. Sure , go learn COAS or Yast etc. Fat lot of use they'll be too you on Solaris or HP-UX or AIX etc etc. Any serious unix professional uses more than one version of unix and we don't bother learning every 2 bit admin tool for each one , we learn the standard tools and use them everywhere.
>I have nothing against Slackware personally. However as a Linux professional, I cannot recommend slackware as anything more than a hobbyist's distro.
I think you'll find its the other way around. Suse etc with their easy install for dummies and pretty GUI tools and for the clueless hobbiest. Slackware is for people who know what they're doing and want a fast, efficient, uncluttered system to run 24/7 unmonitored in a server enviroment.
"Heck it's alot easier looking for the sendmail initscript in/etc/init.d to edit the startup than searching through one massive script"
Yeah , its real tough doing grep/etc/rc.d sendmail
And there isn't one massive startup script , thats BSD itself you're thinking of. Perhaps you should check out how Slackware actually does it before you critiscise.
Lets just hope for the enviroments sake that this aircraft never gets built. We're fucking up the atmosphere enough as it is with the normal aircraft. The last thing the world needs right now is another supersonic fuel sucking CO2 spewing white elephant that allows the rich to get to a destination a few hours quicker.
Even your average Dumbfuck Joe isn't that stupid. Even he knows his PC isn't the internet just like he knows his TV isn't the TV station itself and they're arn't little men inside the set making the programs.
Yeah , high perfomance, sure. That'll be why a previous firm I worked for when "upgrading" their software to run under a VM instead of a binary ended up having to upgrade their servers too. That'll be why every single java program I've ever run , runs like a slug compared the equivalent non VM progran. You java zealots can preach your religion as much as you like , but people like me who actually have to work with this horrid VM system (I have nothing against the language itself, especially when compiled to native code) know the truth of it.
Slashdot Mirror
With all the hype over design patterns (usually by OO zealots who couldn't code in any other paradigm if their lives depended on it) you'd think no one had managed to write complex systems before they came along. In fact it seems to me that since the false prophet known as OO with all its attendant accolytes came along (design patterns being one of them) programming has actually got harder, less efficient and far more costly.
IMO its time to ditch all this high level buzzword trash coding methodology and go back to something a bit lower level whereby coders actually have to put some thought into what their writing and hopefully produce a fast , efficient end result. Not just use someone elses lego bricks to build some bloatware system thats has all the stability and robustness of a 1 legged stool. Far too many clueless idiots are coders these days. Its a bit like car maintenance - you have the people who can change the oil and air filter and plug in a new alternator out of a parts box and then call themselves mechanics , but the real mechanics know otherwise.
"Why are we still coding in low level 3GLs like Java 47 years after FORTRAN was invented?"
Quite. And why do we still have wheels on vehicles 10,000 years after the wheel was invented? Surely someone could have come up with something better by now!
Agree with you about patterns tho.
Indeed. It seems to me we've bred a whole generation of new programmers who are great at thinking up fancy methods to use but useless at actually solving the problem at hand so what you get is bloated code that they've chucked everything in their limited repertoir in to get it working because they can't think "low level" and create a solution on their own. They have to use other peoples algorithms/methods/patterns or they're lost.
...until you connect it to the internet for the 3rd time. Then you'll be sorry!
Theres no reason to design or use an inefficient protocol whatever the year. Try and get your lonely braincell into gear before you reply you clueless muppet.
True , but implemeting a protocol that can handle 2 streams of data is trivial and since ftp already uses a protocol anyway....
PLus having 2 open TCP streams is wasteful of resources, not so much these days , but imagine if you were running a TCP stack on a machine with only a few dozen K of memory like back in the 70s. Its a bad design.
"It's generally considered common knowledge around these parts"
Oh well it must be true then. After all , who needs empirical evidence when you've got common knowledge. Hell , why did we even bother with the last 200 years of science when we could have just asked local yokels for an explanation for everything!
Agreed. I just wonder what was being smoked at the time when whoever it was decided that 2 open streams were needed and that the server needs in some instances to connect back to the client to make a data connection!
Yeah , sure there are. Lets see some evidence instead of the usual "they're bigger back in the US of A" rhetoric.
"Language has to evolve, otherwise it's not getting any better"
You're confusing evolution with change. Languages change , they don't "evolve". Theres no natural selection going on with the most efficient word usage etc. If there were then english would never have come out of the far more logical (grammatically and with spelling) anglo-saxon tongue. They simply change by random drift depending on the prevailing societal conditions and fashions at any given time.
In the article I noticed this:
"The issue found with HT is that the two logical CPUs on a single core share the same caches "
Thats a seriously nasty hardware "bug"! Didn't anyone at intel even consider the security implications with this or were they just beaten over the head by the marketing guys who were desperate to get one over AMD??
Sorry , does that mean its good or bad? I genuinely have no clue from your post. Perhaps you might try writing english next time.
Ok , apple wanted to use the (allegedly) superior processing power of the intel CPU , but does that mean they had to carry over all the antiquated baggage of the generic PC design with it? Could they not have come up with a 21st century for a computer that just happens to use intel rather than do a Me-Too and just create a bog standard PC that simply has an extra chip in to allow MacOS/X to install? Seems to me a very lazy and uninspired way to get a few more MFlops. Has Steve Jobs lost his way perhaps?
>1) How about package management? No one can tell me Slackware has good package management.
.tgz which for me is a godsend. No farting about with irritating package management systems that don't tell you what their doing.
It uses
>2) How about lack of hardware detection?
I'll agree thats an issue for a novice but setting up the correct modules for an experienced admin isn't in issue. Besides which hardware detection has a nasty habit of going tits up on install and boot as I've seen in mandrake and redhat occasionally.
3) How about lack of commercial support? Yes some exists but I wouldn't be surprised if Linspire has more than slackware now.
Come on, thats hardly slackwares fault. As for oracle i used to run an Oracle 8.1 server on a slackware box. Apart from tweaking a couple of install files I had no further problems.
>5) How about the lack of good administration tools? Sure somethings like webmin and linuxconf can be installed but I hardly call them good admin tools.
Sorry , you've lost me here. You can't claim to be a serious professional then gripe because something only has standard unix admin tools. Sure , go learn COAS or Yast etc. Fat lot of use they'll be too you on Solaris or HP-UX or AIX etc etc. Any serious unix professional uses more than one version of unix and we don't bother learning every 2 bit admin tool for each one , we learn the standard tools and use them everywhere.
>I have nothing against Slackware personally. However as a Linux professional, I cannot recommend slackware as anything more than a hobbyist's distro.
I think you'll find its the other way around. Suse etc with their easy install for dummies and pretty GUI tools and for the clueless hobbiest. Slackware is for people who know what they're doing and want a fast, efficient, uncluttered system to run 24/7 unmonitored in a server enviroment.
If thats your only gripe you might as well complain that theres only 1 process that carries out the functions of init. Geez.
"Heck it's alot easier looking for the sendmail initscript in /etc/init.d to edit the startup than searching through one massive script"
/etc/rc.d sendmail
Yeah , its real tough doing grep
And there isn't one massive startup script , thats BSD itself you're thinking of. Perhaps you should check out how Slackware actually does it before you critiscise.
Lets just hope for the enviroments sake that this aircraft never gets built. We're fucking up the atmosphere enough as it is with the normal aircraft. The last thing the world needs right now is another supersonic fuel sucking CO2 spewing white elephant that allows the rich to get to a destination a few hours quicker.
Do you work for the chinese government by any chance? You certainly sound like them.
..they'd simply pull out of the Chinese market.
But whats human rights and freedom when theres
market share and online presence at stake. Right?
Uranus jokes were old when the solar system was still forming.
Even your average Dumbfuck Joe isn't that stupid. Even he knows his PC isn't the internet just like he knows his TV isn't the TV station itself and they're arn't little men inside the set making the programs.
Yeah , high perfomance, sure. That'll be why a
previous firm I worked for when "upgrading" their
software to run under a VM instead of a binary
ended up having to upgrade their servers too. That'll be why every single java program I've ever run , runs like a slug compared the equivalent non VM progran. You java zealots can preach your religion as much as you like , but people like me who actually have to work with this horrid VM system (I have nothing against the language itself, especially when compiled to native code) know the truth of it.
Not so much Bit Torrent as Bit Dribble then knowing Java VMs amazing data throughput abilities.
"It is nearly possible now to build a little robot that emulates a bee's behavior "
BS. We're not even close.
That'll be why Bees can communicate to other bees the location of certain flowers I suppose.