Not much use outside AI or research? Hmmm, tell that to Paul Graham, who wrote Viaweb in Lisp, which Yahoo then bought for $40 million and called it Yahoo!Store. I don't think AutoCAD counts as AI either. See alu.cliki.net for some idea of how it's currently being used.
Consideration does not have to be money. Probably the most used definition is "some right, interest, profit or benefit accruing to the one party or some forbearance, detriment, loss or responsibility given, suffered or undertaken by the other." The source is what SCO is giving as consideration. Losing the ability to freely discuss the code except as SCO permits is what the other party would give as consideration.
IAAL, and this is not a "contract" until the other party signs it. Unitl then, it is just words on paper. No one is being forced to enter into this agreement, and in fact most have decided not to.
A "unilateral contract" is the acknowledgment of one party to do something for (or to) another party, without requiring that party's consent or consideration on their part. Calling the draft of a proposed contract "unilateral" simply because it was drawn by one party is misleading.
There is, in fact, mutual consideration here for those that sign, regardless of how limiting it may seem.
They got M$ to cough up $10 - $20 million in license fees, and they haven't even used up their legal budget yet. All they need is one or two more like that, and all the executives can cash out and go home before the stock crumbles...
Another reason many programmers don't use threads is that their language of choice (usually C or C++) doesn't natively support threads as a concept; they have to create a mental abstraction of threads on top of the language in order to understand the concept in the first place.
I had been a "hobby" programmer with C (then C++) for 15 years, and not once did I truly understand how to implement threading in an efficient manner in any of my projects which might have benefitted theoretically from threads. This was a limitation of the language, not the OS. However, now that I have discovered Ada95 (not "ADA": it's not an acronymn), which has built-in language support and features for threads, it is becomming almost second nature to think in terms of threads. What a wonderful language!
The bad press this language has recieved (being "designed by committee" is the common complaint) is entirely undeserved, and is usually spouted off by people who haven't actually used it. I find it far easier to maintain the code of even relatively small projects than it ever was with C++. I now shudder to think that I ever thought C++ was a good language. I'll never go back!
> Much of beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I think Ada [sic] is much easier on the eyes than most of the other languages that are popular this week.
Excuse me, but why the "[sic]"? It actually isAda. It is notADA. Ada is named after Ada Lovelace, who is considered to be the first programmer. It is not an acronym for anything, and it is not spelled with all caps.
And it is a wonderful language, despite all the "designed by committee" crap floating around, posted by people who have never programmed with it. After 15 years of using C then C++, I started searching for a new language. I had a hobby project I was working on for 2 years suddenly start crashing. I knew it was pointer-related, but I tried for two solid weeks, using all the debugging tools I could find, and I still couldn't track down the bug. In frustration I threw the towel in on C/C++.
I had to have a compiled language that produced fast code (at least after debuggin). That ruled out Python and Ruby (which I would use in a heartbeat if it was compiled and produced fast code) and Java and any other byte-code language. My other requirement was that it had to be very secure in it's error checking, and easy for me to maintain. Look around. There's only one language that fits that bill: Ada95.
Yes, there was a steeper learning curve than I bargained for (helped by the excellent online tutorial Lovelace [http://www.adahome.com/Tutorials/Lovelace/lovelac e.htm], but it has been well worth the effort. I just love the compiler finding errors before I crash something! And the speed is faster than the C/C++ code I used before.
Slashdot Mirror
He says in the article: "Both kernels are monolithic". I thought the Windows kernel was monopolithic.
Forget weather forecasts over the internet. You should build your own barometer.
I loaded the .gif and used Photoshop to find the exact center. No matter how hard I tried, I couldn't find SCO. :)
I personally find it hard to believe that there are NO skeletons in the Linux kernel closet.
It is exactly this reasoning that is behind the "surprising" stock value.
...applications that the industrial world finds for embedded Linum.
:)
Shouldn't that be Linii ?
Not much use outside AI or research? Hmmm, tell that to Paul Graham, who wrote Viaweb in Lisp, which Yahoo then bought for $40 million and called it Yahoo!Store. I don't think AutoCAD counts as AI either. See alu.cliki.net for some idea of how it's currently being used.
Anyone else getting a flashback to when Diablo II was in stores No, but I got whiplash when I saw the $899.95 pricetag! :)
Consideration does not have to be money. Probably the most used definition is "some right, interest, profit or benefit accruing to the one party or some forbearance, detriment, loss or responsibility given, suffered or undertaken by the other." The source is what SCO is giving as consideration. Losing the ability to freely discuss the code except as SCO permits is what the other party would give as consideration.
IAAL, and this is not a "contract" until the other party signs it. Unitl then, it is just words on paper. No one is being forced to enter into this agreement, and in fact most have decided not to. A "unilateral contract" is the acknowledgment of one party to do something for (or to) another party, without requiring that party's consent or consideration on their part. Calling the draft of a proposed contract "unilateral" simply because it was drawn by one party is misleading. There is, in fact, mutual consideration here for those that sign, regardless of how limiting it may seem.
They got M$ to cough up $10 - $20 million in license fees, and they haven't even used up their legal budget yet. All they need is one or two more like that, and all the executives can cash out and go home before the stock crumbles...
10 spelling and gramar errors in a post barely over one line. Good work! :)
I had been a "hobby" programmer with C (then C++) for 15 years, and not once did I truly understand how to implement threading in an efficient manner in any of my projects which might have benefitted theoretically from threads. This was a limitation of the language, not the OS. However, now that I have discovered Ada95 (not "ADA": it's not an acronymn), which has built-in language support and features for threads, it is becomming almost second nature to think in terms of threads. What a wonderful language!
The bad press this language has recieved (being "designed by committee" is the common complaint) is entirely undeserved, and is usually spouted off by people who haven't actually used it. I find it far easier to maintain the code of even relatively small projects than it ever was with C++. I now shudder to think that I ever thought C++ was a good language. I'll never go back!
> Much of beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I think Ada [sic] is much easier on the eyes than most of the other languages that are popular this week.
c e.htm], but it has been well worth the effort. I just love the compiler finding errors before I crash something! And the speed is faster than the C/C++ code I used before.
Excuse me, but why the "[sic]"? It actually is Ada. It is not ADA. Ada is named after Ada Lovelace, who is considered to be the first programmer. It is not an acronym for anything, and it is not spelled with all caps.
And it is a wonderful language, despite all the "designed by committee" crap floating around, posted by people who have never programmed with it. After 15 years of using C then C++, I started searching for a new language. I had a hobby project I was working on for 2 years suddenly start crashing. I knew it was pointer-related, but I tried for two solid weeks, using all the debugging tools I could find, and I still couldn't track down the bug. In frustration I threw the towel in on C/C++.
I had to have a compiled language that produced fast code (at least after debuggin). That ruled out Python and Ruby (which I would use in a heartbeat if it was compiled and produced fast code) and Java and any other byte-code language. My other requirement was that it had to be very secure in it's error checking, and easy for me to maintain. Look around. There's only one language that fits that bill: Ada95.
Yes, there was a steeper learning curve than I bargained for (helped by the excellent online tutorial Lovelace [http://www.adahome.com/Tutorials/Lovelace/lovela