You have to have the error handling somewhere. The GP happened to specify the scenario I used. In the end you have to do either a fp != NULL or a try-catch, unless it's a fatal exception which I didn't protest against.
But your functions are no longer as simple and orthogonal as they were before. Making sure that your file isn't null is now part of the program logic that shouldn't be dealing with that.
I don't see how that follows, unless you mean that the error wasn't handled within openfile()? (That was because the GP specified this scenario.) You still have to have the error handling code somewhere.
So why can't openfile() simply return NULL? Obviously an unsuccessful operation.
I don't mind exceptions, except when non-fatal ones are thrown by a library. A module should always either A) handle its non-fatal exceptions or B) provide a secondary implementation that uses return values rather than exceptions.
I've been working on a paradigm where all functions return a Result object which can easily be used as a replacement for a normal return (op() for the parameterized type, C++ scoping automatically destroying the object at the end of scope etc.)
I don't know. I don't personally mind C but I'd be much more inclined to write modules in C++.
In any case, I think any application that uses the mentioned features of the language might get a boost too, from what I understood (didn't read the WP).
If the Democrats are right about why the Republicans are trying to exclude the black people on that list, they have to concede that the white people were more likely to vote Republican.
Yes and no. Statistically speaking, a person who votes Republican is more likely to be white than a person who votes Democrat. (It's incorrect to say that 'white people were more likely to vote Republican' because the relation is inverted.)
It's not logically consistant to claim that the whites were going to split their vote evenly but that the "minority" voters were going to vote Democrat. If that was reality, Republicans would never win.
Don't fool yourself. It's all from the same source. They want to turn the U.S. into a christiofascist empire. Usually McCain is more sensible, though. Maybe he's just the messenger?
That's it. You've lost your right to the title 'Marxist'. Please change it to 'Stalinist' or 'Insane' at your earliest convenience. Thank you for not further spoiling the good name of Marxism like Communism was.
If you really wanted to transform the politicial landscape of the country, the best place to start would be the Congressional elections. There is a fair amount of seats available and the constituency is fairly well locality-bound. If it could be arranged that all CE would be held as either IRV or Approval, chances are that even on the first round, there'd be three to five third-party candidates elected. Not really enough to make a difference during that term, but certainly a nudge to the right direction with the relative flood of media exposure.
The problem is that the ones most likely to 'win' a group are more likely exceptionally good in A) lying, B) manipulating and C) other malevolent people skills than just 'good guys'.
You know what's sad? The one who actually admits to having made a mistake (for preference one that was since rectified) would get a landslide of votes.
I can't understand why the advisers are not jumping on this.
well, getting rid of the non-constitutional institutions. The fed, to me, _is_ a company. One that has a monopoly over what it does and can force it's customers to do whatever it wants. I trust private companies which can't force me to do something.
You're confusing the concepts of what the government should be versus what the government to some extent is.
The government should protect its citizens, whether against threats from foreign nations or domestic companies.
Er, how is it the liberal* leanings of CBS that stop them from airing a documentary about a conservative ex-president at the behest of the family and most of the Republican party?
* Idiots using the word 'liberal': liberalism refers to free trade, low taxation and low government oversight.
Any poll or questionnaire such as this is biased. If a question is "Is it OK for the US to take unilateral action against an enemy" and 'Y' goes for Bush while 'N' goes to Kerry, then it's a biased question since neither its premises nor conclusions are accurate. This kind of stuff serves to further the Republican image of Kerry. There are, I'm sure, other questionnaires in which the situation is reversed.
Of course one could argue that it's up to the intelligence of the reader to select the 'right' option -as in, decode the media speak to recognize the position they assume matches yours the closest.
I've advocated the quiz from OnTheIssues.org previously and will do so here again. They are doing an excellent job explaining what each answer option really means.
A rich person makes, say, $350 000.00 per year. A working poor makes, say, $35 000.00 per year (which is more than I do).
If we grant both a two-percentage-point tax decrease, they will respectively get $7000.00 and $700 back.
The next part of the evaluation deals with the redistribution of those funds. Which do you think will put a greater portion of their tax cut back into the direct market (rent, mortgage, food etc.) and which to the indirect (savings, retirement, investments)?
If the race still seems tight to you, consider where the money is coming from. Which would you rather be without: sewer maintenance or botox injections?
Anyone attempting to learn Dvorak may do well by not painting over/switching/etc. the QWERTY keys. Just put a reference right below your keyboard so you can glance at it, otherwise keep your eyes on the screen and fingers on the home row. You'll learn faster and pick it up in touch-type at the same time.
Oh, and reserve about two weeks for a reasonable speed.
Slashdot Mirror
You have to have the error handling somewhere. The GP happened to specify the scenario I used. In the end you have to do either a fp != NULL or a try-catch, unless it's a fatal exception which I didn't protest against.
I don't see how that follows, unless you mean that the error wasn't handled within openfile()? (That was because the GP specified this scenario.) You still have to have the error handling code somewhere.
So why can't openfile() simply return NULL? Obviously an unsuccessful operation.
I don't mind exceptions, except when non-fatal ones are thrown by a library. A module should always either A) handle its non-fatal exceptions or B) provide a secondary implementation that uses return values rather than exceptions.
I've been working on a paradigm where all functions return a Result object which can easily be used as a replacement for a normal return (op() for the parameterized type, C++ scoping automatically destroying the object at the end of scope etc.)
I don't know. I don't personally mind C but I'd be much more inclined to write modules in C++.
In any case, I think any application that uses the mentioned features of the language might get a boost too, from what I understood (didn't read the WP).
The 'flip-flop' charges have been refuted many times, most recently by spinsanity.com.
Yes and no. Statistically speaking, a person who votes Republican is more likely to be white than a person who votes Democrat. (It's incorrect to say that 'white people were more likely to vote Republican' because the relation is inverted.)
I don't think anyone's claiming that.
Don't fool yourself. It's all from the same source. They want to turn the U.S. into a christiofascist empire. Usually McCain is more sensible, though. Maybe he's just the messenger?
That's it. You've lost your right to the title 'Marxist'. Please change it to 'Stalinist' or 'Insane' at your earliest convenience. Thank you for not further spoiling the good name of Marxism like Communism was.
You're taking that too literally. The relation between 1:1 and 1:1 is the same as 1:10 and 1:10. There's only a problem if 1:1 and 1:2. Right?
If you really wanted to transform the politicial landscape of the country, the best place to start would be the Congressional elections. There is a fair amount of seats available and the constituency is fairly well locality-bound. If it could be arranged that all CE would be held as either IRV or Approval, chances are that even on the first round, there'd be three to five third-party candidates elected. Not really enough to make a difference during that term, but certainly a nudge to the right direction with the relative flood of media exposure.
The problem is that the ones most likely to 'win' a group are more likely exceptionally good in A) lying, B) manipulating and C) other malevolent people skills than just 'good guys'.
Unfortunately the shipment was accidentally sent to D.C.
Let me make one thing perfectly clear.
Americans hold their leaders to incredibly low standards.
You know what's sad? The one who actually admits to having made a mistake (for preference one that was since rectified) would get a landslide of votes.
I can't understand why the advisers are not jumping on this.
Perhaps the national election registration and party primary registration shouldn't have anything to do with eachother in the first place?
You're confusing the concepts of what the government should be versus what the government to some extent is.
The government should protect its citizens, whether against threats from foreign nations or domestic companies.
Er, how is it the liberal* leanings of CBS that stop them from airing a documentary about a conservative ex-president at the behest of the family and most of the Republican party?
* Idiots using the word 'liberal': liberalism refers to free trade, low taxation and low government oversight.
Stern and Limbaugh come on at set times and their agenda is usually well-known.
The newsstation is pre-empting national programming in favour of this.
But that's not the point.
Any poll or questionnaire such as this is biased. If a question is "Is it OK for the US to take unilateral action against an enemy" and 'Y' goes for Bush while 'N' goes to Kerry, then it's a biased question since neither its premises nor conclusions are accurate. This kind of stuff serves to further the Republican image of Kerry. There are, I'm sure, other questionnaires in which the situation is reversed.
Of course one could argue that it's up to the intelligence of the reader to select the 'right' option -as in, decode the media speak to recognize the position they assume matches yours the closest.
I've advocated the quiz from OnTheIssues.org previously and will do so here again. They are doing an excellent job explaining what each answer option really means.
The Arabs? Remember the whole thing about Egypt, Red Sea etc.?
A rich person makes, say, $350 000.00 per year. A working poor makes, say, $35 000.00 per year (which is more than I do).
If we grant both a two-percentage-point tax decrease, they will respectively get $7000.00 and $700 back.
The next part of the evaluation deals with the redistribution of those funds. Which do you think will put a greater portion of their tax cut back into the direct market (rent, mortgage, food etc.) and which to the indirect (savings, retirement, investments)?
If the race still seems tight to you, consider where the money is coming from. Which would you rather be without: sewer maintenance or botox injections?
Links, please.
I'm pretty sure the idiot who set the store called the "French Laundry" on fire when the 'Freedom Fries' lunacy was abound was a Republican.
Yeah, MS positively oozes motives.
Actually, four versions behind is often exactly what you want on a webserver.
Anyone attempting to learn Dvorak may do well by not painting over/switching/etc. the QWERTY keys. Just put a reference right below your keyboard so you can glance at it, otherwise keep your eyes on the screen and fingers on the home row. You'll learn faster and pick it up in touch-type at the same time.
Oh, and reserve about two weeks for a reasonable speed.
.