Has reporting spam helped you reduce your incoming spam? No? I didn't think so. Why do you report it? The spammers aren't wasting your time--you are wasting your own time. For snail mail, do you take the time to write to each spammer to get your name removed from their mailing lists? No? Then why do you do a similar thing with spam?
Does hitting the delete key 20 times a day (or whatever) really take that much effort? How about using filters/rules or Bayesian filters then? Set them up once and you save time.
Think about it this way. I was "on" the internet back before the Web was created. Back in 1986. Back then, business was discouraged from using the Internet altogether. Now, business can use the Internet. That has led to some abuses. Yes, that sucks. But spam really doesn't cost that much unless you waste your time dealing with spam in the most ineffective manner possible (yes, your method of dealing with it is ineffective).
Let me ask you this. How the hell does spam intrude into your privacy? How do "illegitamite[sic] marketers hawking mostly 100% scam wares" intrude in the middle of your personal and business conversations? Last I checked, no spammer has been able to paste in a spam ad in the middle of an email from a friend or business colleague. There is no invasion of privacy. Hell, once again, good filters/rules and/or Bayesian filters can make it so that you don't see *any* spam.
If the Internet is no a great resource for communication and productivity any more for you, you *really* need to look at alternative ways to deal with spam. For me, about 75% of the email I get is spam. But it doesn't affect me at all. My wife, who is not as much of a computer guy as me (she relies on the "delete" button to handle spam) spends...oh...about 20 seconds a day hitting the delete button for spam. It simply isn't that much of a productivity breaker *unless you deal with it in an ineffective manner*.
You claim that the spammers have profited at the system's expense. But, last I checked, ISPs tend to pay for bandwidth at a flat rate per month, whether the bandwidth is used or not. I would bet that far less than 1% of the bandwidth of the Internet is consumed by spam. The costs of this bandwidth are negligible because ISPs don't have to buy additional bandwidth as a result of it.
Law enforcement and government are doing nothing effective to stop it because there are many precedents for allowing spam. I get about 20 snail mails a day that are unsolicited. I get about 4 snail mails a day that are solicited. Why don't we go after these spammers instead? They have a much greater cost to society, both in terms of the costs of pollution (making paper isn't too good for the environment) and the costs of our landfills. Snail mail only takes up electrons and negligible amounts of bandwidth (negligible compared to the bandwidth used for more "legitimate" business uses, like porn and surfing the web).
Just because you don't agree with the content of spam, do you think you have the right to shut down others' rights to receive the content? Maybe some people actually buy the stuff offered in spam. I don't. But I don't want to shut down another person's right to buy something offered from spam.
If spam were really such a severe problem in terms of costs and productivity, then I'm sure some enterprising soul would simply make an email replacement that operates on a different port that charges the sender for each item received. But, quite frankly, spam doesn't cost that much, and doesn't impact productivity that much (except for thin-skinned people like yourself). Nobody (other than Cringely) is calling for such an email replacement.
Can't you spend the energy you use fighting spam in another more productive way? It's clear your efforts won't make spam go away. How about you replace your quixotic endeavors with more productive uses? Become a Big Brother to an inner city youth. Donate time building housing for the underprivileged. Spend time supporting the arts in your neighborhood. Or, hell, go ahead and build that email replacement that you seem to want so badly. Anything is better than spending hours trying to blacklist spammers that have sent you 10 emails today.
I hope you're joking, or the post is a troll. Have spammers caused you that much trouble? Is it that hard to push the "delete" button? Have you not yet figured out how to use filters/rules? Since you're reading Slashdot, have you not checked out any of the various Bayesian filters? Do other trivial matters bring out this type of rage?
Look, if I could somehow give my preference to receive all my snail junk mail as email, I would. Junk email doesn't consume paper. Junk email doesn't consume that much bandwidth (and if it does for you, perhaps you should have your libido checked...one porn photo requires about 100x as much bandwith to send as a typical spam).
When developing your coding standards, categorize the "rules" into three categories: recommended, guidelines, and rules.
Recommendations are really just suggestions. For instance, the last coding standards I helped to author we recommended that open brackets (the '{' character) be placed at the end of the expression rather than on a separate line. This recommendation was not followed by some, but it really isn't that critical towards code readability. For the record, I actually like putting open brackets on new lines, so that the open & close brackets line up. I did change my practices, but I occasionally forgot, and didn't get yelled at since it was merely a "recommendation".
Guidelines are "rules" to be followed at all times unless there is a really good reason not to. For instance, we had a guideline that instructions should not be divided between lines, and that only one instruction should appear per line. Well, if you have a really long piece of logic, splitting the instruction across two lines makes sense. Conditional expressions (i.e. something of the form of "(ab)? a : b") counted as a single instruction.
Rules must be followed at all times. For instance, one rule we used was no "goto" statements. Pretty simple and obvious.
We found that by having the rules in this form, people that would categorically reject some of the guidelines under different circumstances were more receptive towards the guidelines when presented in this manner. So long as they weren't forced to adopt these "rules" they somehow seemed less ominous. YMMV.
I think you're the one with the mis-informed Slashdot post. I'm not sure you've ever worked in a M$ shop, but in my experience very few of these will accept CVS, or any other open-source software solution for that matter. Sure, CVS and Subversion work, but VSS will be the solution most M$ shops use.
Perforce, Subversion, and CVS are all decent solutions, and all tend to have better reliability than VSS. But I've found that most M$ shops stick with M$ solutions for most tasks. If you're stuck with VSS, follow the suggestions outlined by the grandfather post.
As for a drag & drop UI for CVS, check out TortoiseCVS. It is the bomb. Integrates with Windows Explorer, so files get color-coded depending upon their check-in status. Right-click to commit changes. Totally seamless. Wish I had something like it under Linux.
Two reasons. One: we don't pay for local calls. Most coutries outside the U.S. have per-call charges on local calls from landlines. In the U.S., unlimited local calls are bundled with phone service. Two: we made the decision to share area codes between mobile phones and land lines (what most countries would call prefixes--the U.S. is so big, with so many phones (many cities have 10-digit dialing for local calls, and NY is considering 11-digit dialing), that the area code is more analogous to most countries' prefixes--after electronic switching in the mid-80s, the prefix does not have to be tied to a geographical area).
So, if we don't pay for local calls, and there's no easy way to distinguish landlines from mobile phones, it's really tough for us to charge callers for calls to mobile phones that are local.
I get lots of international calls on my mobile phone. No caller ID on those calls. I also keep receiving a phone call from a fax machine with an unlisted number. I cannot afford to ignore unlisted numbers. So I get charged for someone with an unlisted number trying to send a fax to my mobile phone?!? That's not right.
Hahahahahahaha! You think Telstra has set up a real phone system? Maybe your mobile phone doesn't bill you for incoming calls (yeah, that's kind of stupid, but the US made a decision a while ago to integrate land lines with cell numbers vis-a-vis the prefix, so now there's no easy way to tell a cell number from a landline, and we don't pay for local calls on landlines). But Telstra has to be one of the world's most f'ed up companies. I feel sorry for you that you have such a miserable phone company.
At least you don't have to pay for that call you receive. That's the real kicker here--in the U.S. the mobile phone owner has to pay for both incoming and outgoing calls.
I'm not sure the root of this thread really was a troll. I think he/she was stating his/her opinion. J2EE is not perfect, and is tremendously complex. After all, it addresses a very complex problem--distributed, reliable, scalable multi-tier computing.
However, if you're looking for a problem with the J2EE spec, look no further than entity EJBs. These things are seriously screwed up, and scream of an implementation based upon a poorly designed predecessor (CORBA) that was rushed out the door. By comparison, JDO really does things right.
As for Java's popularity, I think it really comes down to competition. When J2EE was first released, it really didn't have any competition. Even today, no Microsoft solution really matches up to J2EE in terms of availability (many J2EE implementations already exist), features, and scalability. That said, don't discount.Net. There's a lot in.Net to be liked if you don't get caught up in the religious battles. And that's coming from a Java guy.
What companent is JBoss? I thought it covered pretty much every part of the J2EE spec now that the Resin web/JSP server has been integrated.
Actually, I think IBM is being threatened. WebSphere is horribly overpriced, buggy, and very late to support new J2EE specifications. While IBM will still get hardware and integration revenue from their customers, I think they will miss the WebSphere revenue. IBM probably worries about this the least, though, as more and more of their business comes from the integration side.
Sun has been relegated to 4th place among commercial J2EE servers these days. I would bet they're far worse than 4th place when considering open source implementations. Even if they aren't upset about losing the revenues from iPlanet, I'm sure they can't be happy about losing control over what is becoming the de facto reference implementation for J2EE.
BEA can't be happy--much of their revenue comes from their overpriced J2EE server.
Microsoft is worried because the open-source J2EE servers are, much like Linux, making robust Unix-based server applications cheaper to deploy than equivalent Microsoft-based solutions.
I'm not sure how the strategy behind Java is really that different than.Net. Both are efforts to get their respective owners' products embedded in back office situations. The APIs of.Net seem to compare directly with those of Java. If Java solutions become cheaper to deploy, and if they run faster and more reliably than.Net solutions,.Net will undoubtably suffer. In fact, I would bet that Microsoft is among the most worried with the open-source J2EE servers.
I wonder if your employer allowed you to install your personal software on your work machine. I think Intuit might be able to claim you brought the damage upon your work machine yourself. That said, it's still a pretty stupid policy of Intuit's.
One word: Taxes. This way, Jobs can write the $1.2 million off against his operating costs, resulting in zero profits. Jobs probably won't pay any taxes on that $1.2 million. He won't pay even pay FICA on that, either.
One thing to remember is that the US counts their unemployed differently than most countries in Europe (except for the UK--they are really schizophrenic wrt counting the unemployed, switching every few years). The US counts its unemployed as the number of people claiming benefits. In most European countries, they use stastical methods that estimate the number of people *looking* for work (and also unemployed). Switching between the two methods in the UK reveals that counting the ones receiving benefits underestimates the actual number by 1/3 (that is, using the statistical methods produces numbers 50% higher). The US' restrictions on unemployment benefits probably means the US is undercounting by an even greater extent. All of a sudden the US numbers don't look quite as good as they used to. The US economy is in a better state than most European nations, but the delta is much smaller than would be apparent from the numbers.
I, for one, fall into the category of the uncounted unemployed. In fact, just about every unemployed tech worker I know does not receive benefits.
Bean Sripting Framework is a generic wrapper for including scripting languages within your application. It's from IBM, and is intended to abstract away the implementation of the scripting language. It supports Jython, Jacl, and Rhino now. It seems like I remember IBM releasing something for REXX as well.
My point here is that saying that Java doesn't include an interpreter is a downfall to Java is like saying that Perl not having a JVM is Perl's downfall. It's not their design goal. Java is a bytecode-interpreted language, not an interpreter. If you want an interpreter you can easily add one. And many are available.
I don't think p-code really bears much resemblance to Java byte code. Java does a lot of stuff after things have been compiled to byte code. P-code really is just a machine language of sorts that provides a hardware abstaction layer--that is, it is still just machine language. Java's byte code offers things like late binding & reflection, bounds checking, garbage collection, and a whole slew of other things. Many of these features make compiled Java (that is, compiled to a native executable) very difficult at best. And it also means that about 9/10 of the computation time with typical Java apps is spent in the JVM doing these things.
Yes, but people that have old code with variables or methods named "foreach" (methods being the more likely one here...I have written several classes with a method called foreach()) will still compile with the new compiler. Backwards compatibility doesn't mean that new code will work with older compilers; it means old code will work with the newer compiler.
Mexico City earthquake
on
Earthquake Data
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
What a timely article given the recent earthquake in Mexico City. Was this article planned for submission before the earthquake? Perhaps/. is part of some gov't conspiracy to control earthquakes. Maybe I should go dig out my tinfoil hat.
Terrorism isn't stopped through the waging of war. Can you name one case where terrorism was ended by war? War "against terrorism" only brings on more terrorism.
We really ought to consider our policies in the Middle East if we wish to eradicate terrorism. Would Iraq have built up their military had we not armed Iran to the hilt in the 50s, 60s, and 70s? Why are we arming the Israelis, Egyptians, and Saudis to the hilt (oil)? Would our interests be served better through other forms of aid? Yes, I know that Egypt is the largest recipient of non-military US aid, but Israel and Egypt are the #1 & #2 recipients of military aid.
Why did the Bush regime stop the US policy of engagement in North Korea and with respect to the Palestinian Authority? Perhaps the US would be better served through the use of other means.
We (the world) don't have many success stories in our fights against terrorism. The terrorism threat in Northern Ireland seems to be improving, albeit very slowly. Egypt and Israel have developed a somewhat lasting peace (hopefully it will be able to survive Israel's current regime). What has happened in these cases? First and foremost is engagement. Engagement does not require capitulation. But we must continue dialogue. Bush's approach in Israel and North Korea are completely inane. Isolationism does not work, and has never worked.
I have always cherished America's ability to behave in a pragmatic manner. Rightly or wrongly, America usually acts in a manner that achieves their goals while minimizing the negative consequences. However, the actions the US government has taken in the past year and a half have made me question this pragmatism. Has Bush and his administration carefully considered the consequences of their militant approach to these issues? Will this approach achieve the intended results while minimizing negative consequences? I don't think so. Will they create more problems? Probably--it seems North Korea was a manufactured problem that resulted from Bush's isolationism coupled with North Korea's opportunism.
As for giving "up a measure of your free civilization so that these baddies will love you more", I'm more worried about giving up my free civilization (yes, I'm American) in the process of attempting to *prevent* these baddies. I personally consider the rights outlined by the Articles to the Constitution (and its amendments) as inalienable rights. I find our treatment of interned foreigners completely unacceptable. I believe that America is a great nation that should rise above this current conflict and do the right thing. We can win in this current conflict. However, if we sink to the levels of war mongering and disregarding of our own Constitution, we will merely get mired into a conflict that cannot be won.
No. It means that JSP code can be retrieved without being processed first.
When a user requests a.jsp page, Tomcat takes all the HTML code on the.jsp page and sticks it in the equivalent of a printf(). The Java code on the page is just interspersed between the HTML output. After this, it compiles the resulting Java, and uses the compiled Java to create the output for the requested URL for subsequent requests. At no point should the user be able to see the.jsp code (just like with ASP, cold fusion, etc etc).
Slashdot Mirror
Has reporting spam helped you reduce your incoming spam? No? I didn't think so. Why do you report it? The spammers aren't wasting your time--you are wasting your own time. For snail mail, do you take the time to write to each spammer to get your name removed from their mailing lists? No? Then why do you do a similar thing with spam?
Does hitting the delete key 20 times a day (or whatever) really take that much effort? How about using filters/rules or Bayesian filters then? Set them up once and you save time.
Think about it this way. I was "on" the internet back before the Web was created. Back in 1986. Back then, business was discouraged from using the Internet altogether. Now, business can use the Internet. That has led to some abuses. Yes, that sucks. But spam really doesn't cost that much unless you waste your time dealing with spam in the most ineffective manner possible (yes, your method of dealing with it is ineffective).
Let me ask you this. How the hell does spam intrude into your privacy? How do "illegitamite[sic] marketers hawking mostly 100% scam wares" intrude in the middle of your personal and business conversations? Last I checked, no spammer has been able to paste in a spam ad in the middle of an email from a friend or business colleague. There is no invasion of privacy. Hell, once again, good filters/rules and/or Bayesian filters can make it so that you don't see *any* spam.
If the Internet is no a great resource for communication and productivity any more for you, you *really* need to look at alternative ways to deal with spam. For me, about 75% of the email I get is spam. But it doesn't affect me at all. My wife, who is not as much of a computer guy as me (she relies on the "delete" button to handle spam) spends...oh...about 20 seconds a day hitting the delete button for spam. It simply isn't that much of a productivity breaker *unless you deal with it in an ineffective manner*.
You claim that the spammers have profited at the system's expense. But, last I checked, ISPs tend to pay for bandwidth at a flat rate per month, whether the bandwidth is used or not. I would bet that far less than 1% of the bandwidth of the Internet is consumed by spam. The costs of this bandwidth are negligible because ISPs don't have to buy additional bandwidth as a result of it.
Law enforcement and government are doing nothing effective to stop it because there are many precedents for allowing spam. I get about 20 snail mails a day that are unsolicited. I get about 4 snail mails a day that are solicited. Why don't we go after these spammers instead? They have a much greater cost to society, both in terms of the costs of pollution (making paper isn't too good for the environment) and the costs of our landfills. Snail mail only takes up electrons and negligible amounts of bandwidth (negligible compared to the bandwidth used for more "legitimate" business uses, like porn and surfing the web).
Just because you don't agree with the content of spam, do you think you have the right to shut down others' rights to receive the content? Maybe some people actually buy the stuff offered in spam. I don't. But I don't want to shut down another person's right to buy something offered from spam.
If spam were really such a severe problem in terms of costs and productivity, then I'm sure some enterprising soul would simply make an email replacement that operates on a different port that charges the sender for each item received. But, quite frankly, spam doesn't cost that much, and doesn't impact productivity that much (except for thin-skinned people like yourself). Nobody (other than Cringely) is calling for such an email replacement.
Can't you spend the energy you use fighting spam in another more productive way? It's clear your efforts won't make spam go away. How about you replace your quixotic endeavors with more productive uses? Become a Big Brother to an inner city youth. Donate time building housing for the underprivileged. Spend time supporting the arts in your neighborhood. Or, hell, go ahead and build that email replacement that you seem to want so badly. Anything is better than spending hours trying to blacklist spammers that have sent you 10 emails today.
I hope you're joking, or the post is a troll. Have spammers caused you that much trouble? Is it that hard to push the "delete" button? Have you not yet figured out how to use filters/rules? Since you're reading Slashdot, have you not checked out any of the various Bayesian filters? Do other trivial matters bring out this type of rage?
Look, if I could somehow give my preference to receive all my snail junk mail as email, I would. Junk email doesn't consume paper. Junk email doesn't consume that much bandwidth (and if it does for you, perhaps you should have your libido checked...one porn photo requires about 100x as much bandwith to send as a typical spam).
Take a chill pill, dude.
When developing your coding standards, categorize the "rules" into three categories: recommended, guidelines, and rules.
Recommendations are really just suggestions. For instance, the last coding standards I helped to author we recommended that open brackets (the '{' character) be placed at the end of the expression rather than on a separate line. This recommendation was not followed by some, but it really isn't that critical towards code readability. For the record, I actually like putting open brackets on new lines, so that the open & close brackets line up. I did change my practices, but I occasionally forgot, and didn't get yelled at since it was merely a "recommendation".
Guidelines are "rules" to be followed at all times unless there is a really good reason not to. For instance, we had a guideline that instructions should not be divided between lines, and that only one instruction should appear per line. Well, if you have a really long piece of logic, splitting the instruction across two lines makes sense. Conditional expressions (i.e. something of the form of "(ab)? a : b") counted as a single instruction.
Rules must be followed at all times. For instance, one rule we used was no "goto" statements. Pretty simple and obvious.
We found that by having the rules in this form, people that would categorically reject some of the guidelines under different circumstances were more receptive towards the guidelines when presented in this manner. So long as they weren't forced to adopt these "rules" they somehow seemed less ominous. YMMV.
I think you're the one with the mis-informed Slashdot post. I'm not sure you've ever worked in a M$ shop, but in my experience very few of these will accept CVS, or any other open-source software solution for that matter. Sure, CVS and Subversion work, but VSS will be the solution most M$ shops use.
Perforce, Subversion, and CVS are all decent solutions, and all tend to have better reliability than VSS. But I've found that most M$ shops stick with M$ solutions for most tasks. If you're stuck with VSS, follow the suggestions outlined by the grandfather post.
As for a drag & drop UI for CVS, check out TortoiseCVS. It is the bomb. Integrates with Windows Explorer, so files get color-coded depending upon their check-in status. Right-click to commit changes. Totally seamless. Wish I had something like it under Linux.
All minutes are free for land lines. One of the major mobile vendors (there are about 8, I think) doesn't charge for the first minute. But most do.
Two reasons. One: we don't pay for local calls. Most coutries outside the U.S. have per-call charges on local calls from landlines. In the U.S., unlimited local calls are bundled with phone service. Two: we made the decision to share area codes between mobile phones and land lines (what most countries would call prefixes--the U.S. is so big, with so many phones (many cities have 10-digit dialing for local calls, and NY is considering 11-digit dialing), that the area code is more analogous to most countries' prefixes--after electronic switching in the mid-80s, the prefix does not have to be tied to a geographical area).
So, if we don't pay for local calls, and there's no easy way to distinguish landlines from mobile phones, it's really tough for us to charge callers for calls to mobile phones that are local.
I get lots of international calls on my mobile phone. No caller ID on those calls. I also keep receiving a phone call from a fax machine with an unlisted number. I cannot afford to ignore unlisted numbers. So I get charged for someone with an unlisted number trying to send a fax to my mobile phone?!? That's not right.
Hahahahahahaha! You think Telstra has set up a real phone system? Maybe your mobile phone doesn't bill you for incoming calls (yeah, that's kind of stupid, but the US made a decision a while ago to integrate land lines with cell numbers vis-a-vis the prefix, so now there's no easy way to tell a cell number from a landline, and we don't pay for local calls on landlines). But Telstra has to be one of the world's most f'ed up companies. I feel sorry for you that you have such a miserable phone company.
At least you don't have to pay for that call you receive. That's the real kicker here--in the U.S. the mobile phone owner has to pay for both incoming and outgoing calls.
I'm not sure the root of this thread really was a troll. I think he/she was stating his/her opinion. J2EE is not perfect, and is tremendously complex. After all, it addresses a very complex problem--distributed, reliable, scalable multi-tier computing.
.Net. There's a lot in .Net to be liked if you don't get caught up in the religious battles. And that's coming from a Java guy.
However, if you're looking for a problem with the J2EE spec, look no further than entity EJBs. These things are seriously screwed up, and scream of an implementation based upon a poorly designed predecessor (CORBA) that was rushed out the door. By comparison, JDO really does things right.
As for Java's popularity, I think it really comes down to competition. When J2EE was first released, it really didn't have any competition. Even today, no Microsoft solution really matches up to J2EE in terms of availability (many J2EE implementations already exist), features, and scalability. That said, don't discount
What companent is JBoss? I thought it covered pretty much every part of the J2EE spec now that the Resin web/JSP server has been integrated.
.Net. Both are efforts to get their respective owners' products embedded in back office situations. The APIs of .Net seem to compare directly with those of Java. If Java solutions become cheaper to deploy, and if they run faster and more reliably than .Net solutions, .Net will undoubtably suffer. In fact, I would bet that Microsoft is among the most worried with the open-source J2EE servers.
Actually, I think IBM is being threatened. WebSphere is horribly overpriced, buggy, and very late to support new J2EE specifications. While IBM will still get hardware and integration revenue from their customers, I think they will miss the WebSphere revenue. IBM probably worries about this the least, though, as more and more of their business comes from the integration side.
Sun has been relegated to 4th place among commercial J2EE servers these days. I would bet they're far worse than 4th place when considering open source implementations. Even if they aren't upset about losing the revenues from iPlanet, I'm sure they can't be happy about losing control over what is becoming the de facto reference implementation for J2EE.
BEA can't be happy--much of their revenue comes from their overpriced J2EE server.
Microsoft is worried because the open-source J2EE servers are, much like Linux, making robust Unix-based server applications cheaper to deploy than equivalent Microsoft-based solutions.
I'm not sure how the strategy behind Java is really that different than
I wonder if your employer allowed you to install your personal software on your work machine. I think Intuit might be able to claim you brought the damage upon your work machine yourself. That said, it's still a pretty stupid policy of Intuit's.
One word: Taxes. This way, Jobs can write the $1.2 million off against his operating costs, resulting in zero profits. Jobs probably won't pay any taxes on that $1.2 million. He won't pay even pay FICA on that, either.
One thing to remember is that the US counts their unemployed differently than most countries in Europe (except for the UK--they are really schizophrenic wrt counting the unemployed, switching every few years). The US counts its unemployed as the number of people claiming benefits. In most European countries, they use stastical methods that estimate the number of people *looking* for work (and also unemployed). Switching between the two methods in the UK reveals that counting the ones receiving benefits underestimates the actual number by 1/3 (that is, using the statistical methods produces numbers 50% higher). The US' restrictions on unemployment benefits probably means the US is undercounting by an even greater extent. All of a sudden the US numbers don't look quite as good as they used to. The US economy is in a better state than most European nations, but the delta is much smaller than would be apparent from the numbers.
I, for one, fall into the category of the uncounted unemployed. In fact, just about every unemployed tech worker I know does not receive benefits.
Yes, right. BeanShell is exactly what this guy was looking for in the first place, too. The ability to interpret Java code.
- Jython is a Python scripting engine for Java. There, now you can use Python within the JVM! <sarcasm>Get the worst of both worlds!</sarcasm\>
- Rhino is a Javascript engine for Java.
- Jacl is a TCL engine for Java.
- Bean Sripting Framework is a generic wrapper for including scripting languages within your application. It's from IBM, and is intended to abstract away the implementation of the scripting language. It supports Jython, Jacl, and Rhino now. It seems like I remember IBM releasing something for REXX as well.
My point here is that saying that Java doesn't include an interpreter is a downfall to Java is like saying that Perl not having a JVM is Perl's downfall. It's not their design goal. Java is a bytecode-interpreted language, not an interpreter. If you want an interpreter you can easily add one. And many are available.Performance isn't great, but reports have indicated that Jython is about 75% of the performance (near the end of the article...search for the word "performance") of CPython. It's slower than Java code of the same type. But, hey, if you wanted speed you wouldn't be using interpreted code (or byte-code interpreted code, for that matter), right?
I don't think p-code really bears much resemblance to Java byte code. Java does a lot of stuff after things have been compiled to byte code. P-code really is just a machine language of sorts that provides a hardware abstaction layer--that is, it is still just machine language. Java's byte code offers things like late binding & reflection, bounds checking, garbage collection, and a whole slew of other things. Many of these features make compiled Java (that is, compiled to a native executable) very difficult at best. And it also means that about 9/10 of the computation time with typical Java apps is spent in the JVM doing these things.
Yes, but people that have old code with variables or methods named "foreach" (methods being the more likely one here...I have written several classes with a method called foreach()) will still compile with the new compiler. Backwards compatibility doesn't mean that new code will work with older compilers; it means old code will work with the newer compiler.
What a timely article given the recent earthquake in Mexico City. Was this article planned for submission before the earthquake? Perhaps /. is part of some gov't conspiracy to control earthquakes. Maybe I should go dig out my tinfoil hat.
Terrorism isn't stopped through the waging of war. Can you name one case where terrorism was ended by war? War "against terrorism" only brings on more terrorism.
We really ought to consider our policies in the Middle East if we wish to eradicate terrorism. Would Iraq have built up their military had we not armed Iran to the hilt in the 50s, 60s, and 70s? Why are we arming the Israelis, Egyptians, and Saudis to the hilt (oil)? Would our interests be served better through other forms of aid? Yes, I know that Egypt is the largest recipient of non-military US aid, but Israel and Egypt are the #1 & #2 recipients of military aid.
Why did the Bush regime stop the US policy of engagement in North Korea and with respect to the Palestinian Authority? Perhaps the US would be better served through the use of other means.
We (the world) don't have many success stories in our fights against terrorism. The terrorism threat in Northern Ireland seems to be improving, albeit very slowly. Egypt and Israel have developed a somewhat lasting peace (hopefully it will be able to survive Israel's current regime). What has happened in these cases? First and foremost is engagement. Engagement does not require capitulation. But we must continue dialogue. Bush's approach in Israel and North Korea are completely inane. Isolationism does not work, and has never worked.
I have always cherished America's ability to behave in a pragmatic manner. Rightly or wrongly, America usually acts in a manner that achieves their goals while minimizing the negative consequences. However, the actions the US government has taken in the past year and a half have made me question this pragmatism. Has Bush and his administration carefully considered the consequences of their militant approach to these issues? Will this approach achieve the intended results while minimizing negative consequences? I don't think so. Will they create more problems? Probably--it seems North Korea was a manufactured problem that resulted from Bush's isolationism coupled with North Korea's opportunism.
As for giving "up a measure of your free civilization so that these baddies will love you more", I'm more worried about giving up my free civilization (yes, I'm American) in the process of attempting to *prevent* these baddies. I personally consider the rights outlined by the Articles to the Constitution (and its amendments) as inalienable rights. I find our treatment of interned foreigners completely unacceptable. I believe that America is a great nation that should rise above this current conflict and do the right thing. We can win in this current conflict. However, if we sink to the levels of war mongering and disregarding of our own Constitution, we will merely get mired into a conflict that cannot be won.
This is a different PIN...a PIN just for Quicken access. Call up Citi...they'll give you one. I had the same problem.
Yep. This is the one. Good stuff.
Flipdog rocks. Best job website I've seen by far.
No. It means that JSP code can be retrieved without being processed first.
.jsp page, Tomcat takes all the HTML code on the .jsp page and sticks it in the equivalent of a printf(). The Java code on the page is just interspersed between the HTML output. After this, it compiles the resulting Java, and uses the compiled Java to create the output for the requested URL for subsequent requests. At no point should the user be able to see the .jsp code (just like with ASP, cold fusion, etc etc).
When a user requests a