Whether you're working in a team or working by yourself: Use Subversion Anyway. Or svk. Or Darcs. Any reputable revision control system will kick the pants out of any ad-hoc solution you come up with. Revision control should be automatic and easy. The value of being able to easily merge changesets alone is reason enough for any non-trivial project. Keeping track of branches for experimental/delicate changes, tagging releases, LOG MESSAGES for all your changes - all of these things, use them, learn to love them. It's a bitch to get in the habit, but when you do it's absolutely worth it.
It's taken me over seven years to truly learn the worth of version control. These days I'd dare not live without it. It really is that good. Honest!
Why is this being moderated as a troll? Ignoring the sarcasm, spelling and grammar, the parent makes a perfectly valid point.
The summary reads like a great thing has been done. I'm not so sure. Selling out freedom of speech in the name of a sense of security sounds like a step backwards to me.
Not to say anything of whether or not the hacker is implicated with "terrorist factions" (which, in itself, is a matter of perception, but that's a whole other post) - I just mean spinning the censorship of "sensitive" material as a good thing seems irresponsible.
I know this is borderline hippy ranting, I'm just a bit uneasy about somebody else telling me what is appropriate for me to see and what isn't. Slippery slope and all that crap.
Obviously when changes happen, they happen rapidly via mutations. However, over time all these mutations "add up" so to speak, so Darwinism as we know it is still very much at work.
I highly doubt that one day we were born from a monkey with exactly the same mutations that are present in us all today - over time things just worked out this way.
Perhaps someone who isn't still drunk from last night can better explain where I'm coming from?:)
i would really be happy to have a look of those deleted version. but i wonder wouldnt it hamper the good flow of the movie if i did. however i will try.
You have to remember that MS is in this for the bottom line and Linux and OSS is eating into their bottom line.
That's right, this is HR at its best: hire the guy that the target audience wants to hear from and let him speak. If this were Steve or Gates speaking you wouldn't give them two seconds of credit.
1. MS HR hires guy who loves F/OSS 2. Guy who loves F/OSS tells Slashdot he has a deep appreciation for Linux & F/OSS in a Q&A session. 3. PR filters said Q&A session to put a subtle "We're Still Better, Just Barely" spin on it all. 4. MS essentially tells Slashdot exactly what it wants to hear, while F/OSS loving Microsoftie thinks he's doing the F/OSS world a favour.
The reason this bullshit is so believable is because the guy saying it believes it himself. MS knows he believes it, and is using it to their advantage to appease the F/OSS community.
Corporations exist solely to make money, and will use people with noble intentions and/or moral values to continue making money if it suits their purposes. Never, ever forget that.
... so... what you're trying to say is... trees can get erections?
Re:Which is the bigger irony:
on
Ajax On Rails
·
· Score: 1
XMLHttpRequest does more or less the same thing as an IFrame (via an ActiveX contarol), except that it adds the overhead of an XML parse. AFAIK, Google doesn't use the XMLHttpRequest for any of their applications.
Well, yeah, it can be used like an iframe if you use XMLHttpRequest to pull HTML snippets from the server.
There's more power in passing back real XML documents, then using request.responseXML (which is a DOM document) to process that data and display it as something meaningful.
Half the tutorials you see are just about dumping HTML snippets into a <div> element, and while that's a nice, easy way to get things done, I certainly don't think the authors of these documents realize the full power of what XMLHttpRequest provides.
How else should it be done, using req.responseXML? Who has a client-side XML parser?
You're exactly the sort of person he's talking about, you know: responseXML is a DOM document, so the XML has already been parsed long before it hits your JavaScript.
KOTOR was one of the best RPGs ever done, a true classic.
Well somebody's never played Final Fantasy 7... *glassy eyes*
I can still remember beating Emerald Weapon and staining my pants with happiness, watching Aerith get skewered, the all-round badness of Sephiroth and the joy of encouraging Chocobos to fuck and make babies with a little help from some aphrodisiac nuts.
Sorry to reply to my own post, but those interested in further reading on the topic of server-side XForms validation may find the XForms Constraints section of the XForms working draft interesting:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-xforms-20020118/sli ce 6.html#model-xformsconstraints
It's a little faster for the user (instant feedback on any mistakes), and it saves a tiny bit of server resources. And it should replace all the JavaScript hacks with one standard interface.
What's to stop server side code from parsing the XForms (or Web Forms or whatever your choice of poison is) to extract validation information, and then do the _exact_ same checks on the server side? Why, it even makes your code more easily maintainable.
I do something similar to this with my PHP framework using XML documents (for those wondering about the efficiency: so far it's been good enough for me, but with my framework there's nothing stopping one from cacheing the generated code as PHP, changing a line in a config file and continuing on without any interface changes), though I've not yet chosen my poison in terms of a standardized format: I'd like to just go with XForms, but who knows what bastardized format we'll be using in a few years time...
Slashdot Mirror
No no no no no. :)
Whether you're working in a team or working by yourself: Use Subversion Anyway. Or svk. Or Darcs. Any reputable revision control system will kick the pants out of any ad-hoc solution you come up with. Revision control should be automatic and easy. The value of being able to easily merge changesets alone is reason enough for any non-trivial project. Keeping track of branches for experimental/delicate changes, tagging releases, LOG MESSAGES for all your changes - all of these things, use them, learn to love them. It's a bitch to get in the habit, but when you do it's absolutely worth it.
It's taken me over seven years to truly learn the worth of version control. These days I'd dare not live without it. It really is that good. Honest!
10. Most people don't care and are still using Windows anyway.
Why is this being moderated as a troll? Ignoring the sarcasm, spelling and grammar, the parent makes a perfectly valid point.
The summary reads like a great thing has been done. I'm not so sure. Selling out freedom of speech in the name of a sense of security sounds like a step backwards to me.
Not to say anything of whether or not the hacker is implicated with "terrorist factions" (which, in itself, is a matter of perception, but that's a whole other post) - I just mean spinning the censorship of "sensitive" material as a good thing seems irresponsible.
I know this is borderline hippy ranting, I'm just a bit uneasy about somebody else telling me what is appropriate for me to see and what isn't. Slippery slope and all that crap.
FYI; Sleepycat wrote Berkeley DB ("bdb" - the open source database engine behind most Subversion repositories)
Obviously when changes happen, they happen rapidly via mutations. However, over time all these mutations "add up" so to speak, so Darwinism as we know it is still very much at work.
:)
I highly doubt that one day we were born from a monkey with exactly the same mutations that are present in us all today - over time things just worked out this way.
Perhaps someone who isn't still drunk from last night can better explain where I'm coming from?
... or do other people find the idea of drowning polar bears funny?
Scared or not, it sounds a bit irresponsible :S I mean ... dude goes off, has wild kinky sex with people ... winds up actually being positive.
VS.NET Express is only free for one year.
I think you should both stop the intellectual masturbation and go outside. :S
i would really be happy to have a look of those deleted version. but i wonder wouldnt it hamper the good flow of the movie if i did. however i will try.
:P
do, or do not. there is no "try".
I know that there will be enough of you trying to find a hidden (evil) reason for Google's action, but it is simply not the case.
Wow. It's great that we've got people like you to think critically for the rest of us. God forbid we come to our own conclusion!
if you're going to call it by a single thing, that should be GNU, not Linux.
Richard? Is that you?
my favourite was the footware/duck stomping question :(
You have to remember that MS is in this for the bottom line and Linux and OSS is eating into their bottom line.
That's right, this is HR at its best: hire the guy that the target audience wants to hear from and let him speak. If this were Steve or Gates speaking you wouldn't give them two seconds of credit.
1. MS HR hires guy who loves F/OSS
2. Guy who loves F/OSS tells Slashdot he has a deep appreciation for Linux & F/OSS in a Q&A session.
3. PR filters said Q&A session to put a subtle "We're Still Better, Just Barely" spin on it all.
4. MS essentially tells Slashdot exactly what it wants to hear, while F/OSS loving Microsoftie thinks he's doing the F/OSS world a favour.
The reason this bullshit is so believable is because the guy saying it believes it himself. MS knows he believes it, and is using it to their advantage to appease the F/OSS community.
Corporations exist solely to make money, and will use people with noble intentions and/or moral values to continue making money if it suits their purposes. Never, ever forget that.
There's more fundamentally wrong with the education system than clickers or multi-choice questions dude.
I mean, Bush graduated.
... so ... what you're trying to say is ... trees can get erections?
XMLHttpRequest does more or less the same thing as an IFrame (via an ActiveX contarol), except that it adds the overhead of an XML parse. AFAIK, Google doesn't use the XMLHttpRequest for any of their applications.
Well, yeah, it can be used like an iframe if you use XMLHttpRequest to pull HTML snippets from the server.
There's more power in passing back real XML documents, then using request.responseXML (which is a DOM document) to process that data and display it as something meaningful.
Half the tutorials you see are just about dumping HTML snippets into a <div> element, and while that's a nice, easy way to get things done, I certainly don't think the authors of these documents realize the full power of what XMLHttpRequest provides.
ADOdb actually provides a PEAR::DB-like interface in there somewhere.
hehe ... you said "gag"
How else should it be done, using req.responseXML? Who has a client-side XML parser?
You're exactly the sort of person he's talking about, you know: responseXML is a DOM document, so the XML has already been parsed long before it hits your JavaScript.
Sounds like the news story a work mate read out today:
"Experts say kids in less danger if they play it safe"
Where do they find these experts in the oft-astounding field of common-fucking-sense?
KOTOR was one of the best RPGs ever done, a true classic.
Well somebody's never played Final Fantasy 7... *glassy eyes*
I can still remember beating Emerald Weapon and staining my pants with happiness, watching Aerith get skewered, the all-round badness of Sephiroth and the joy of encouraging Chocobos to fuck and make babies with a little help from some aphrodisiac nuts.
Sorry to reply to my own post, but those interested in further reading on the topic of server-side XForms validation may find the XForms Constraints section of the XForms working draft interesting:
i ce 6.html#model-xformsconstraints
http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-xforms-20020118/sl
It's a little faster for the user (instant feedback on any mistakes), and it saves a tiny bit of server resources. And it should replace all the JavaScript hacks with one standard interface.
...
What's to stop server side code from parsing the XForms (or Web Forms or whatever your choice of poison is) to extract validation information, and then do the _exact_ same checks on the server side? Why, it even makes your code more easily maintainable.
I do something similar to this with my PHP framework using XML documents (for those wondering about the efficiency: so far it's been good enough for me, but with my framework there's nothing stopping one from cacheing the generated code as PHP, changing a line in a config file and continuing on without any interface changes), though I've not yet chosen my poison in terms of a standardized format: I'd like to just go with XForms, but who knows what bastardized format we'll be using in a few years time
3. Ease of service. The thin-client breaks down, what do you do? Unplug it, plug another machine in it's place, continue working.
Just to play devil's advocate, what do you do when the server breaks down?
Answer: Your organization grinds to a halt. You lose lots of money.
(Disclaimer: I'm on a thin client terminal at work and have never had such an issue. Just posing a bit of a "what-if")