It's an all or nothing thing. You're strongly typed if you catch all type errors. Java (barring bugs in the VMs), does. If a language don't catch all type errors at compile-time or runtime, then it's weakly typed.
I call Java statically typed only because what people usually consider it to be. In general, it's statically typed with polymorphism as an extension. It's not really fair to call it a dynamically typed language, even though it's not as statically typed as something like ML.
You're confusing strongly typed with statically typed. Strong vs weak typing refers to safety. In strongly typed languages, type safety is enforced, with no loopholes. Both ML and Java meet this criterea.
I don't think you can say "THE SYSTEM WORKS." Only part of the Patriot Act was struck down, not the whole thing. If things continue this way, there will be parts of the Patriot Act that make it through, and that is the way you gradually lose your freedoms. Are you less free today than you were in 1789? Hell yeah! The situation is not catestrophically bad, of course, and no, the sky is not falling, but the air is slowly but surely leaking out of the balloon.
C/C++ has weak typing not because you can cast to void*, but because you can then cast that void* back into a type different from the original type, and then use that pointer. Java will give you an error at runtime in this situation, but C/C++ will happily go and corrupt memory.
"Loose" typing is another way of saying "weak" typing. Meaning the system doesn't enforce type safety. In almost all scripting languages, type safety is strongly enforced.
Well, right now, our $350bn a year aren't doing very much good at fighting terrorism. $2bn for a B-2 bombers does jack-shit against some guy with a bomb on his back. Increased ilitary spending to counter terrorism might make sense, but first I want to see some clearly outdated projects phased out and replaced with ones that can really combat modern threats.
It's a very simple matter of basic capitalism. A space mission is an investment. It has some possible return. Feeding the poor is not. It has no return. At the same time, the population will keep growing, so there will be more poor to feed. Spending all your resources on things that have no return is an absolutely losing battle. You'll never get ahead that way.
Let me ask you a question: why do you own a computer? I mean, you could have easily donated that money to the poor. I mean, we have libraries for taht sort of thing, right?
You can't think like that. It's counter-productive to spend everything you have on those who have nothing. If you do that, you'll never have anything, because you'll spend all your capital on things that don't have any return.
raise massive trade tariffs against goods made in, or service provided from, India. Farking populists. You lost already! Eugene V. Debbs is dead or rotting, let it go!
Jesus Christ, who barfed on that monitor? Is that the Outlook 2003 default theme? God, I thought only Visio was broken enough to use that. Did the entire QA department at MS get their eyes gouged out or something?
And just why did those come into existance? They were created for national defense by those horrible capitalist industries.
Sorry to break this to you, but government subsidizing industries, even if they are capitalist industries, is still anti-capitalist. That is not to say that defense spending (to a degree) isn't legitimate, but rather that the larger your defense budget, the further you are from the capitalist ideal.
Actually, all three things you mentioned are unfriendly to overclocking:
1) Short pipelines make it harder to clock-up individual stages (more work to do per stage); 2) Embedded memory controller makes the FSB an overclocking bottleneck; 3) Cache memory is sensitive to high clock-speeds. Remember that one of the best overclockers ever was the cacheless Celeron.
Well, in terms of percantage-GDP, we spend less than most developed nations. So I don't think military spending is out-of-whack. I do think it needs to be reallocated a bit --- there are crazy boondogles like the F-22 program, which is useless to us in a world where even the F-15 is still far superior to what our enemies have.
We also spend tons of money on education, we just don't do a good job of getting our money's worth.
1) Farmers are part of the problem. They are a drain on our economy (billions in subsidies), and are highly inefficient. Farming is simply not profitable, for a developed country like the US, but the government keeps propping it up because they like the votes. If the Republicans had any balls, they'd stay true to their capitalist roots and tell the farmers to either switch to a productive profession, or go to a third-world country where their skills are needed.
2) If the original poster is a democrat, from his perspective, there is no such thing as a good republican candidate. The same is true for Republicans. It's not blind party loyalty, but simple self-selection. People who call themselves democrats or republicans continue to vote for their party's candidate not just for the sake of it, but because their party's candidate is chosen to represent their party's views, and thus best represent that individual's views.
From the comparison of the 6600 GT with the Radeon 9800 XT, it seems like it's a far better idea to buy a $200 card more often then to buy a $400 less often.
Slashdot Mirror
Genes are made of DNA, not proteins. Genes control the production of proteins.
It's an all or nothing thing. You're strongly typed if you catch all type errors. Java (barring bugs in the VMs), does. If a language don't catch all type errors at compile-time or runtime, then it's weakly typed.
I call Java statically typed only because what people usually consider it to be. In general, it's statically typed with polymorphism as an extension. It's not really fair to call it a dynamically typed language, even though it's not as statically typed as something like ML.
It is, however, strongly typed not weakly typed.
You're confusing strongly typed with statically typed. Strong vs weak typing refers to safety. In strongly typed languages, type safety is enforced, with no loopholes. Both ML and Java meet this criterea.
I don't think you can say "THE SYSTEM WORKS." Only part of the Patriot Act was struck down, not the whole thing. If things continue this way, there will be parts of the Patriot Act that make it through, and that is the way you gradually lose your freedoms. Are you less free today than you were in 1789? Hell yeah! The situation is not catestrophically bad, of course, and no, the sky is not falling, but the air is slowly but surely leaking out of the balloon.
At least we have strongly-typed collections in C++
You *don't* have strongly-typed collections in C++. You've got *statically* typed collections in C++. They are, however, still *weakly* typed.
The difference between weak and strong typing is in that a strongly typed language, the compiler enforces the type system.
The difference between static and dynamic typing is that in a dynamically typed language, some type information may not be known until runtime.
Maybe you should read one of those textbooks...
C/C++ has weak typing not because you can cast to void*, but because you can then cast that void* back into a type different from the original type, and then use that pointer. Java will give you an error at runtime in this situation, but C/C++ will happily go and corrupt memory.
C/C++ = Weakly statically typed
Java/C# = Strongly statically typed
Python/Ruby = Strongly dynamically typed
"Loose" typing is another way of saying "weak" typing. Meaning the system doesn't enforce type safety. In almost all scripting languages, type safety is strongly enforced.
Well, right now, our $350bn a year aren't doing very much good at fighting terrorism. $2bn for a B-2 bombers does jack-shit against some guy with a bomb on his back. Increased ilitary spending to counter terrorism might make sense, but first I want to see some clearly outdated projects phased out and replaced with ones that can really combat modern threats.
It's a very simple matter of basic capitalism. A space mission is an investment. It has some possible return. Feeding the poor is not. It has no return. At the same time, the population will keep growing, so there will be more poor to feed. Spending all your resources on things that have no return is an absolutely losing battle. You'll never get ahead that way.
Let me ask you a question: why do you own a computer? I mean, you could have easily donated that money to the poor. I mean, we have libraries for taht sort of thing, right?
You can't think like that. It's counter-productive to spend everything you have on those who have nothing. If you do that, you'll never have anything, because you'll spend all your capital on things that don't have any return.
raise massive trade tariffs against goods made in, or service provided from, India.
Farking populists. You lost already! Eugene V. Debbs is dead or rotting, let it go!
You don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about. The last bit about "bitmap versus postscript" is particularly bad.
Real film is also a sampled image, with the sample size depending on the film's grain size.
When I grow up and become President I will be truthful and honest and I won't talk bad about the other guy.
Ah, the idiocy of youth...
Jesus Christ, who barfed on that monitor? Is that the Outlook 2003 default theme? God, I thought only Visio was broken enough to use that. Did the entire QA department at MS get their eyes gouged out or something?
And just why did those come into existance? They were created for national defense by those horrible capitalist industries.
Sorry to break this to you, but government subsidizing industries, even if they are capitalist industries, is still anti-capitalist. That is not to say that defense spending (to a degree) isn't legitimate, but rather that the larger your defense budget, the further you are from the capitalist ideal.
Actually, all three things you mentioned are unfriendly to overclocking:
1) Short pipelines make it harder to clock-up individual stages (more work to do per stage);
2) Embedded memory controller makes the FSB an overclocking bottleneck;
3) Cache memory is sensitive to high clock-speeds. Remember that one of the best overclockers ever was the cacheless Celeron.
Well, in terms of percantage-GDP, we spend less than most developed nations. So I don't think military spending is out-of-whack. I do think it needs to be reallocated a bit --- there are crazy boondogles like the F-22 program, which is useless to us in a world where even the F-15 is still far superior to what our enemies have.
We also spend tons of money on education, we just don't do a good job of getting our money's worth.
1) Farmers are part of the problem. They are a drain on our economy (billions in subsidies), and are highly inefficient. Farming is simply not profitable, for a developed country like the US, but the government keeps propping it up because they like the votes. If the Republicans had any balls, they'd stay true to their capitalist roots and tell the farmers to either switch to a productive profession, or go to a third-world country where their skills are needed.
2) If the original poster is a democrat, from his perspective, there is no such thing as a good republican candidate. The same is true for Republicans. It's not blind party loyalty, but simple self-selection. People who call themselves democrats or republicans continue to vote for their party's candidate not just for the sake of it, but because their party's candidate is chosen to represent their party's views, and thus best represent that individual's views.
Um, even if it means that in one of 1000 languages, as long as they are African languages, it is an African word.
From the comparison of the 6600 GT with the Radeon 9800 XT, it seems like it's a far better idea to buy a $200 card more often then to buy a $400 less often.
Subversion 1.1 will have a reguler filesystem backend called FSFS.
Wanna paper towel?
Try re-reading the blurb. This device is definitely VGA.
Brilliant idea. Post a page of high-res shots to Slashdot...