I agree that it should be the applications which have to conform, not the distros.
For starters, applications should not assume a certain directory layout, and should just install to the appropriate places based on the distro. Yes, this means that package managers might need to be slightly smarter than they currently are. But existing source-based installation already works for the majority of packages.
Case in point: GoboLinux. Now, those guys have introduced a more intuitive filesystem hierarchy that actually works and makes sense at the same time (which is rare.) However, Linux Standard Base, which depends on the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard, outright prohibits their directory layout.
So... let's fast forward to when LSB is in widespread use. Application vendors start assuming that LSB is all they need to support "Linux". Distros who won't have a bar of the shitty legacy directory layout we've had to endure for decades will basically be punished for being forward-thinking.
Turn off ActiveX, JavaScript and images in IE, and it becomes just as safe as Firefox with everything enabled. So I don't see a problem with IE at all.
Well, you're calling various methods on that object which assume that it's a string. I'd imagine you'd be changing all of those when you change the collection type.
If you know it's a string, though, you won't be iterating through objects, you'll be iterating through strings. So the sum benefit is 3 characters, the difference between typing "var" and "string".
A great IDE would still be a good start, though. I'm still waiting to see an IntelliJ IDEA for C#... the JetBrains guys do seem to be working on a few C# apps lately, so who knows, maybe it will happen.
All personal experience with Visual Spewdio.NET has been less than satisfactory due to all the missing features, mainly thanks to my experience with actually-"great" IDEs.
Funnily enough, most database binding libraries in Ruby seem to work exactly like that.
The way I see it, a language which pretends to be statically typed (as Java and C# do) should stick to being statically typed. If developers wanted to use a dynamically-typed language they would use one, rather than perverting another language which doesn't quite fit the programming paradigm.
It also seems to me that this battle between Java and C# is mainly to distract people away from languages like Ruby which really are a step forward instead of just an evolution on top of something else.
Wouldn't it be better to use packages to distinguish classes from each other instead of building increasingly-long classnames to avoid collisions? Then you would no longer need to worry about really long classnames like that.
Your example seems to throw away the type information to the same degree as his did. In both cases, the actual type of the object is unmodified and merely the type of the reference has changed.
I think there is a big difference between something existing, and something existing in the future. The phrase "you can also do it in Vista/XP" means that Vista and Sparkle are already out, but clearly neither of these things exist yet.
So someone just needs to learn a little about English, specifically tense.
If the Revolution actually doesn't work. If the games actually suck... the interface doesn't work in practice, or anything like that... then it has failed, and they should probably continue to develop for other consoles. Though, I would be happier to see them shift exclusively to the DS and utterly destroy Sony in the handheld market instead of just kicking them in the nuts like they are now.:-)
On the other hand, if you define failing as simply not selling to the majority of the market, and if you think the GameCube failed, then you more than likely don't own one so wouldn't know. All of Nintendo's games on the GameCube have been top notch, and we'd be in a really bad place if the new Zelda weren't going to be released for it. All of their fans are obviously still going to buy their games, in the same fashion that millions of Mac users still buy Macs.
GameCube didn't "fail"... and in a way, it's better that it doesn't have the majority of the market, because what would happen to the game selection when that happened? (Hint: sports, racing, fighters. No thanks.)
Is there a better CSS editor out there than Vim? I actually want to know, because it takes hours to position everything right sometimes, and it would save much more time if I could just draw what I want and have it generate the CSS.
We started with step 1 a couple of years ago, and haven't moved onto step 2 yet. Got any tips on how to get there? Does it take longer than a couple of years? (I guess it must.)
Hmm... what's wrong with "soccer", exactly? I think it's a good idea to distinguish the sport names when there are at least five different kinds of "football".
Not to be a jerk, but how is that insightful? Its not even really that funny. An open source grammar checker would be extremely useful. Everyone mistypes from time to time, and often times spellcheckes are unable to catch it.
Sure. If we had grammar checkers in all web browsers by default, they might suggest the word "oftentimes" instead of the user using the two words separately, and similar issues.
But is this really the problem when most people don't even check their spelling enough to get the word "spellcheckers" right?
We usually design the entire GUI to be properly separated into model/view in the first place, so that we can thoroughly test the model to the point where we know that no matter what bug might exist in the UI itself, the user won't be able to find it.;-)
What you're looking for for web stuff is probably HttpUnit. There is an equivalent for Swing apps too, but we've tried it and it really took more time (10 times more) to write the tests than to write the code, so we decided against it.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree that it should be the applications which have to conform, not the distros.
For starters, applications should not assume a certain directory layout, and should just install to the appropriate places based on the distro. Yes, this means that package managers might need to be slightly smarter than they currently are. But existing source-based installation already works for the majority of packages.
Case in point: GoboLinux. Now, those guys have introduced a more intuitive filesystem hierarchy that actually works and makes sense at the same time (which is rare.) However, Linux Standard Base, which depends on the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard, outright prohibits their directory layout.
So... let's fast forward to when LSB is in widespread use. Application vendors start assuming that LSB is all they need to support "Linux". Distros who won't have a bar of the shitty legacy directory layout we've had to endure for decades will basically be punished for being forward-thinking.
So yeah, LSB sounds real great.
To get infected on Windows you... have to turn the system on. As far as I can tell.
Now, that's just being a bit unfair to Windows, IMO.
You also have to connect it to the network. :-)
Turn off ActiveX, JavaScript and images in IE, and it becomes just as safe as Firefox with everything enabled. So I don't see a problem with IE at all.
Sorry, links to Bugzilla from Slashdot are disabled.
Aren't they a little late to be researching anti-camera devices, when we just saw one a whole day ago?
Well, you're calling various methods on that object which assume that it's a string. I'd imagine you'd be changing all of those when you change the collection type.
If you know it's a string, though, you won't be iterating through objects, you'll be iterating through strings. So the sum benefit is 3 characters, the difference between typing "var" and "string".
I guess if you made a duct tape wallet out of metallic duct tape, it would block radio waves for free. :-)
Maybe not that amorous couple, but I can see some robbers getting some use out of this sort of technology if it works well.
Bah, that was a low-flying duck!
A great IDE would still be a good start, though. I'm still waiting to see an IntelliJ IDEA for C#... the JetBrains guys do seem to be working on a few C# apps lately, so who knows, maybe it will happen.
All personal experience with Visual Spewdio.NET has been less than satisfactory due to all the missing features, mainly thanks to my experience with actually-"great" IDEs.
Funnily enough, most database binding libraries in Ruby seem to work exactly like that.
The way I see it, a language which pretends to be statically typed (as Java and C# do) should stick to being statically typed. If developers wanted to use a dynamically-typed language they would use one, rather than perverting another language which doesn't quite fit the programming paradigm.
It also seems to me that this battle between Java and C# is mainly to distract people away from languages like Ruby which really are a step forward instead of just an evolution on top of something else.
Wouldn't it be better to use packages to distinguish classes from each other instead of building increasingly-long classnames to avoid collisions? Then you would no longer need to worry about really long classnames like that.
Your example seems to throw away the type information to the same degree as his did. In both cases, the actual type of the object is unmodified and merely the type of the reference has changed.
My bad. I thought you said "Sparkle", not "Sparkle beta". Oh, wait a second... you did say "Sparkle".
I think there is a big difference between something existing, and something existing in the future. The phrase "you can also do it in Vista/XP" means that Vista and Sparkle are already out, but clearly neither of these things exist yet.
So someone just needs to learn a little about English, specifically tense.
How can you do something in an application if the application doesn't even exist yet?
That really depends on what you mean by "fails."
If the Revolution actually doesn't work. If the games actually suck... the interface doesn't work in practice, or anything like that... then it has failed, and they should probably continue to develop for other consoles. Though, I would be happier to see them shift exclusively to the DS and utterly destroy Sony in the handheld market instead of just kicking them in the nuts like they are now. :-)
On the other hand, if you define failing as simply not selling to the majority of the market, and if you think the GameCube failed, then you more than likely don't own one so wouldn't know. All of Nintendo's games on the GameCube have been top notch, and we'd be in a really bad place if the new Zelda weren't going to be released for it. All of their fans are obviously still going to buy their games, in the same fashion that millions of Mac users still buy Macs.
GameCube didn't "fail"... and in a way, it's better that it doesn't have the majority of the market, because what would happen to the game selection when that happened? (Hint: sports, racing, fighters. No thanks.)
You can't really compare an academic price (which is basically a discount) with a system that isn't discounted.
Is there a better CSS editor out there than Vim? I actually want to know, because it takes hours to position everything right sometimes, and it would save much more time if I could just draw what I want and have it generate the CSS.
We started with step 1 a couple of years ago, and haven't moved onto step 2 yet. Got any tips on how to get there? Does it take longer than a couple of years? (I guess it must.)
Hmm... what's wrong with "soccer", exactly? I think it's a good idea to distinguish the sport names when there are at least five different kinds of "football".
Not to be a jerk, but how is that insightful? Its not even really that funny. An open source grammar checker would be extremely useful. Everyone mistypes from time to time, and often times spellcheckes are unable to catch it.
Sure. If we had grammar checkers in all web browsers by default, they might suggest the word "oftentimes" instead of the user using the two words separately, and similar issues.
But is this really the problem when most people don't even check their spelling enough to get the word "spellcheckers" right?
"The fruit flies through the air"... "Flew" is never a noun, so the ambiguity is gone.
We usually design the entire GUI to be properly separated into model/view in the first place, so that we can thoroughly test the model to the point where we know that no matter what bug might exist in the UI itself, the user won't be able to find it. ;-)
What you're looking for for web stuff is probably HttpUnit. There is an equivalent for Swing apps too, but we've tried it and it really took more time (10 times more) to write the tests than to write the code, so we decided against it.