Macros are also inherited wholesale from C and are discouraged (if not resolutely forbidden by good style guides) in C++, so calling them part of "the problem" with C++ seems unfair.
And unless you count macros, the differences between C++ and Java in terms of "ways to write things" begin to disappear. C++ supports operator overloading and doesn't require you (mindlessly, IMHO) to place every function inside a class, but aside from that, you have many of the same options when it comes to structuring a given representation of a program.
I still wouldn't recommend it for beginners; the sheer weight of all the features and idiosyncrasies (not to mention the occasionally esoteric rules) make it a pretty substantial undertaking to use the language correctly. A good language for a beginner should allow them to focus on learning fundamental concepts, rather than forcing them to attend to countless details like always giving your base classes a virtual destructor and religiously checking buffer lengths and pointers in an attempt to avoid the nasal demons.
C and Java (forget C++, it tries to be C and Java, but fails to beat both)
I'll readily agree that C++ is an awkward and complicated language that is absolutely not suitable for beginners, but how can it try to be Java? C++ predates Java by over a decade.
Having a tendency to come up with bright ideas under pressure is simply a liability in the world of street level law enforcement.
How about having a tendency to come up with stupid ideas under pressure? The problem here wouldn't be intelligence, but a lack of discipline. Strong reasoning ability doesn't imply an incapacity for working within a control structure or following orders in a crisis.
Sometimes it depends on your local police department's policies. For instance, in Ohio it is legal to carry a weapon as long as it is NOT concealed. But, if you try to do so, many police departments will arrest you and charge you with inciting a riot or some such nonsense. Or, if you get in your car with the weapon, you are then concealing it.
It is legal to carry concealed in Ohio if you have the appropriate license. Ohio, like most states, has a "shall-issue" licensing law, which requires the state to grant a license to every applicant not disqualified by a criminal conviction or the like, so this is generally not a problem.
Unconcealed carry is legal in a lot of states, and while police generally don't like it and will often do their best to discourage the practice, in most places they would be treading on thin ice legally to actually attempt to charge you with anything.
Meant to mod the parent "Insightful," but I slipped and selected "Redundant" instead. Thanks to the stupid new moderation interface, selecting an item from the listbox automatically performs moderation, so I didn't have any chance to verify my selection. >:-/
So don't mind me, I'm just posting here to remove the effect of my inadvertent moderation.:-)
Actually, I think something like this happened to me just a couple weeks ago. I was using Firefox 3 on Windows XP Professional SP3 with AVG and Zone Alarm, all up-to-date. I was browsing several different sites, all with lots of advertisements -- I had recently reinstalled FF, and I hadn't acquired ABP yet. Suddenly, I get a series of popups, followed immediately by a segfault notification for "a.exe." Moments later, AVG alerted me that it had detected a trojan in "C:\WINDOWS\System32\a.exe."
So, not only did some script manage to download a trojan into system32, it executed it completely without any response or authorization on my part.
I forget exactly which trojan it was that AVG found; I was just about to wipe that drive clean and reinstall so my dad could use it in his computer anyway, so I didn't bother to investigate more deeply. Still an alarming experience though, since Firefox is supposed to be less prone to that sort of vulnerability.
You're joking, right? If somebody on the street attacks me with a knife, the only thing non-violence is going to beget is me being dead. Fuck that. Running isn't always an option. If I don't feel I can make good my escape while ensuring my safety and the safety of those around me, I will respond with whatever force I have available that will be necessary and sufficient to decisively end the threat. Usually, this will be 9 rounds of.45ACP.
I don't consider this "stooping" to any level, and if anything, a street criminal being gunned down by one of his victims will beget less violence, as other lowlifes begin to understand that the next person they try to rob or rape might just be their last.
It is now deemed "GOOD" for the media to ignore reporting the largely unknown (under-reported) fact that many quite highly qualified individuals seriously question the official story behind what is quite possibly the most important recent event in United States history?!
"Highly qualified"? I'm sure. Just like creationists are always ready to trot out all those "highly-qualified biologists" who oppose evolution.
I don't see anything wrong with ignoring crackpot conspiracy theories that have already been thoroughly debunked.
Personally, I think that any civilian who wants to walk around armed is a lunatic and should by no means be allowed to carry a weapon.
Uh huh. I suppose this doesn't apply to police officers, of course? Because having a badge automatically makes one more competent and responsible than any civilian with firearms training.
My position is that anyone appropriately trained in the defensive use of a weapon should be able to carry one in public - that includes police officers and citizens with concealed carry permits. (At least, in those states where such certification is required for a CCW; those where you can get one just by filling out a form are a little crazy, IMHO.)
I'm one of those pro-gun folks who does (and did, after VA Tech) suggest that if everyone (or a non-trivial percentage) was packing on campus, that there may have been fewer deaths.
Well, I certainly agree that people should have the ability to defend themselves. However, I don't think arming *everyone* is even remotely a good idea. There are too many people who just don't have the responsibility, judgment, or emotional control necessary to effectively use a firearm in a self-defense capability in a life-or-death situation.
My personal opinion is that anyone with a concealed carry permit should be allowed to carry on public university campuses (in private schools, of course, it is at the discretion of the administration). I also believe that to be issued a concealed carry permit should require a thorough background check and a reasonable amount of training and testing to help ensure competency, judgment under fire, and familiarity with laws regarding the defensive use of force.
I'd much rather have a criminal feel nice and safe with a simple handgun than feel he has to be armed with a semi-automatic or fully-automatic gun.
Well, you can't exactly conceal an AK-47 or an M4, can you? (Unless you're large and willing to wear a trenchcoat and walk stiffly...) Most criminals choose handguns because they're cheap, small, and easy to conceal (not to mention readily available). And I would venture to say that most run-of-the-mill muggers and robbers are looking to avoid a shootout of any kind, whatever it is they're packing - to them the purpose of a gun is first and foremost to intimidate someone into compliance.
The fact that you can pretty reliably guess that people who simulate child porn are probably also interested in the real thing, but that tens of thousands of people who go on shooting sprees in Counter-Strike don't even own guns should highlight some of the difference between the two.
And yet many of us who play Counterstrike do own guns. What's your point?
Hm, I kinda figured most cities had done away with that by applying laws about "public disturbance" or something like that. Ridiculous, if you ask me. I grew up in rural areas where a person walking down the street with a rifle on his back or a pistol in a holster wouldn't even raise an eyebrow. Except maybe to say something along the lines of "nice rifle.":-)
You're not deterring crap if it's concealed. Come up with a better deterrent than walking down the street with a shotgun over one shoulder...You'll have the whole damn sidewalk to yourself.
A guy I know used to be homeless on the streets of L.A. several decades ago. The only possession he carried with him everywhere was his AR-15. He was very careful never to carry ammunition when he was in the city (which would have been illegal, I believe; he was regularly stopped by police about it), but I don't think anybody ever gave him any trouble.;-)
I definitely don't think that would fly today though.
Well said, though naturally we all hope it would never come to that. The hope of preventing such an eventuality is what the soapbox, the ballot box, and the jury box are for!:-)
Pause the game with (+), hit the "Options" button, and go to "Pointer options", IIRC. It'll walk you through a few simple calibrations, including the sensor bar's onscreen size. It seemed to really improve precision and accuracy for me.
I was just pointing out that the law on the books defines the militia very broadly. It's not that important anyway since the Second Amendment guarantees the [i]individual[/i] right to bear arms. (This is the DOJ's opinion too, not just mine.)
Perhaps you could make a better effort to research and understand the law before you go spouting off comments like that.
Even if the Second Amendment referred only to ownership of arms by a "government sponsored militia" (which it doesn't), there's the little fact that under the provisions of USC Title 10, Chapter 13, Section 311, every male citizen between the ages of 17 and 45 years is a member of the militia of the United States. Look it up.
In regard to the wording of the Second Amendment: what makes you think "the People" refers to a government-sponsored militia, rather than, you know, to the people? Does the notion of a prefatory clause confuse you?
Slashdot Mirror
Macros are also inherited wholesale from C and are discouraged (if not resolutely forbidden by good style guides) in C++, so calling them part of "the problem" with C++ seems unfair.
And unless you count macros, the differences between C++ and Java in terms of "ways to write things" begin to disappear. C++ supports operator overloading and doesn't require you (mindlessly, IMHO) to place every function inside a class, but aside from that, you have many of the same options when it comes to structuring a given representation of a program.
I still wouldn't recommend it for beginners; the sheer weight of all the features and idiosyncrasies (not to mention the occasionally esoteric rules) make it a pretty substantial undertaking to use the language correctly. A good language for a beginner should allow them to focus on learning fundamental concepts, rather than forcing them to attend to countless details like always giving your base classes a virtual destructor and religiously checking buffer lengths and pointers in an attempt to avoid the nasal demons.
C and Java (forget C++, it tries to be C and Java, but fails to beat both)
I'll readily agree that C++ is an awkward and complicated language that is absolutely not suitable for beginners, but how can it try to be Java? C++ predates Java by over a decade.
Having a tendency to come up with bright ideas under pressure is simply a liability in the world of street level law enforcement.
How about having a tendency to come up with stupid ideas under pressure? The problem here wouldn't be intelligence, but a lack of discipline. Strong reasoning ability doesn't imply an incapacity for working within a control structure or following orders in a crisis.
Sometimes it depends on your local police department's policies. For instance, in Ohio it is legal to carry a weapon as long as it is NOT concealed. But, if you try to do so, many police departments will arrest you and charge you with inciting a riot or some such nonsense. Or, if you get in your car with the weapon, you are then concealing it.
It is legal to carry concealed in Ohio if you have the appropriate license. Ohio, like most states, has a "shall-issue" licensing law, which requires the state to grant a license to every applicant not disqualified by a criminal conviction or the like, so this is generally not a problem.
Unconcealed carry is legal in a lot of states, and while police generally don't like it and will often do their best to discourage the practice, in most places they would be treading on thin ice legally to actually attempt to charge you with anything.
Meant to mod the parent "Insightful," but I slipped and selected "Redundant" instead. Thanks to the stupid new moderation interface, selecting an item from the listbox automatically performs moderation, so I didn't have any chance to verify my selection. >:-/
So don't mind me, I'm just posting here to remove the effect of my inadvertent moderation. :-)
Actually, I think something like this happened to me just a couple weeks ago. I was using Firefox 3 on Windows XP Professional SP3 with AVG and Zone Alarm, all up-to-date. I was browsing several different sites, all with lots of advertisements -- I had recently reinstalled FF, and I hadn't acquired ABP yet. Suddenly, I get a series of popups, followed immediately by a segfault notification for "a.exe." Moments later, AVG alerted me that it had detected a trojan in "C:\WINDOWS\System32\a.exe."
So, not only did some script manage to download a trojan into system32, it executed it completely without any response or authorization on my part.
I forget exactly which trojan it was that AVG found; I was just about to wipe that drive clean and reinstall so my dad could use it in his computer anyway, so I didn't bother to investigate more deeply. Still an alarming experience though, since Firefox is supposed to be less prone to that sort of vulnerability.
*Ahem*
Seattle's not a major city anymore? ;-)
Sincerely,
- An Annoyed Seattleite
Against gun control? Pro union? Pro civil liberty and equality? Seems that above all else, he was pro-freedom.
No need to drag the phony conservative/liberal left/right political dichotomy into things...
Hmmmm. I have a 12-gauge in my closet, and I sure don't see any tigers around here! It must work! :-D
You're joking, right? If somebody on the street attacks me with a knife, the only thing non-violence is going to beget is me being dead. Fuck that. Running isn't always an option. If I don't feel I can make good my escape while ensuring my safety and the safety of those around me, I will respond with whatever force I have available that will be necessary and sufficient to decisively end the threat. Usually, this will be 9 rounds of .45ACP.
I don't consider this "stooping" to any level, and if anything, a street criminal being gunned down by one of his victims will beget less violence, as other lowlifes begin to understand that the next person they try to rob or rape might just be their last.
"Highly qualified"? I'm sure. Just like creationists are always ready to trot out all those "highly-qualified biologists" who oppose evolution.
I don't see anything wrong with ignoring crackpot conspiracy theories that have already been thoroughly debunked.
Uh huh. I suppose this doesn't apply to police officers, of course? Because having a badge automatically makes one more competent and responsible than any civilian with firearms training.
My position is that anyone appropriately trained in the defensive use of a weapon should be able to carry one in public - that includes police officers and citizens with concealed carry permits. (At least, in those states where such certification is required for a CCW; those where you can get one just by filling out a form are a little crazy, IMHO.)
Well, I certainly agree that people should have the ability to defend themselves. However, I don't think arming *everyone* is even remotely a good idea. There are too many people who just don't have the responsibility, judgment, or emotional control necessary to effectively use a firearm in a self-defense capability in a life-or-death situation.
My personal opinion is that anyone with a concealed carry permit should be allowed to carry on public university campuses (in private schools, of course, it is at the discretion of the administration). I also believe that to be issued a concealed carry permit should require a thorough background check and a reasonable amount of training and testing to help ensure competency, judgment under fire, and familiarity with laws regarding the defensive use of force.
Hm, I kinda figured most cities had done away with that by applying laws about "public disturbance" or something like that. Ridiculous, if you ask me. I grew up in rural areas where a person walking down the street with a rifle on his back or a pistol in a holster wouldn't even raise an eyebrow. Except maybe to say something along the lines of "nice rifle." :-)
A guy I know used to be homeless on the streets of L.A. several decades ago. The only possession he carried with him everywhere was his AR-15. He was very careful never to carry ammunition when he was in the city (which would have been illegal, I believe; he was regularly stopped by police about it), but I don't think anybody ever gave him any trouble. ;-)
I definitely don't think that would fly today though.
Well said, though naturally we all hope it would never come to that. The hope of preventing such an eventuality is what the soapbox, the ballot box, and the jury box are for! :-)
Pause the game with (+), hit the "Options" button, and go to "Pointer options", IIRC. It'll walk you through a few simple calibrations, including the sensor bar's onscreen size. It seemed to really improve precision and accuracy for me.
Er, yeah, I'm aware of that. Question mark? :-)
I was just pointing out that the law on the books defines the militia very broadly. It's not that important anyway since the Second Amendment guarantees the [i]individual[/i] right to bear arms. (This is the DOJ's opinion too, not just mine.)
Don't worry, there are at least of few of us gun nuts with our heads on our shoulders. :-D
*Ahem*
Perhaps you could make a better effort to research and understand the law before you go spouting off comments like that.
Even if the Second Amendment referred only to ownership of arms by a "government sponsored militia" (which it doesn't), there's the little fact that under the provisions of USC Title 10, Chapter 13, Section 311, every male citizen between the ages of 17 and 45 years is a member of the militia of the United States. Look it up.
In regard to the wording of the Second Amendment: what makes you think "the People" refers to a government-sponsored militia, rather than, you know, to the people? Does the notion of a prefatory clause confuse you?