Python have some problems with I/O being allowed only in ASCII or Unicode on some circunstances, depending on your version. It also has some problems with composing codepoints, lengths, encode translations, and other of that stuff that nobody does right.
Yet, Python has the most comprehensive support for Unicode of any language that I looked out, outside of C/C++. (Beats Perl 5 in any day. I don't know about 6.) It's just that no language has complete support (except for C/C++, that properly ignores the entire issue).
you can give a type to an arbitrary pointer, and do strongly typed enums that way?
Strongly typed... C... Those things do not belong in the same sentence.
The point is probably that there must be some behaviour, and it's better to define it. Thus, they defined. I hightly doubt it has any practical application, besides minimizing the damage in case of some kind of error.
From the GNU C manual (in the section about bit fields):
You can also specify a bit field of size 0, which indicates that subsequent bit fields not further bit fields should be packed into the unit containing the previous bit field. This is likewise not generally useful.
I guess now I have a new favorite C feature... Well, as soon as I actually understand what this means.
Also, GCC accepts empty structs, and they use no memory! I should look at the C specs more often.
Really, even if you are completely ignorant about it, it does not take much more than a short reading to see how simpler IPv6 is. That's why it corrects so many issues.
The problem with IPX style local names assignment is in security. Doing it in the open, wild Internet is a certain way to destroy it. The nearest option that's actualy usable is dynamic DNS, and it's quite widspread.
What about just not allowing passwords to connect from a network? Is it too simple, or what?
It's simply stupid to prohibit robots from connecting. It means you'll never be able to automate your work. It's also not viable to lock the system, as it'll turn any bot anywhere into a severe DoS attak. And trying to discern intent from behaviour is way too hard a task for a computer.
You can't change the referential during calculations. Not on Classical Mechanics, because referentials can not accelerate, and in general relativity things are much more complex. Thus, no, it does not take the same amount of energy to accelerate from 0 to 10mph as it does from 90 to 100mph.
What may help you is realising that classical mechanics do not hold for acelerating referentials. And, yes, the added energy varies with the choosen referential.
You're not talking a huge difference in speed at that point...
Are you aware that the kinetic energy is proportional to the SQUARE of the speed, right? There is a huge difference in safety - much bigger than between 40MPH and 70MPH.
You know, in a imaginary future where machines outcompete humans in every task, and no job is available for more humans to perform anymore, all those problems you cited just go away.
Nah. Each one of those clocks are showing their own time, that may disagree by minutes or entire hours... I don't use a watch, but only use the computers and telephone clocks.
How would a telephone call work on a watch? One can put it near either the mouth or a ear, not both, and in any of those situations, it's quite an unconfortable position.
The problem is worse than that. It's a matter of the media missrepresenting the problem, and people not looking into the details to notice the hype.
I've never seen a technical forecast being delayed, only anticipated. The first one I saw from the working group was working with widespread adoption (like what we have now) of IPv6 by 2020-2025 and IPv4 addresses running out by as late as 2030. The media can't stand having that much time to fix a problem.
Which won't be for a long while because of all the old computers out there that have either no or insufficient IPv6 support.
Just how old are you estimating those old computers are? Windows XP has support for IPv6, as do the first 2.6 Linux kernel. I doubt there's a single smartphone without support for it.
The only reason we are not using IPv6 all along is because ISPs decided to save some 5% (probably less) of the cost on their last upgrades, or because they actively don't want to supply it.
To be fair my (badly constructed?) printer loses precision from vibration much before the stepers have any problem.
Also, all steps that it missed were due to electronic or software problems. Except when the software sent things beyhond the end of the printer, it never lost a step due to physical resistence.
Neural networks are Turing complete analogic copmputers programmed by setting weights within it... Hash algorithms are programs that given an input return an output that is very similar to random, except for the fact that it's completely deterministic.
In a Linux computer the button continues there, but there is a warning bellow it telling that the campaign only applies to Windows computers. When I click the button, it tries to download.exe file, Igot tempted to run it on Wine and see what it does, but setting a VM and etc is too much work:)
There is probably something in the.exe to tell them if you switch back. But I doubt they reclaim the credit, as that would break consumer laws.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe OS kernels are indeed too small nowadays, and we do need some basic services packaged in an integrated suite.
Or maybe it's due time to POSIX to die, and to divide issues differently between kernel and user space.
Anyway, the ascendence of Systemd is clear evidence that the way we organize our software is currently outdated.
What do you mean by a stable star anyway?
I just love the 4k TV trend.
Those rich people parting with their money now will finance a cheap very good quality set of computer monitors for me in just a few years.
Python have some problems with I/O being allowed only in ASCII or Unicode on some circunstances, depending on your version. It also has some problems with composing codepoints, lengths, encode translations, and other of that stuff that nobody does right.
Yet, Python has the most comprehensive support for Unicode of any language that I looked out, outside of C/C++. (Beats Perl 5 in any day. I don't know about 6.) It's just that no language has complete support (except for C/C++, that properly ignores the entire issue).
Can any language do unicode right yet?
You can throw away any language that uses UTF-16 right from the start. What's left is C/C++, if you are careful enough.
Strongly typed... C... Those things do not belong in the same sentence.
The point is probably that there must be some behaviour, and it's better to define it. Thus, they defined. I hightly doubt it has any practical application, besides minimizing the damage in case of some kind of error.
But yeah, it's amusing.
From the GNU C manual (in the section about bit fields):
I guess now I have a new favorite C feature... Well, as soon as I actually understand what this means.
Also, GCC accepts empty structs, and they use no memory! I should look at the C specs more often.
Really, even if you are completely ignorant about it, it does not take much more than a short reading to see how simpler IPv6 is. That's why it corrects so many issues.
The problem with IPX style local names assignment is in security. Doing it in the open, wild Internet is a certain way to destroy it. The nearest option that's actualy usable is dynamic DNS, and it's quite widspread.
What happened to Slashdot lately?
There's a xkcd for that: http://xkcd.com/1104/
"Administrative operations" is everything a governemnt does.
What about just not allowing passwords to connect from a network? Is it too simple, or what?
It's simply stupid to prohibit robots from connecting. It means you'll never be able to automate your work. It's also not viable to lock the system, as it'll turn any bot anywhere into a severe DoS attak. And trying to discern intent from behaviour is way too hard a task for a computer.
You can't change the referential during calculations. Not on Classical Mechanics, because referentials can not accelerate, and in general relativity things are much more complex. Thus, no, it does not take the same amount of energy to accelerate from 0 to 10mph as it does from 90 to 100mph.
What may help you is realising that classical mechanics do not hold for acelerating referentials. And, yes, the added energy varies with the choosen referential.
Are you aware that the kinetic energy is proportional to the SQUARE of the speed, right? There is a huge difference in safety - much bigger than between 40MPH and 70MPH.
You know, in a imaginary future where machines outcompete humans in every task, and no job is available for more humans to perform anymore, all those problems you cited just go away.
Yes, it works on the terminal. Autocompletion, and real time compiling also do.
Nah. Each one of those clocks are showing their own time, that may disagree by minutes or entire hours... I don't use a watch, but only use the computers and telephone clocks.
How would a telephone call work on a watch? One can put it near either the mouth or a ear, not both, and in any of those situations, it's quite an unconfortable position.
The problem is worse than that. It's a matter of the media missrepresenting the problem, and people not looking into the details to notice the hype.
I've never seen a technical forecast being delayed, only anticipated. The first one I saw from the working group was working with widespread adoption (like what we have now) of IPv6 by 2020-2025 and IPv4 addresses running out by as late as 2030. The media can't stand having that much time to fix a problem.
Just how old are you estimating those old computers are? Windows XP has support for IPv6, as do the first 2.6 Linux kernel. I doubt there's a single smartphone without support for it.
The only reason we are not using IPv6 all along is because ISPs decided to save some 5% (probably less) of the cost on their last upgrades, or because they actively don't want to supply it.
To be fair my (badly constructed?) printer loses precision from vibration much before the stepers have any problem.
Also, all steps that it missed were due to electronic or software problems. Except when the software sent things beyhond the end of the printer, it never lost a step due to physical resistence.
Besides, the extruder is the one motor where if you lose a couple of steps, your project won't be ruined.
Wake me up when they get closed loop positioning for the other axys.
Neural networks are Turing complete analogic copmputers programmed by setting weights within it... Hash algorithms are programs that given an input return an output that is very similar to random, except for the fact that it's completely deterministic.
What kind of semelhance did you see between them?
In a Linux computer the button continues there, but there is a warning bellow it telling that the campaign only applies to Windows computers. When I click the button, it tries to download .exe file, Igot tempted to run it on Wine and see what it does, but setting a VM and etc is too much work :)
There is probably something in the .exe to tell them if you switch back. But I doubt they reclaim the credit, as that would break consumer laws.
They brought it to kill MySQL.
Somehow they couldn't imagine that people would switch to MariaDB and PostgreSQL instead of Oracle...