Fair enough. Good response. I still think its a significant draw back to have to write the performance sensitive stuff in C, but maybe that's because I often work on performance sensitive stuff.
FYI, never said I didn't like Python. I greatly prefer it to Java ( for non performance critical code). The future of everything is wonderful, I'll wait until it becomes the mundane present before trashing it.
Nothing is ideal. Nothing is perfectly optimised. Java is widely used for a variety of tasks. Which makes selecting a successor a bit difficult. Java, while not as fast as FORTRAN, or Ocaml, isn't ruby slow. Its decent. Like a stock entry level corvette. Its not a Ferrari, but not a semi truck. If you're going to replace it wholesale without any more details about the task, it make sense to choose something closer to its specs. In some cases that may be stupid ( like if some one was using their corvette to haul concrete to a job site), but if you trust the people who are using a tool to have used it appropriately, its the only logical thing to do.
The issue is the languages themselves. If you have to write all of the performance critical sections in C, why bother using the non C language in the first place?
Ok, prove it. Benchmark the languages. Java is much faster than any of the existing implementations of those languages that do not run on top of the JVM ( so don't count Jython or Jruby).
The implicit assumption with the different time periods given, is that the bulk of the sales took place at the beginning of the availability of the product.
I'd agree with you that's probably a faulty assumption. However, that's also the old Music industry trick too. The chart toppers are for sales for a week. That assumption is usually true for pop records and hip hop, but not for rock. So it sometimes looks like Rock isn't popular because you are always looking at weekly sales figures.
Common mistake, the slogan is orally pronounced, which came out of the googlers storied oral tradition in which they would recite search results from memory over the campfire as their roast beast slowly rotated on the spit.
Wow, yeah. Don't bother trying to hit the related stories links form the main article either. They're just as poorly written. I can't tell who did what,when. As I now ( probably incorrectly ) understand, there was a company Cheyenne mountain that was developing a video game, they may have gone bankrupt. Other companies emerged from the dust out of former employees and inverters ( dark comet), Having access to Cheyenne studios, they just took stuff and the project itself for a small amount of money, with out the authorization of Cheyenne. Cheyenne then sued and won, not before dark star pretty much trashed the stuff dark comet had stolen.
That's my best guess. Either that or it was Col Mustard in the study with the rope.
Well, If I asked joe random guy on street for a calculator, what are the features that I could guarantee with 100% accuracy it to have. That is what I would consider a calculator.
This book isn't about that. This book is about changing the storage and retrieval mechanism to best fit your applications data needs. Its the same sort of change as switching from a MS access database to a MS SQL Server, if you were moving your product from a desktop app to the web.
I don't think you understood my analogy. How much energy does it take to make a little bit o mass? Probably the same amount of power is necessary to convert to money.
[q]Aren't all our sciences outside quantum physics deterministic?[/q]
Nope. They are not, if quantum mechanics is correct. Science is built upon science. If the lowest level of interaction of particles is deterministic then they all are. If it is not, then they are not(but for all practical purposes they certainly can be considered to be deterministic, but we know there is always a minisucle probability > 0 that something odd will happen.
Free will is in opposition to determinism. Either we can choose what we do, or it was predetermined in the initial conditions of the universe.
Plus that, that was the whole superdetermininisim argument in the first place: If Superdeterminisim is correct, there isn't such a thing as free will and thus nothing too strange about bells experimental results.
If our brains are quantum mechanical devices, that doesn't mean that all of our thoughts are random. Just that they are not 100% reliable. That seems to be my experience. Plus, you can force quantum mechanics non determinism to work for you to get some sweet results: like, uhmm, quantum computers. I'm okay my thoughts not being completely logical, and I'll admit sometimes my effects are not very closely related to any external causes, but that doesn't mean I have a random number generator in there.
I find superdeterminisim to be even stranger than quantum mechanics, and too close to creationism/intelligent design to me. The answer to every question simply becomes " because that's the way God did it" Or "because that's the way the initial conditions set it up". It seems downright psuedo scientific and even more of a philosophical intrusion.
I also find the lack of free will to be more mind boggling, with more bad implications in real life than quantum mechanics.
All theories are really just models of the universe, some work better and tell us more about how the universe does work. Quantum mechanics does tell us many very important things about our universe. Most importantly, and confusingly for everyone first learning it, our universe is not deterministic. Unlike dice, where we could predict with absolute certainty what the outcome would be if we collected enough data about the throw, we cannot do that in the quantum world. There are no "hidden variables" that we could use to increase the accuracy of our probabilistic predictions.
Uhm, That's my point. They have to make up for those costs some how. The exorbitant charges for text messages also is a source of income to cover those costs, just like per minute charges.
The cell carriers have a business where many of their core costs are not obviously related to the service they provide. When they add a new cell tower, they can't actually just add a service fee to everyone who will regularly use that tower. They have to cover that cost from existing fees from customers. So they've developed a system to charge people for their use, even though that use doesn't directly corrilate with costs they incur providing that service.
What else, besides your companies policies, would have to change for you to consider it a drop in replacement for the official JDK that is available in mainstream yum repositories?
You had me at improbsible. The problem is that everything that does happen is improbable from some perspective. The probabilites of you existing and reading this in the exact same way that you are doing it right now, from the moment of the sun's birth out a cloud of gas was pretty improbable. Probably improsible. However the odds taken from the moment you clicked on the link that displayed this, were much more probable.
A: Since Oracle's takeover of Sun Microsystems, the Community has been under "notice to quit" from our previous Collabnet infrastructure. With today's announcement of a Foundation, we now have an entity which can own our emerging new infrastructure.
Basically Oracle told them their lease was up. Yea Oracle! I didn't already have enough reasons to loathe thee.
Slashdot Mirror
Fair enough. Good response. I still think its a significant draw back to have to write the performance sensitive stuff in C, but maybe that's because I often work on performance sensitive stuff.
FYI, never said I didn't like Python. I greatly prefer it to Java ( for non performance critical code). The future of everything is wonderful, I'll wait until it becomes the mundane present before trashing it.
Nothing is ideal. Nothing is perfectly optimised. Java is widely used for a variety of tasks. Which makes selecting a successor a bit difficult. Java, while not as fast as FORTRAN, or Ocaml, isn't ruby slow. Its decent. Like a stock entry level corvette. Its not a Ferrari, but not a semi truck. If you're going to replace it wholesale without any more details about the task, it make sense to choose something closer to its specs. In some cases that may be stupid ( like if some one was using their corvette to haul concrete to a job site), but if you trust the people who are using a tool to have used it appropriately, its the only logical thing to do.
The issue is the languages themselves. If you have to write all of the performance critical sections in C, why bother using the non C language in the first place?
Depend on what your doing. Check out some benchmarks
For complex number crunching purposes, Java kills perl. For a website, perl's probably good enough.
Ok, prove it. Benchmark the languages. Java is much faster than any of the existing implementations of those languages that do not run on top of the JVM ( so don't count Jython or Jruby).
The implicit assumption with the different time periods given, is that the bulk of the sales took place at the beginning of the availability of the product.
I'd agree with you that's probably a faulty assumption. However, that's also the old Music industry trick too. The chart toppers are for sales for a week. That assumption is usually true for pop records and hip hop, but not for rock. So it sometimes looks like Rock isn't popular because you are always looking at weekly sales figures.
What exactly do you think his opinion should be?
Hey mr CTO, you could fire all of us really productive, but really expensive engineers, if you only paid for support. You should do this now!
Common mistake, the slogan is orally pronounced, which came out of the googlers storied oral tradition in which they would recite search results from memory over the campfire as their roast beast slowly rotated on the spit.
Its actually:
Do know evil.
Wow, yeah. Don't bother trying to hit the related stories links form the main article either. They're just as poorly written. I can't tell who did what ,when. As I now ( probably incorrectly ) understand, there was a company Cheyenne mountain that was developing a video game, they may have gone bankrupt. Other companies emerged from the dust out of former employees and inverters ( dark comet), Having access to Cheyenne studios, they just took stuff and the project itself for a small amount of money, with out the authorization of Cheyenne. Cheyenne then sued and won, not before dark star pretty much trashed the stuff dark comet had stolen.
That's my best guess. Either that or it was Col Mustard in the study with the rope.
responding to undo bad mod. Finger slipped. Meant to rate "funny".
Well, If I asked joe random guy on street for a calculator, what are the features that I could guarantee with 100% accuracy it to have. That is what I would consider a calculator.
+-/*
When was the calculator or notepad sold seperate of windows? I'm pretty sure they were a part of windows 1.0
wiki argrees
I don't want anything bleeding to hold my hand, least of all an edge.
This book isn't about that. This book is about changing the storage and retrieval mechanism to best fit your applications data needs. Its the same sort of change as switching from a MS access database to a MS SQL Server, if you were moving your product from a desktop app to the web.
I don't think you understood my analogy. How much energy does it take to make a little bit o mass? Probably the same amount of power is necessary to convert to money.
If you have enough money or power, can't you just use it to get the other? Much like matter and energy they can be converted back and forth.
P= $e^2
[q]Aren't all our sciences outside quantum physics deterministic?[/q]
Nope. They are not, if quantum mechanics is correct. Science is built upon science. If the lowest level of interaction of particles is deterministic then they all are. If it is not, then they are not(but for all practical purposes they certainly can be considered to be deterministic, but we know there is always a minisucle probability > 0 that something odd will happen.
Free will is in opposition to determinism. Either we can choose what we do, or it was predetermined in the initial conditions of the universe.
Plus that, that was the whole superdetermininisim argument in the first place: If Superdeterminisim is correct, there isn't such a thing as free will and thus nothing too strange about bells experimental results.
If our brains are quantum mechanical devices, that doesn't mean that all of our thoughts are random. Just that they are not 100% reliable. That seems to be my experience. Plus, you can force quantum mechanics non determinism to work for you to get some sweet results: like, uhmm, quantum computers. I'm okay my thoughts not being completely logical, and I'll admit sometimes my effects are not very closely related to any external causes, but that doesn't mean I have a random number generator in there.
I find superdeterminisim to be even stranger than quantum mechanics, and too close to creationism/intelligent design to me. The answer to every question simply becomes " because that's the way God did it" Or "because that's the way the initial conditions set it up". It seems downright psuedo scientific and even more of a philosophical intrusion. I also find the lack of free will to be more mind boggling, with more bad implications in real life than quantum mechanics.
All theories are really just models of the universe, some work better and tell us more about how the universe does work. Quantum mechanics does tell us many very important things about our universe. Most importantly, and confusingly for everyone first learning it, our universe is not deterministic. Unlike dice, where we could predict with absolute certainty what the outcome would be if we collected enough data about the throw, we cannot do that in the quantum world. There are no "hidden variables" that we could use to increase the accuracy of our probabilistic predictions.
See bells theorem for more mind bending details.
Uhm, That's my point. They have to make up for those costs some how. The exorbitant charges for text messages also is a source of income to cover those costs, just like per minute charges.
The cell carriers have a business where many of their core costs are not obviously related to the service they provide. When they add a new cell tower, they can't actually just add a service fee to everyone who will regularly use that tower. They have to cover that cost from existing fees from customers. So they've developed a system to charge people for their use, even though that use doesn't directly corrilate with costs they incur providing that service.
openjdk is in FC's yum repositories. It seems to be decent enough for my uses ( and red hats).
Its passed the certification test for Java .
What else, besides your companies policies, would have to change for you to consider it a drop in replacement for the official JDK that is available in mainstream yum repositories?
You had me at improbsible. The problem is that everything that does happen is improbable from some perspective. The probabilites of you existing and reading this in the exact same way that you are doing it right now, from the moment of the sun's birth out a cloud of gas was pretty improbable. Probably improsible. However the odds taken from the moment you clicked on the link that displayed this, were much more probable.
Q: Why are you building a new web infrastructure?
A: Since Oracle's takeover of Sun Microsystems, the Community has been under "notice to quit" from our previous Collabnet infrastructure. With today's announcement of a Foundation, we now have an entity which can own our emerging new infrastructure.
Basically Oracle told them their lease was up. Yea Oracle! I didn't already have enough reasons to loathe thee.