So does this mean I can start using btrfs, at least for personal workstations? I've got a new box at the office waiting to be setup, with a 120GB Corsair SSD as the main system disk, normal 2TB harddisk as backup/media storage. Will be using Debian. Should I use btrfs?
If Windows Phone market has comparatively _more_ developers/apps/games compared to Android, how is it that you have less competition and can earn more easily? (Or are you talking about Windows Phone vs iPhone?)
This has been the Sony mantra since forever. Proprietary, proprietary, proprietary.... That's also why we are seeing zero involvement of Sony in the open source field.
Agreed. If there is a need for Firefox, it will still be alive somehow. I've never really used Firefox after all these years. Have been using Opera since nothing can replace it. Started using Chrome too for the past couple of years and have grown to like it, but still can't replace Opera as the main browser. Firefox? Meh.
How many times has Google been launching "a social network" (or "social integration")? First there's Orkut (failed), and then FriendFeed and its Blogger integration, and then Google Buzz (major fail!), now this Google Me. Just buy out Facebook (or Zynga, or both) and be done with it.
I too hate variable scoping in Javascript, even PHP is slightly better in that variables are local inside functions. There are other small annoyances too. But the biggest is: Javascript has been given monopoly on the client side for too long. I wonder how much better can the Web be if there were more competition on the client-side browser language.
$ grep kill ~/.bash_history | grep opera | tail -5
killall -9 opera
killall -USR2 opera
killall -9 opera
killall -9 -9 -9 opera
killall -9 opera
$ grep kill ~/.bash_history | grep opera | wc -l
175
I've used Opera for years since the 5.x days and have always loved it, but the past year it's generally becoming less stable and more annoying. It always seems to eat 100% cpu after some time, or crash at other times. Some builds are really terrible, stability- and performance-wise. Meanwhile Firefox is getting faster and faster and more stable and I'm finding myself opening Firefox more and more often.
However (unfortunately?), nothing comes close in handling lots of open tabs like Opera.
Yeah I know it's planned to be in 8.4 and there are hacks to do it in the current version. But it's ironic that "the world's most advanced open source database" doesn't have this feature, which is supposedly pretty basic and crucial in a relational database system. While the "toy" database that everybody loves to hate, Access, has had this for what, centuries?
Yeah I know, it's planned in 8.4 and there are currently hacks to do this in Postgres. But it's ironic that "The world's most advanced open source database" still does not have this feature, which according to relational theory, is pretty crucial. While the toy database which everybody loves to flame, Access, has had this for what, centuries?
Perl 6 is a language specification, remember? It's no longer a single implementation. Anything that passes the Perl 6 suite will be Perl 6, be it Parrot, Pugs,...
Anyway, we're seeing good progress recently with Parrot. We should be seeing a Perl 6.0.0 alpha "soon"...
And if your language doesn't support it natively, usually there's a library for it, as it's pretty easy to do (just create a wrapper sub which checks the args and choose the right sub).
Err, the other guy's explanation might be a bit complex.:-) Here's my attempt: basically you can define two or more subs with the same name but different number/types of args, e.g.: add(Int, Int), add(Float, Float), add(Complex, Complex). the runtime will automatically choose the right sub for you.
We have seen this used in several other places. PostgreSQL comes to mind.
Take a look at Komodo IDE. There used to be a Visual Studio plugin for Perl or something made by the same guys, but due to lack of demand development has ceased.
How about demoting the currently "high level" (C/C++ and the likes) languages to medium or low level. By today's standards, they're not very high level anyway.
Instead of debating which one should be used, why don't just use both? More security, all the better.
Using placeholders is a form of dilligence too. What if some programmers (like the new guys) forget, some of the time, to use them for newly-written SQL statements? On the other hand, sanitizing request parameters e.g. uid, sid, *id will work on all new SQL statements that involve these parameters.
Well, wake me up when "the damn thing that has great transactional support" can handle transactional DDL. MySQL and IB/FB both suck equally badly when it comes to handling DDL's (CREATE TABLE, RENAME TABLE, DROP TABLE, ALTER TABLE,...) in transactions. MySQL performs an "implicit commit", while IB/FB acts as if it can handle it but then behaves weirdly and the only thing to avoid weirdness is to perform a COMMIT after each DDL.
Slashdot Mirror
Score 5 Insightful... Funny... Interesting... what's the difference?
Where's the promised Rendezvous With Rama? I want to see the cylindrical sea, dammit.
BTW, are the dishes especially salty there? Or, whether the residents have a higher rate of HBP and stroke?
So does this mean I can start using btrfs, at least for personal workstations? I've got a new box at the office waiting to be setup, with a 120GB Corsair SSD as the main system disk, normal 2TB harddisk as backup/media storage. Will be using Debian. Should I use btrfs?
If Windows Phone market has comparatively _more_ developers/apps/games compared to Android, how is it that you have less competition and can earn more easily? (Or are you talking about Windows Phone vs iPhone?)
Waiting for their tagline to change to "Safe, Trusted, and We Apologize For Spyware"
This has been the Sony mantra since forever. Proprietary, proprietary, proprietary.... That's also why we are seeing zero involvement of Sony in the open source field.
Agreed. If there is a need for Firefox, it will still be alive somehow. I've never really used Firefox after all these years. Have been using Opera since nothing can replace it. Started using Chrome too for the past couple of years and have grown to like it, but still can't replace Opera as the main browser. Firefox? Meh.
Wow, talk about strawman :)
Where's my cheap energy? You promised to fix that too!
How many times has Google been launching "a social network" (or "social integration")? First there's Orkut (failed), and then FriendFeed and its Blogger integration, and then Google Buzz (major fail!), now this Google Me. Just buy out Facebook (or Zynga, or both) and be done with it.
I too hate variable scoping in Javascript, even PHP is slightly better in that variables are local inside functions. There are other small annoyances too. But the biggest is: Javascript has been given monopoly on the client side for too long. I wonder how much better can the Web be if there were more competition on the client-side browser language.
Did so a long time ago. Opera still crashes and freezes a lot.
Also I wonder, Firefox etc also has Flash/plugins. Why don't these other browsers crash a lot too like Opera then?
$ grep kill ~/.bash_history | grep opera | tail -5
killall -9 opera
killall -USR2 opera
killall -9 opera
killall -9 -9 -9 opera
killall -9 opera
$ grep kill ~/.bash_history | grep opera | wc -l
175
I've used Opera for years since the 5.x days and have always loved it, but the past year it's generally becoming less stable and more annoying. It always seems to eat 100% cpu after some time, or crash at other times. Some builds are really terrible, stability- and performance-wise. Meanwhile Firefox is getting faster and faster and more stable and I'm finding myself opening Firefox more and more often.
However (unfortunately?), nothing comes close in handling lots of open tabs like Opera.
Stop writing Perl as PERL please, it hurts my eye.
Yeah I know it's planned to be in 8.4 and there are hacks to do it in the current version. But it's ironic that "the world's most advanced open source database" doesn't have this feature, which is supposedly pretty basic and crucial in a relational database system. While the "toy" database that everybody loves to hate, Access, has had this for what, centuries?
Yeah I know, it's planned in 8.4 and there are currently hacks to do this in Postgres. But it's ironic that "The world's most advanced open source database" still does not have this feature, which according to relational theory, is pretty crucial. While the toy database which everybody loves to flame, Access, has had this for what, centuries?
Perl 6 is a language specification, remember? It's no longer a single implementation. Anything that passes the Perl 6 suite will be Perl 6, be it Parrot, Pugs, ...
Anyway, we're seeing good progress recently with Parrot. We should be seeing a Perl 6.0.0 alpha "soon" ...
And if your language doesn't support it natively, usually there's a library for it, as it's pretty easy to do (just create a wrapper sub which checks the args and choose the right sub).
Err, the other guy's explanation might be a bit complex. :-) Here's my attempt: basically you can define two or more subs with the same name but different number/types of args, e.g.: add(Int, Int), add(Float, Float), add(Complex, Complex). the runtime will automatically choose the right sub for you.
We have seen this used in several other places. PostgreSQL comes to mind.
Take a look at Komodo IDE. There used to be a Visual Studio plugin for Perl or something made by the same guys, but due to lack of demand development has ceased.
How about demoting the currently "high level" (C/C++ and the likes) languages to medium or low level. By today's standards, they're not very high level anyway.
Instead of debating which one should be used, why don't just use both? More security, all the better.
Using placeholders is a form of dilligence too. What if some programmers (like the new guys) forget, some of the time, to use them for newly-written SQL statements? On the other hand, sanitizing request parameters e.g. uid, sid, *id will work on all new SQL statements that involve these parameters.
Well, wake me up when "the damn thing that has great transactional support" can handle transactional DDL. MySQL and IB/FB both suck equally badly when it comes to handling DDL's (CREATE TABLE, RENAME TABLE, DROP TABLE, ALTER TABLE, ...) in transactions. MySQL performs an "implicit commit", while IB/FB acts as if it can handle it but then behaves weirdly and the only thing to avoid weirdness is to perform a COMMIT after each DDL.