It was like five different tests to do to a voting system. None of our systems pass all five. I think the term is "monotonicity" for part of the five or something, but I just gave up searching.
Approval voting is subject to voting stratagy though, in some ways more so then our current system.
I'll agree that we need a better election system; Personally I'm ultimiately in favor of the Condorcet System of voting because it's strategy free.
Indeed Condorcet voting is better than Approval voting, but it is also more complex to implement. So promoting Approval voting could be the best thing to do in the long run, as
advocated by the ElectionMethods.org website (which I think gives a very clear review of these issues).
The real solution would be a better election system, a good compromise being Approval Voting. Approval Voting uses the same ballot format as the current system but allows a voter to approve any number of candidates, effectively allowing a vote for or against each candidate. Approval Voting is a simple reform that gets rid of the spoiler and lesser-of-two-evils problems and would result in a level playing field for all parties and candidates.
I completely agree. Operator overloading does not offer more occasions to write misleading code than the ability to write methods with misleading names. In both cases, you need discipline to match the name (or the operator) with the semantics of the method. So in this case the drawbacks are almost non-existent, while the benefits are significant. The situation is less clear about invisible "magic" operations like copy constructors in C++.
Indeed, a language cannot prevent this kind of confusion, since "You cannot go from the informal to the formal by formal means", and the name of a method belongs to the informal. It should try to make as much errors as possible detectable at compile time, like cast errors, dereferencing null references, writes to covariant arrays,...
You could use Nice, which has operator overloading, generates Java bytecode, and allows you to give a syntactically pleasing interface to existing libraries. For instance, supposing there is Matrix.times(Matrix) method in the Jama package, you could declare in Nice:
Halh an hour after Fortran 2003 was announced on slashdot, the silence is deafening. Have most people migrated to other languages? I often heard that the amount of legacy code will make fortran survive for a long time. Or is it just that the sets of fortran users and of slashdoters do not intersect?
Obviously different websites have different audiences, so the raw numbers have little significance unless you take a large sample of websites. However, it's the trend that is important here, and it seems to be consistently positive for gecko on various websites.
'Which one of these two companies probably knows more about computers.' I can't see how SCO can hope to do any better in front of a jury.
Don't underestimate the "David vs Goliath" effect. SCO could try to appear as the nice small one with truth on their side, against the Evil Big One with money and force on their side.
Given these quotes from the previous article, there are reasons to doubt how much open the license will be:
Schwartz invoked the precedent set by Sun's popular Java programming language. [...] We need to now take the model with Java and bring it to Solaris.
A problem that Schwartz wants to avoid is having Solaris splintered into different distributions like Linux, which he said creates application incompatibilities. Going the way of Linux-type licensing, he suggested, creates open source but not open standards.
Ruby and Groovy are different languages. They happen to be both scripting languages, and to have an implementation that runs on the jre (Java Runtime Environment), that's all.
The JRuby article is part of the alt.lang.jre series, with announced articles about "Rhino, Nice, and NetRexx, and many other exciting alternate languages for the JRE".
It looks like the articles are coming in this order, one around the beginning of each month.
I was suspicious about MS releasing anything under an Open Source license, so I checked. From HTK's license:
2.1 The Licensor hereby grants the Licensee a non-exclusive license to a) make
copies of the Licensed Software in source and object code form for use
within the Licensee's organisation; b) modify copies of the Licensed Software
to create derivative works thereof for use within the Licensee's organisation.
2.2 The Licensed Software either in whole or in part can not be distributed
or sub-licensed to any third party in any form.
This license is in no way Open Source. Yes, you can play with the source, but you cannot build something useful with it and redistribute under the same license.
Why should an algebraic solution necessarily be an exact solution?
Because otherwise it wouldn't be called a solution.
"Numeric solution" is used here sloppily, it should be "numeric approximation": a number that is close enough to the real solution, or better, a process to progressively come with numbers closer and closer to the solution. In the second case, you can stop the process when you got close enough to the solution, depending on the precision you need.
Unfortunately, with Java 5 you will still need to write
return list.toArray(new Foo[list.size()]);
since list.toArray() still returns an Object[]. That's because of the restriction that forbids new T[...].
Of course, with a more advanced language, you could simply write
Rejoice, you can use functions in polymorphic code. The reason why primitive types were mentioned is that many generic proposals handle "everything but primitive types" (Java 1.5 won't let you write Collection, IIRC). Would it be clearer with "Even values of primitive types..."?
For instance, map could be typed as:
<T,U> Collection<U> map(Collection<T> c, T->U f);
Actually, it has a more precise type by abstracting over which collection class is used:
<Collection C, T, U> C<U> map(C<T> c, T->U f);
The difference is that if you call map on a List, you know statically that you get a List, not a mere Collection. Again, that's something you couldn't express in Java 1.5 (even if you had closures).
If you need to produce code that runs on a JVM but enjoy the benefits of more advanced languages, have a look at Nice or one of the many other languages for the Java VM.
Actually, it seems that they are using gij, which is the Java interpreter from the GCC team. It would be interesting to also get the results when natively compiled with gcj.
Slashdot Mirror
The real solution would be a better election system, a good compromise being Approval Voting. Approval Voting uses the same ballot format as the current system but allows a voter to approve any number of candidates, effectively allowing a vote for or against each candidate. Approval Voting is a simple reform that gets rid of the spoiler and lesser-of-two-evils problems and would result in a level playing field for all parties and candidates.
Indeed, a language cannot prevent this kind of confusion, since "You cannot go from the informal to the formal by formal means", and the name of a method belongs to the informal. It should try to make as much errors as possible detectable at compile time, like cast errors, dereferencing null references, writes to covariant arrays, ...
You can also use Eclipse, JUnit and Ant with Nice. Don't hesitate to ask for help on the nice-info mailing list.
Halh an hour after Fortran 2003 was announced on slashdot, the silence is deafening. Have most people migrated to other languages? I often heard that the amount of legacy code will make fortran survive for a long time. Or is it just that the sets of fortran users and of slashdoters do not intersect?
Obviously different websites have different audiences, so the raw numbers have little significance unless you take a large sample of websites. However, it's the trend that is important here, and it seems to be consistently positive for gecko on various websites.
Schwartz invoked the precedent set by Sun's popular Java programming language. [...] We need to now take the model with Java and bring it to Solaris.
A problem that Schwartz wants to avoid is having Solaris splintered into different distributions like Linux, which he said creates application incompatibilities. Going the way of Linux-type licensing, he suggested, creates open source but not open standards.
Use the pages on mozilla.org: Firefox, Thunderbird.
http://tcljava.sourceforge.net/docs/website/index. html
The JRuby article is part of the alt.lang.jre series, with announced articles about "Rhino, Nice, and NetRexx, and many other exciting alternate languages for the JRE". It looks like the articles are coming in this order, one around the beginning of each month.
Note that all you need is the ability to add TXT records to your DNS information. See this list of domain registrars that support SPF.
2.1 The Licensor hereby grants the Licensee a non-exclusive license to a) make copies of the Licensed Software in source and object code form for use within the Licensee's organisation; b) modify copies of the Licensed Software to create derivative works thereof for use within the Licensee's organisation.
2.2 The Licensed Software either in whole or in part can not be distributed or sub-licensed to any third party in any form.
This license is in no way Open Source. Yes, you can play with the source, but you cannot build something useful with it and redistribute under the same license.
Well, if I follow the given URL I get redirected to http://www.windowsforms.net/Forums/Login.aspx?Retu rnUrl=%2FAdmin%2FAccessDenied.aspx.
And of course, you need to register before you can even have a look at this project. How friendly...
Because otherwise it wouldn't be called a solution.
"Numeric solution" is used here sloppily, it should be "numeric approximation": a number that is close enough to the real solution, or better, a process to progressively come with numbers closer and closer to the solution. In the second case, you can stop the process when you got close enough to the solution, depending on the precision you need.
New reply from the Microsoft guy.
You mean multiline string literals?
If you need to produce code that runs on a JVM but enjoy the benefits of more advanced languages, have a look at Nice or one of the many other languages for the Java VM.
Actually, it seems that they are using gij, which is the Java interpreter from the GCC team. It would be interesting to also get the results when natively compiled with gcj.