The difference becomes clear if you accidently try to push something else on the stack. If you try to push a string onto the STL stack, you get a compile error. If you try to do the same to the Java stack, you don't find out until runtime, when you do the cast.
In other words, you better hope that your testing is good and that the bug that causes a string to get put on the stack doesn't only appear in a rare set of conditions.
Isn't it interesting how, while the patent office is handing out exclusive rights to all sorts of obvious bits of standard practice, the truly revolutionary ideas in software are never patented?
1) The chess program that beat Kasporov is mostly built on 25-40 year old ideas run on modern hardware. It represented not an advance in AI but an advance in hardware. "Alpha-beta pruning" is straight out of 1960's AI.
2) The reason the Civ 3 AI can beat you is that at levels above "Warlord", the computer player is given production advantages. And it still can't "spank the ass" of a decent player.
3) Database caching is not AI.
"Genetic Algorithms", "Fuzzy Logic", "Alpha-beta"....those aren't "new AI advances". Those are all things I learned about when I got my Cog. Sci. degree in 1987.
One of the things that hurt OS/2 was that once OS/2 got decent Windows emulation (well, the ability to run Windows as a task), developers lost all incentive to develop apps for OS/2. Why bother, when they could just get users to buy the Windows version? Of course, this meant fewer native OS/2 apps, which meant less reason to buy it in the first place.
Now Linux doesn't have quite the same problem, as there's a much larger application library out there for it, but if Wine runs lots of new games immediately, it does remove incentive for those game publishers to publish native versions.
(Of course, Loki's failure likely killed the idea anyway...the trouble is that lots of Linux users demanded games, but didn't actually buy them...oh well...can't say that I'm any better. I waited for all the Loki titles to start selling for firesale prices before buying.)
Presumably you could grab the text of the GPL, rename it the "NOWAR-GPL" and throw in some text about not allowing military purposes. You'd probably need to be a lawyer to get it right, though.
You've completely missed the point. Good programmers used scripting languages when scripting is called for, and other sorts of languages when other sorts of languages are called for. They don't call themselves "scriters". They call themselves programmers, even if they happen to be writing Perl or Python at the moment.
If you are a "scripter", then you are not a real programmer. Not because using scripting isn't programming, but because real programmers use whatever tool is best for the task, be it a scripting language, compiled language, whatever.
If someone "can't" use one of those types, then they aren't a real programmer. If someone won't use one of those types, then they aren't a real programmer. If someone always recommends the same language for all tasks, then they aren't a real programmer.
A real programmer says "oh, you don't want me to use Perl? Well, ok, that's not what I'd recommend...so give me the spec and I will do it in Java."
It wouldn't be "enjoy high school because college will be hard". It would be "don't sweat the bullshit in high school because once you get to college, it will all seem lame".
And for Gord's sake, stay in college until they kick you out, because once you hit the real world, that's it, party's over.
Twenty-five years from now, when you post on slashdot, read the whole article rather then responding to the title, so you don't look like a putz, responding with a "joke" that's in the article itself.
The press release is a bit muddled. It also says:...has it's PCI allocation and bridge setup based in part on the following functions from the Linux kernel sources
It's the second part that's important...from their press release, they seem to think that they can just give you the source for the routines they copied. You can't even link to GPL'd code without GPLing your code. (The LGPL is a different story, though the Linux kernel isn't LGPLed, so that's moot.)
I doubt any conspiracy theories are in order. It is more likely that sales of lower-end CRTs are dropping to the point where there's no point in making the effort.
I doubt that the big CRTs are going anywhere, at least until LCDs get cheap.
Remember that Sony can't "force" you to buy a higher price LCD as you can always buy another brand. The fact that there taking the smaller ones of the market means that they feel that they won't lose very many customers.
I learned 6502 assembly language in High School (along with Pascal and BASIC). Glad I didn't have someone like you telling me that I wasn't ready for it.
An OS like Linux is far better for teaching about the guts of software because everything is exposed. And I'm not just talking about "the source". On a Linux box, you can go look at things like startup scripts and installed drivers, while on Windows, such things are (mostly) hidden.
Windows does its damndest to prevent users from accidently encountering any confusing internals. Good, I suppose, for someone who doesn't care, but lousy if you are trying to teach those internals.
Slashdot Mirror
In other words, you better hope that your testing is good and that the bug that causes a string to get put on the stack doesn't only appear in a rare set of conditions.
Isn't it interesting how, while the patent office is handing out exclusive rights to all sorts of obvious bits of standard practice, the truly revolutionary ideas in software are never patented?
I stand corrected...that RMS guy is one smart cookie.
2) The reason the Civ 3 AI can beat you is that at levels above "Warlord", the computer player is given production advantages. And it still can't "spank the ass" of a decent player.
3) Database caching is not AI.
"Genetic Algorithms", "Fuzzy Logic", "Alpha-beta"....those aren't "new AI advances". Those are all things I learned about when I got my Cog. Sci. degree in 1987.
One of the things that hurt OS/2 was that once OS/2 got decent Windows emulation (well, the ability to run Windows as a task), developers lost all incentive to develop apps for OS/2. Why bother, when they could just get users to buy the Windows version? Of course, this meant fewer native OS/2 apps, which meant less reason to buy it in the first place.
Now Linux doesn't have quite the same problem, as there's a much larger application library out there for it, but if Wine runs lots of new games immediately, it does remove incentive for those game publishers to publish native versions.
(Of course, Loki's failure likely killed the idea anyway...the trouble is that lots of Linux users demanded games, but didn't actually buy them...oh well...can't say that I'm any better. I waited for all the Loki titles to start selling for firesale prices before buying.)
Oh crap...the thought of my software being used to kill Iraqi children is just too much to bear...[sob]
Presumably you could grab the text of the GPL, rename it the "NOWAR-GPL" and throw in some text about not allowing military purposes. You'd probably need to be a lawyer to get it right, though.
1.) Make joke about karma whoring
2.) ???
3.) Karma
You've completely missed the point. Good programmers used scripting languages when scripting is called for, and other sorts of languages when other sorts of languages are called for. They don't call themselves "scriters". They call themselves programmers, even if they happen to be writing Perl or Python at the moment.
If someone "can't" use one of those types, then they aren't a real programmer. If someone won't use one of those types, then they aren't a real programmer. If someone always recommends the same language for all tasks, then they aren't a real programmer.
A real programmer says "oh, you don't want me to use Perl? Well, ok, that's not what I'd recommend...so give me the spec and I will do it in Java."
And for Gord's sake, stay in college until they kick you out, because once you hit the real world, that's it, party's over.
Twenty-five years from now, when you post on slashdot, read the whole article rather then responding to the title, so you don't look like a putz, responding with a "joke" that's in the article itself.
Buy MSFT as soon as it goes public.
You can GPL code and then turn around and sell the same code under another, proprietary license, for instance.
The press release is a bit muddled. It also says: ...has it's PCI allocation and bridge setup based in part on the following functions from the Linux kernel sources
It's the second part that's important...from their press release, they seem to think that they can just give you the source for the routines they copied. You can't even link to GPL'd code without GPLing your code. (The LGPL is a different story, though the Linux kernel isn't LGPLed, so that's moot.)
They need a new lawyer.
Stallman doesn't write "Open Source" software. He writes GNU/free GNU/software.
On the other hand, this shows pretty clearly that nothing was learned after the Challenger disaster.
Isn't he too busy trying to catch babes by pretending to be rich to use a computer?
I doubt any conspiracy theories are in order. It is more likely that sales of lower-end CRTs are dropping to the point where there's no point in making the effort.
I doubt that the big CRTs are going anywhere, at least until LCDs get cheap.
Remember that Sony can't "force" you to buy a higher price LCD as you can always buy another brand. The fact that there taking the smaller ones of the market means that they feel that they won't lose very many customers.
Redundent code means the coder wasn't thinking. Hence more bugs.
That's slashdot priorities for ya.
I learned 6502 assembly language in High School (along with Pascal and BASIC). Glad I didn't have someone like you telling me that I wasn't ready for it.
An OS like Linux is far better for teaching about the guts of software because everything is exposed. And I'm not just talking about "the source". On a Linux box, you can go look at things like startup scripts and installed drivers, while on Windows, such things are (mostly) hidden.
Windows does its damndest to prevent users from accidently encountering any confusing internals. Good, I suppose, for someone who doesn't care, but lousy if you are trying to teach those internals.