Actually that is a fairly common practice in agile development. You have a pretty good idea what it is going to look like but you never have the details ironed out.
If they follow this paradigm - all the risky parts of the building will be spiked ahead of time.
We can look forward to PvE nerfs that hurt classes because of PvP whines. Gentlemen get your cheese knives ready!
It was stated the the PVP mechanics and the PVE mechanics are separate. While not modifying the talent to make it unrecognizable, there would be some changes to the PVP talent to adjust mechanics for balance purposes.
If you read the article, there is a weigh-in against RISK. For all those who say NOT IN MY INDUSTRY - NOT ACCEPTABLE FOR MISSION - CRITICAL - well no shit. That falls into the RISK category. If bugs are unacceptable for the purpose of the software - ie - patient monitoring then every effort will be made to ensure it won't happen.
It actually disgusts me to see the usual OS bashing bullshit that continues to go on and on and on and on around here.
My OS is better than yours Nah Nah Nah. Nice. Can't we have more intellectual conversations around here? I've been coding since the late 80's being weened on x86 assembler on DOS, Q'nix and yes - even 16/32 bit windows - and to see comments like "the average windows user can barely tie their shoelaces" bullshit irritates me. To be quite honest, computers to the average joe are scary. Just because they don't know how to mount a drive or know what shl ax,1 means doesn't mean their stupid. Its like asking/.'s to describe a date with a woman.
Want to know something amazing? I've been using Windows since it came out and have YET TO BE INFECTED WITH A VIRUS. Yes you heard right. I have NEVER been infected by a Trojan, Worm or Virus. Be a dumb user - you get burned. Simple.
Its like every 5th post is about how shitty Windoze is. Lets drop this dribble. No one is gonna win this argument.
Well, I will have to say you were courteous in your reply - but you mispoke me.
In one sentence you quote me "You are absolutely correct in the regard that calling to DLLs doesn't mean you get a new security context. " and then in the next sentence you say "But you're also wrong. At least in explaination. A DLL technically has no security context. Security contexts are bound to processes, not DLLs..
That is precisely what is meant when a DLL runs under the security context of its host (process).
Plus their is security.
Technically DLL's (unless your specifically speaking about the core OS DLL's or VXD's run as a System account), are NOT directly executable and therefore take on the security context of their host.
The Security point is bogus.
Applications do not have the same level of access as DLLs.
Uh, DLL's (either straight Win32 or as containers for COM) use the security context as their host. PERIOD. DLL's run INPROCESS or seemingly OUTOFPROCESS in a surrogate host - but nonetheless - They always run in the security context as their host.
Other than that, your points are valid.
Slashdot Mirror
Didn't we get the rant out of our system already with SC2?
Actually that is a fairly common practice in agile development. You have a pretty good idea what it is going to look like but you never have the details ironed out. If they follow this paradigm - all the risky parts of the building will be spiked ahead of time.
We can look forward to PvE nerfs that hurt classes because of PvP whines. Gentlemen get your cheese knives ready!
It was stated the the PVP mechanics and the PVE mechanics are separate. While not modifying the talent to make it unrecognizable, there would be some changes to the PVP talent to adjust mechanics for balance purposes.
If you read the article, there is a weigh-in against RISK. For all those who say NOT IN MY INDUSTRY - NOT ACCEPTABLE FOR MISSION - CRITICAL - well no shit. That falls into the RISK category. If bugs are unacceptable for the purpose of the software - ie - patient monitoring then every effort will be made to ensure it won't happen.
Compute! rocked. Real working code fully printed in the magazine. Oh, God I remember typing lines of DATA statements in for all that assembler...
Its even more fun to write Assembler on paper and covert it to the numeric equivalents for your DATA statements, wooot!
It actually disgusts me to see the usual OS bashing bullshit that continues to go on and on and on and on around here. My OS is better than yours Nah Nah Nah. Nice. Can't we have more intellectual conversations around here? I've been coding since the late 80's being weened on x86 assembler on DOS, Q'nix and yes - even 16/32 bit windows - and to see comments like "the average windows user can barely tie their shoelaces" bullshit irritates me. To be quite honest, computers to the average joe are scary. Just because they don't know how to mount a drive or know what shl ax,1 means doesn't mean their stupid. Its like asking /.'s to describe a date with a woman.
Want to know something amazing? I've been using Windows since it came out and have YET TO BE INFECTED WITH A VIRUS. Yes you heard right. I have NEVER been infected by a Trojan, Worm or Virus. Be a dumb user - you get burned. Simple.
Its like every 5th post is about how shitty Windoze is. Lets drop this dribble. No one is gonna win this argument.
Up in my neck of the woods 1.5Mbps/768Kbps is $45 in Mill Creek (20 mins North of Seattle).
Well, I will have to say you were courteous in your reply - but you mispoke me.
In one sentence you quote me "You are absolutely correct in the regard that calling to DLLs doesn't mean you get a new security context.
" and then in the next sentence you say "But you're also wrong. At least in explaination. A DLL technically has no security context. Security contexts are bound to processes, not DLLs..
That is precisely what is meant when a DLL runs under the security context of its host (process).
Plus their is security. Technically DLL's (unless your specifically speaking about the core OS DLL's or VXD's run as a System account), are NOT directly executable and therefore take on the security context of their host. The Security point is bogus. Applications do not have the same level of access as DLLs. Uh, DLL's (either straight Win32 or as containers for COM) use the security context as their host. PERIOD. DLL's run INPROCESS or seemingly OUTOFPROCESS in a surrogate host - but nonetheless - They always run in the security context as their host. Other than that, your points are valid.
Thanks for calculating that - I don't think I coulda slept after I posted that completely top o' me wee head (use an irish accent) number. Cheers
Just cache the whole internet locally to your HD. Simple.