Me, I tend toward classical when I'm designing/analysing (particularly Mozart and Paganini) but when I'm coding - meh - punk, heavy metal, goth, rock music - no idea why. But regardless, if I were being told that I couldn't listen to music while I'm working, I'd just nod and smile and continue listening to music regardless - if asked why, I'd just say 'perforated ear drums - didn't hear what you said' and plug the headphones back in.
Which freedom is it this of which you speak? For what purpose exactly?
I can understand hunters and farmers might want or need a weapon (one for sport, and the other for pest control), but for the life of me, I can't fathom why anyone would one for any other reason, except, mebbe, fear? If so, that's not freedom by any stretch of the imagination.
Now, me, I enjoy using a shotgun to shoot clay pigeons every now and again (and I'm OK at it too), but does that mean I want a gun in my house? Nope. Can get them from the range and give em back when I'm done - all good clean fun. If I were a farmer, I'd probably want a gun and most countries allow that afaik.
I can't fathom why anyone would want a gun just for the sake of it though. And I certainly don't feel that any freedoms are taken from me by the fact that neither I nor my neighbours can legally keep one in their houses or god forbid, be allowed to pack heat in the normal run of life.
Well, let's put it another way - when people use the term 'everyone', they typically mean 'a sufficiently large group of people to suit the purpose of my argument'.
It goes without saying that I wouldn't trust a kid with a gun. And I would add that there are always nutters of all ages who I most certainly wouldn't trust with a gun either. Arming those people would inevitably lead to the original 'everyone' needing weapons too. So don't arm them in the first place is the sanest, simplest solution.
That doesn't even make sense - if everyone trusts each other, and life is good without, why have them at all? They aren't disarmed, they just aren't armed.
I did try to go into, and probably didn't explain myself well - C++ is primarily used to generate fast code - and its pedantic nature regarding compile time type validation in preference to run time makes it good for some tasks, and bad for others.
Yes, I'm with you now. Only, I would say that C++ does provide the facilities to work around the field issue - you could, for example, send both the shared_ptr and a reference to the inner variable, and you hold both - provide them with a template class which constructs with both, and it drops away to almost nothing.
I daresay other languages do it more transparently, but I would argue that it is possible with C++ and really, not with much effort after the base classes are formed.
But ultimately C++ is the acceptable form of an optimised code generator these days and it is fast because it doesn't carry the overheads unless your codebase invites them in.
And as I originally acknowledged, you want to provide an interface at certain levels which can be easily wrapped by a high level language. That is ultimately more important than a given implementation of a library.
Now I'm confused - C++ shared_ptr most definitely does solve that - *providing* you hold a reference to the shared_ptr where you need it. In fact, it's really a non-issue - the memory is cleared up as soon as the last referrer falls out of scope. Not seeing where your problem lies with that behaviour.
Well, I won't dispute that you should always use the language that is best suited to you especially if it meets the requirements, and while I too have no love for the . and -> distinction, it's hardly a blocker to use.
Compilation speed - use ccache or distcc.
But on the whole, I agree that C++ is not the tool you're looking for - personally I use it to develop low level libraries, and lean toward high level bindings for use - if the bindings/modules already existed for a scripting language of choice, yeah, I'd lean that way too...
Yes, MS has applied for a patent on sudo's behaviour and that is what the title is ridiculing - as should we. Regardless of their success or failure, we're entitled to point and laugh.
Totally agreed - and additionally, the rigid static linking doesn't work in a plugin environment where each plugin (which is in itself a shared library/dll) brings in its own (shared) dependencies based on the users requirements. Apologies to the OP, but users really shouldn't make demands at this level - there are many reasons why developers and packagers prefer dynamic loading, and likewise it's *their* responsibility to get it right such that users aren't even aware of this level of detail.
I'll never understand this sentiment people on the internet have that try to convince everyone that most people buy music after they have already obtained a pirated copy online. Seriously, its just us tech guys now, the RIAA isn't in the room, we can be honest.
.. so sayeth the anonymous coward... me, I don't have an ipod, but my mp3 collection is formed of legit rips of CD's I own (won't say the same for my video collection, but it's amazing how legit it becomes over time - yes, I do go out and buy the DVD's of things I've really enjoyed from a free online sample, and sometimes, I'll buy stuff on spec based on my enjoyment of a related online sample... and equally, there are times I haven't enjoyed things, and not felt the urge). Just honouring your request for honesty, not saying that everyone does the same.
Yup - sounds about right when you consider most of it's coverage of enforced European legislation... Still, as a Brit living in Europe, I still find it a reliable enough service.
PAL 4:3 and 16:9 are both 720x576 - they get scaled vertically to 768x576 and 1024x576 resp. (well, actually, +20 for both and the outer 10 pixels on left and right aren't visible, but that's a small detail:-)). If you ignore the scaling (and the resultant overscan), and compare pixel for pixel, you get a factor of ( 1920 * 1080 ) / ( 720 * 576 ) = 5. NTSC is different - 720x480 which is displayed at 640x480 and 854x480 (too early to double check maths:-)) giving an effective improvement factor of 6 (again comparing samples only).
Also interlacing doesn't reduce the frame rate - there are still 25 frames per second. What it does is split the frame into two fields which are half the resolution (effectively meaning that you get each field scaled vertically too).
Umm - no - the *code* does the undefined behaviour and *then* checks if the undefined behaviour could happen. But, heck, mistakes happen - it was identified and fixed. Not much of a story really.
Probably old hat, but how about taking an album you know well, and using the first line of each song to generate your password - like 'I see a little silhouetto of a man' becomes 15al50am (assuming you stick to a few fixed rules for substitution in your alpha nums) - then all you have to do is write 'bohemian rhapsody' or the track number on your post it:-).
Before anyone tries, no, that is not my password...
I also moved from the UK to Belgium - I agree on the Dutch being 'fun' - I am still far from proficient in it but have been fortunate over the years to be able to telecommute and continue to work with English speaking companies (of course, that fact alone has held back my Dutch...).
Guess the point is that I'm proof you can live in a country without going fully native in their languages, but I find it embarrassing nonetheless (especially in light of the rate and ease in which my 2 year old is picking up both...).
Agree with OP - language is an important aspect to consider when relocating.
Oddly though, one of the aspects which has been causing a lot of consternation in the UK regarding privacy is the mandatory Identity Card - something which the Belgian's have had for many years... but regardless, I have to agree, Britain's current direction is a lot worse than we have over here.
Uncyclopedia says:
Work doesn't actually exist. It is the facade by which most western affiliated people play up to between masturbating and being hunted by grue's.
It's the same idea behind buying a house that you feel is undervalued, renting it out/doing nothing, until the price goes up, and selling it later.
In the country in which I live, doing nothing with owned property is liable to land you with a fine. Quite right too - property is a scarce commodity and having properties falling (further) into disrepair is a very bad situation.
Other than that, I kinda agree that domain name squatting falls into the other form of legalised gambling that you cited...
Why the browser? Why not go the whole hog and allow the selection (and reselection) of the OS itself?
If you agree to a pay for your selected OS, then you provide credit card details and buy it. If it's free, no cc needed.
It would only mean that you'd need a default OS which acts as a selection mechanism for your OS of choice - and it's not like you couldn't bundle a couple of distros (including windows) on a DVD which would provide a couple of systems for the broadband challenged fraternity.
Slashdot Mirror
Me, I tend toward classical when I'm designing/analysing (particularly Mozart and Paganini) but when I'm coding - meh - punk, heavy metal, goth, rock music - no idea why. But regardless, if I were being told that I couldn't listen to music while I'm working, I'd just nod and smile and continue listening to music regardless - if asked why, I'd just say 'perforated ear drums - didn't hear what you said' and plug the headphones back in.
Which freedom is it this of which you speak? For what purpose exactly?
I can understand hunters and farmers might want or need a weapon (one for sport, and the other for pest control), but for the life of me, I can't fathom why anyone would one for any other reason, except, mebbe, fear? If so, that's not freedom by any stretch of the imagination.
Now, me, I enjoy using a shotgun to shoot clay pigeons every now and again (and I'm OK at it too), but does that mean I want a gun in my house? Nope. Can get them from the range and give em back when I'm done - all good clean fun. If I were a farmer, I'd probably want a gun and most countries allow that afaik.
I can't fathom why anyone would want a gun just for the sake of it though. And I certainly don't feel that any freedoms are taken from me by the fact that neither I nor my neighbours can legally keep one in their houses or god forbid, be allowed to pack heat in the normal run of life.
Well, let's put it another way - when people use the term 'everyone', they typically mean 'a sufficiently large group of people to suit the purpose of my argument'.
It goes without saying that I wouldn't trust a kid with a gun. And I would add that there are always nutters of all ages who I most certainly wouldn't trust with a gun either. Arming those people would inevitably lead to the original 'everyone' needing weapons too. So don't arm them in the first place is the sanest, simplest solution.
That doesn't even make sense - if everyone trusts each other, and life is good without, why have them at all? They aren't disarmed, they just aren't armed.
I did try to go into, and probably didn't explain myself well - C++ is primarily used to generate fast code - and its pedantic nature regarding compile time type validation in preference to run time makes it good for some tasks, and bad for others.
Yes, I'm with you now. Only, I would say that C++ does provide the facilities to work around the field issue - you could, for example, send both the shared_ptr and a reference to the inner variable, and you hold both - provide them with a template class which constructs with both, and it drops away to almost nothing.
I daresay other languages do it more transparently, but I would argue that it is possible with C++ and really, not with much effort after the base classes are formed.
But ultimately C++ is the acceptable form of an optimised code generator these days and it is fast because it doesn't carry the overheads unless your codebase invites them in.
And as I originally acknowledged, you want to provide an interface at certain levels which can be easily wrapped by a high level language. That is ultimately more important than a given implementation of a library.
Now I'm confused - C++ shared_ptr most definitely does solve that - *providing* you hold a reference to the shared_ptr where you need it. In fact, it's really a non-issue - the memory is cleared up as soon as the last referrer falls out of scope. Not seeing where your problem lies with that behaviour.
Well, I won't dispute that you should always use the language that is best suited to you especially if it meets the requirements, and while I too have no love for the . and -> distinction, it's hardly a blocker to use.
Compilation speed - use ccache or distcc.
But on the whole, I agree that C++ is not the tool you're looking for - personally I use it to develop low level libraries, and lean toward high level bindings for use - if the bindings/modules already existed for a scripting language of choice, yeah, I'd lean that way too...
boost::shared_ptr
Got that from what you said the first time round - and since you repeated yourself, so shall I - we're still entitled to point and laugh.
Yes, MS has applied for a patent on sudo's behaviour and that is what the title is ridiculing - as should we. Regardless of their success or failure, we're entitled to point and laugh.
Where's +1 Scary when you need it?
Totally agreed - and additionally, the rigid static linking doesn't work in a plugin environment where each plugin (which is in itself a shared library/dll) brings in its own (shared) dependencies based on the users requirements. Apologies to the OP, but users really shouldn't make demands at this level - there are many reasons why developers and packagers prefer dynamic loading, and likewise it's *their* responsibility to get it right such that users aren't even aware of this level of detail.
I'll never understand this sentiment people on the internet have that try to convince everyone that most people buy music after they have already obtained a pirated copy online. Seriously, its just us tech guys now, the RIAA isn't in the room, we can be honest.
.. so sayeth the anonymous coward... me, I don't have an ipod, but my mp3 collection is formed of legit rips of CD's I own (won't say the same for my video collection, but it's amazing how legit it becomes over time - yes, I do go out and buy the DVD's of things I've really enjoyed from a free online sample, and sometimes, I'll buy stuff on spec based on my enjoyment of a related online sample... and equally, there are times I haven't enjoyed things, and not felt the urge). Just honouring your request for honesty, not saying that everyone does the same.
Yup - sounds about right when you consider most of it's coverage of enforced European legislation... Still, as a Brit living in Europe, I still find it a reliable enough service.
I seem to remember trying out a mouse like device in the 90's that moved the courser with thought. Whatever happened to those?
Probably failed cos the marijuana required to use it is illegal in the majority of countries?
Nothing's stopping you - there are multiple threads of conversation here.
PAL 4:3 and 16:9 are both 720x576 - they get scaled vertically to 768x576 and 1024x576 resp. (well, actually, +20 for both and the outer 10 pixels on left and right aren't visible, but that's a small detail :-)). If you ignore the scaling (and the resultant overscan), and compare pixel for pixel, you get a factor of ( 1920 * 1080 ) / ( 720 * 576 ) = 5. NTSC is different - 720x480 which is displayed at 640x480 and 854x480 (too early to double check maths :-)) giving an effective improvement factor of 6 (again comparing samples only).
Also interlacing doesn't reduce the frame rate - there are still 25 frames per second. What it does is split the frame into two fields which are half the resolution (effectively meaning that you get each field scaled vertically too).
Don't make jokes. It's a very important scientific breakthrough for two reasons. Number one....and number two.
Umm - no - the *code* does the undefined behaviour and *then* checks if the undefined behaviour could happen. But, heck, mistakes happen - it was identified and fixed. Not much of a story really.
Probably old hat, but how about taking an album you know well, and using the first line of each song to generate your password - like 'I see a little silhouetto of a man' becomes 15al50am (assuming you stick to a few fixed rules for substitution in your alpha nums) - then all you have to do is write 'bohemian rhapsody' or the track number on your post it :-).
Before anyone tries, no, that is not my password...
I also moved from the UK to Belgium - I agree on the Dutch being 'fun' - I am still far from proficient in it but have been fortunate over the years to be able to telecommute and continue to work with English speaking companies (of course, that fact alone has held back my Dutch...).
Guess the point is that I'm proof you can live in a country without going fully native in their languages, but I find it embarrassing nonetheless (especially in light of the rate and ease in which my 2 year old is picking up both...).
Agree with OP - language is an important aspect to consider when relocating.
Oddly though, one of the aspects which has been causing a lot of consternation in the UK regarding privacy is the mandatory Identity Card - something which the Belgian's have had for many years... but regardless, I have to agree, Britain's current direction is a lot worse than we have over here.
Uncyclopedia says:
Work doesn't actually exist. It is the facade by which most western affiliated people play up to between masturbating and being hunted by grue's.
It's the same idea behind buying a house that you feel is undervalued, renting it out/doing nothing, until the price goes up, and selling it later.
In the country in which I live, doing nothing with owned property is liable to land you with a fine. Quite right too - property is a scarce commodity and having properties falling (further) into disrepair is a very bad situation.
Other than that, I kinda agree that domain name squatting falls into the other form of legalised gambling that you cited...
Why the browser? Why not go the whole hog and allow the selection (and reselection) of the OS itself?
If you agree to a pay for your selected OS, then you provide credit card details and buy it. If it's free, no cc needed.
It would only mean that you'd need a default OS which acts as a selection mechanism for your OS of choice - and it's not like you couldn't bundle a couple of distros (including windows) on a DVD which would provide a couple of systems for the broadband challenged fraternity.