First, reading through the existing comments, the general opinion appears to be, write clear code, unless you *really* need to optimize it. Ounce for ounce I have to agree with this.
Second, regarding the embedded system portion of the question, we have to remember that the rules for embedded systems are different than the rules for general purpose systems. Specifically, embedded systems are resource constrained and (more times than not) have real-time deadlines.
At least so far, I have never programmed an embedded system that I needed to optomize my code for speed (best case execution time), or for space. I have needed to change an algorithm around for complexity reasons, but never for minor incremental speed improvements.
Real time systems are more about executing on time, rather than executing fast. And yes, there is a difference. Pay close attention to your worst case execution time. If your missing deadlines occasionally, it is most likely due to unpredictable interrupts and other events in your system, not because the compiler couldn't optimize your code.
In short, regarding any compiler/code optimization you may want to do on your embedded system, write your code first to be dependable, predictable, and on time. Worry about raw speed later.
After reading through many of the posts in response to the Boston Globe's article, there appear to be two general opposing opinions. First, the Republicans did nothing illegal because the files were unsecured. Second, The Democrat's files were illegally obtained because there was malicious intent to find and read them. I would like to think that most of us could agree that even if the activity was legal, the viewing of the documents were at least unethical.
In any case there certainly appears to be a number of questions unanswered. For instance, who on the Republican side viewed the documents? Did they stumble upon the documents or did they search for them? Who on the Democratic side was alerted of the security hole? Did the Democrats believe their memos were fully secure? Are there ethical behavior rules of the Senate/Congress that were broken?
I encourage all/.ers to write his or her Senators to ask that the investigation be complete, ethical rules be developed to prevent this behavior in the future, and if any illegal activity did occur that the individuals involved be turned over to the appropriate law enforcement agency.
If you do not know who your Senator are (tisk tisk), you can find out at http://www.senate.gov/.
Does anyone know if this is the first large scale cyber attack (ie one nation verses another)? I imagine USA, GBR, RUS, PRC have all tried small scale attacks on one another in the past, but this is the first I've heard of such a large scale use of cyber attacks.
Second question, what would China have to gain by this attack? The only purpose I can think of is either a) they are preparing for an immenant land invasion, b) this is a probing attack, setting the stage for a larger one, or c) they are just playing political "games" with Taiwon.
A very interesting question, in particular for me since I am starting graduate school, in pursuit of a Ph.D., in two days.
In my case, I am currently a Java developer for a fortune 500 company, have 7 years of experience, and have done comparitively well (for someone in my age and industry). My B.S. is in Computer Science, from the University of Kentucky. This fall I will be going back to school at Kansas University for my Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering. I will be working full time and going to school part time during this process (and hoping I don't burn out).
My reasons for going for my Ph.D. is simple. First I am called to be in academics, I want to do research. Long term I want to either be a professor or working in a R&D position. Second, and as scary as this sounds, being a programmer has proved far to easy for me. I'm looking for a new challenge.
Considering the above, it is highly unlikly that I will be working for my current employer once I've graduted with my Ph.D. (I'm not sure if they are aware of this yet, but I am).
Anyone considering graduate work, my advise is this. If you are looking to advance your current career (in any non-research position) get your masters. You can take the same courses offered in the doctorate program, which means you can learn the same basic skill set. But, if and only if you want to go into research then get your Ph.D. A doctorate is much more than just a skill set you have aquired through taking classes (again that is a MS). Earning a doctorate means you have the thinking capacity to come up with new ideas, to perform research, to expand the world's knowledge.
Another dividing line between a master's and a doctorate is the social responcibility. In my opinion, a person with a Ph.D. has to be willing to work towards the greater good of humanity, to expand scientific knowledge. If you are unwilling to accept this, please stay with a masters.
I hope this helps to anyone who is grippling with this problem.
Lastly I leave you with a joke...
When you graduate from high school you think you know everything.
When you gradate from college you realize you know nothing at all.
When you get your masters you realize no one else knows anything either.
When you earn your Ph.D. you discover the truth, no one is doing a d*** thing about it.
What I do not understand is who is doing the programming for these intrusive ads. Judging by the numberous posts on this subject already, very few if anyone enjoys pop-up ads, let alone the new "take over my screen" ads.
No offense to the many marketing men and women out there, but in general your technological skills are "weak." This means you have to employ a geek to do the work for you.
What we are left with then is, a bunch of geeks who hate intrusive ads, and a subset of these geeks who are selling their souls to the marketing devils. Does anyone else see the dilemma here. There are traitors amongst us.
I say we all take a pledge to never ever write these horrible intrusive ads. Who is with me!
This post reminded me of a question I was pondering last week. What makes one software program better than another software program? Is there a way to quantitatively measure how good a piece of software is? Would we measure the "goodness" of software by, the number of bugs it has (or rather the lack there of), the number of lines it took to write it, how long it took to develop, the type of license (open vs proprietary), the efficiency (how long to takes to run), the language it was written in, ease of use, etc, etc, etc? My guess is we would have to come up with a convoluted mathematical formula to measure the goodness of a program. Anyone care to take a stab at it?
Slashdot Mirror
blah blah blah ... if anyone needs me I'll be rebuilding my Linux kernel.
First, reading through the existing comments, the general opinion appears to be, write clear code, unless you *really* need to optimize it. Ounce for ounce I have to agree with this.
Second, regarding the embedded system portion of the question, we have to remember that the rules for embedded systems are different than the rules for general purpose systems. Specifically, embedded systems are resource constrained and (more times than not) have real-time deadlines.
At least so far, I have never programmed an embedded system that I needed to optomize my code for speed (best case execution time), or for space. I have needed to change an algorithm around for complexity reasons, but never for minor incremental speed improvements.
Real time systems are more about executing on time, rather than executing fast. And yes, there is a difference. Pay close attention to your worst case execution time. If your missing deadlines occasionally, it is most likely due to unpredictable interrupts and other events in your system, not because the compiler couldn't optimize your code.
In short, regarding any compiler/code optimization you may want to do on your embedded system, write your code first to be dependable, predictable, and on time. Worry about raw speed later.
After reading through many of the posts in response to the Boston Globe's article, there appear to be two general opposing opinions. First, the Republicans did nothing illegal because the files were unsecured. Second, The Democrat's files were illegally obtained because there was malicious intent to find and read them. I would like to think that most of us could agree that even if the activity was legal, the viewing of the documents were at least unethical. In any case there certainly appears to be a number of questions unanswered. For instance, who on the Republican side viewed the documents? Did they stumble upon the documents or did they search for them? Who on the Democratic side was alerted of the security hole? Did the Democrats believe their memos were fully secure? Are there ethical behavior rules of the Senate/Congress that were broken? I encourage all /.ers to write his or her Senators to ask that the investigation be complete, ethical rules be developed to prevent this behavior in the future, and if any illegal activity did occur that the individuals involved be turned over to the appropriate law enforcement agency.
If you do not know who your Senator are (tisk tisk), you can find out at http://www.senate.gov/.
Does anyone know if this is the first large scale cyber attack (ie one nation verses another)? I imagine USA, GBR, RUS, PRC have all tried small scale attacks on one another in the past, but this is the first I've heard of such a large scale use of cyber attacks. Second question, what would China have to gain by this attack? The only purpose I can think of is either a) they are preparing for an immenant land invasion, b) this is a probing attack, setting the stage for a larger one, or c) they are just playing political "games" with Taiwon.
A very interesting question, in particular for me since I am starting graduate school, in pursuit of a Ph.D., in two days.
...
In my case, I am currently a Java developer for a fortune 500 company, have 7 years of experience, and have done comparitively well (for someone in my age and industry). My B.S. is in Computer Science, from the University of Kentucky. This fall I will be going back to school at Kansas University for my Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering. I will be working full time and going to school part time during this process (and hoping I don't burn out).
My reasons for going for my Ph.D. is simple. First I am called to be in academics, I want to do research. Long term I want to either be a professor or working in a R&D position. Second, and as scary as this sounds, being a programmer has proved far to easy for me. I'm looking for a new challenge.
Considering the above, it is highly unlikly that I will be working for my current employer once I've graduted with my Ph.D. (I'm not sure if they are aware of this yet, but I am).
Anyone considering graduate work, my advise is this. If you are looking to advance your current career (in any non-research position) get your masters. You can take the same courses offered in the doctorate program, which means you can learn the same basic skill set. But, if and only if you want to go into research then get your Ph.D. A doctorate is much more than just a skill set you have aquired through taking classes (again that is a MS). Earning a doctorate means you have the thinking capacity to come up with new ideas, to perform research, to expand the world's knowledge.
Another dividing line between a master's and a doctorate is the social responcibility. In my opinion, a person with a Ph.D. has to be willing to work towards the greater good of humanity, to expand scientific knowledge. If you are unwilling to accept this, please stay with a masters.
I hope this helps to anyone who is grippling with this problem.
Lastly I leave you with a joke
When you graduate from high school you think you know everything.
When you gradate from college you realize you know nothing at all.
When you get your masters you realize no one else knows anything either.
When you earn your Ph.D. you discover the truth, no one is doing a d*** thing about it.
What I do not understand is who is doing the programming for these intrusive ads. Judging by the numberous posts on this subject already, very few if anyone enjoys pop-up ads, let alone the new "take over my screen" ads. No offense to the many marketing men and women out there, but in general your technological skills are "weak." This means you have to employ a geek to do the work for you. What we are left with then is, a bunch of geeks who hate intrusive ads, and a subset of these geeks who are selling their souls to the marketing devils. Does anyone else see the dilemma here. There are traitors amongst us. I say we all take a pledge to never ever write these horrible intrusive ads. Who is with me!
This post reminded me of a question I was pondering last week. What makes one software program better than another software program? Is there a way to quantitatively measure how good a piece of software is? Would we measure the "goodness" of software by, the number of bugs it has (or rather the lack there of), the number of lines it took to write it, how long it took to develop, the type of license (open vs proprietary), the efficiency (how long to takes to run), the language it was written in, ease of use, etc, etc, etc? My guess is we would have to come up with a convoluted mathematical formula to measure the goodness of a program. Anyone care to take a stab at it?