> I have an Indy. I used in in college for CS work, and it was perfect. Learned OpenGL stuff, etc. I was the biggest SGI fanboy. evar. I didn't know CounterStrike ran on IRIX;)
For precision's sake: you probably wanted to say it's an 'idiom', not a 'dialect'. C99 (or any other variant of the language) is what you call a dialect.
> A program is runnable at all times, no syntax errors are possible
> The program executes modifications tothe program as you make them, making debugging completely integrated with programming
Even if you get rid syntax errors, there's still plenty of room for logic errors, many of which can't be discovered before you actually run a particular branch of your program. Eclipse does on-the-fly syntax checking, which is very nice, but if you break something in the program logic, you will face an exception or your program will not work as expected. Unless you get some super AI to check the code's logic for you, such errors are going to happen. Besides, I don't think people who do a lot of programming make syntax errors that often (although seeing them right away is useful indeed).
Note that what Eclipse does doesn't require using XML for your source code, just a standard unicode text file. And you can use (almost) arbitrary characters in your code, should you somehow find typing Greek characters or smiley faces easier and faster than typing plain ASCII.
> More importantly, OOo just isn't that good. It's amazingly slow and ugly, uses a fileformat that takes forever to save and creates huge files,
While I do agree that startup time and the non-standard GUI are major issues with OpenOffice, I don't understand your "huge files" argument. What are you comparing the sizes of files OOo produces to? My experience is OOo files are usually much smaller than their MS Office counterparts.
You can use wpd2sxw, which is a part of libwpd). Since it's a command line tool, you can use it to convert all your old files to OOo in a single bash loop. If you hit problems with some of the formatting features after conversion, read this tutorial, which might help you get it back into shape.
Yes, you can pack all sorts of intelligent algorithms into your programming language (and this is quite often done now), but the CPU as it is today works at the lowest level with just electric signals. Maybe we can move to another technology, so it will not be electric but rather optical. Or we can even use living cells to do the calculations for us - whatever. Either way, there are going to be people who have to work at the lowest level near the hardware. Others, who don't need that can get their programming tasks done faster thanks to modern programming languages, but the CPU itself is (in a way, by definition) very primitive. If it starts getting smart, we don't speak of the CPU itself anymore, but rather of the firmware that runs on it. And that's software. Oops, that software must talk to the lower level - that primitive CPU. You can't get away from that. If you made your CPU 'smart', you would really be creating an operating system for it.
By the way, there were quite a few good reasons for using paging instead of segmentation in modern operating systems.
-computer files not 'strongly typed'; files are not objects in some permanent storage but rather blobs of bytes. This leads to several problems:
Files on my hard disk are in some permanent storage (if the disk doesn't break). And yes, I can open each file in any application I like if that's what you mean by 'not strongly typed'. And that's the way it should be. I use a different application for viewing my images (fast and lightweight) than for editing them (heavy but with lots of editing tools). I can run a script (thus treating it as an executable) but I can also treat it as plain text and edit it with my favorite text editor. Yes, reasonable file associations are important, but if I really want to edit some file byte by byte with a hex editor, I should be allowed to do so.
a) viruses disguised as useful programs.
Even if your suggestions were introduced into mainstream computing, I highly doubt virus writers would label them with the application/x-virus mime type. Other than signing all software, there is no way to tell a virus from another program for sure (virus scanners use heuristics etc. but you don't really know for sure until some human labels a piece of code a virus and adds it to a virus database). And signing leads to problems: either the OS allows you to run unsigned apps after confirmation (which leads to users clicking OK to any dialog that pops up) or to the system only allowing signed code to run which leads to lock-in, freedom deprivation and terrorism:)
b) files destroyed from implicit actions of applications not intended to handle them. For example if I open a Word document with Wordpad, I might destroy some part of the document.
As mentioned above, file associations are probably such that you had to explicitly tell the system to open your file in that particular application. If you really want to shoot yourself in the foot, do so.
c) open source apps can't handle proprietary-format files, thus spending too much time on reverse-engineering formats (instead of focusing to the GUI and its usability issues).
It is very sad, but if OpenOffice wasn't able to open most Word files, hardly anyone would use it no matter how great usability it would have. Period. Life is brutal, proprietary data formats are a pain to work with but sometimes supporting them is simply a must.
While it is not currently a danger to 64-bit Windows users, it does show that virus writers are looking toward the future.
Maybe the virus is also a beta, so it still lacks some functionality the retail version is going to have.
With a screen small enough to fit in the phone, you could have a radio instead. I can't think of this as anything more than just a geek toy - it may _sound_ cool to have one, but you probably won't _see_ much.
One of my fellow students couldn't access his website's statistics. It turned out, they had been blocked because the URL ended in anal.cgi (as in ANALyse). Blocking sites based only on their names is really stupid.
I guess this sort of addons is usually considered cheating. You might get banned from all servers for that (and even worse - still get fragged by someone with a better model).
> If they don't want us to see it, well, they're the ones paying fer it.
On the other hand, nobody is forcing them to put it on the net. The 'raw' internet was designed for making information available to anyone, anywhere. If they want the information to be restricted to only a particular group, they should give them accounts and only let registered users in. Of course, the hard part is making sure each citizen gets his or her account - and doesn't simply post the username and password for public use.
So there's no perfect system for preventing people from other countries from viewing their broadcast. The 'standard' system (based on the physical limitations of receving transmissions from large distances) isn't perfect, either. I can go to Britain by plane and view or listen to any British Radio or TV. The difference is that it would be rather expensive - and probably not worth the fuss, whereas spoofing IP addresses or ripping streams via ports forwarded over SSH is relatively easy and inexpensive.
But this is a problem of all media - physical objects are hard to copy while digital data is not. When first CD titles appeared, nobody cared about them being copied - the 650 MB CD was larger than most hard disks sold at that time and CD burners weren't available or were terribly expensive. It was the physicla object (the disk) that prevented copying - and it did quite well. As larger hard disks appeared and cheap CD-recorders emerged, that stopped being an obstacle.
As technology progresses and faster, larger, cheaper storage and bandwidth capacities become common, any amount of digital data will be easy to duplicate on inexpensive equipment. So, once something's gone digital, copies will appear, no matter what. Even more or less restrictive laws cannot really stop this. Thus, if someone decides to put something in digital form on the web, they must cope with the fact that it will be copied. If they want to avoid copies being made or viewed by unauthorized people, they should better stick to paper and celluloid film.
And add some phosphors for X-ray and hard gamma wavelengths, so when someone shoots the BFG in your face, your eyes really get hit with some high energy radiation !
In my case, it was necessary to change Protocol to "ImPS/2" (from "auto") and add Resolution=400 (actually any number was ok, as long as the line was present). With Protocol="Auto" my mouse didn't work, so changing that might help you, too.
What exactly isn't working ? Is the mouse not recognized by the kernel at all, or does it function but not quite correctly ? I've had some issues with another Logitech model, and it was actually XFree86/XOrg problems after all (had to manually add a "Resolution=400" line to XF86Config and it started working).
> At a question-and-answer session between the academics and Gates, one professor asked the > Microsoft founder about his views about the study of information technology, a part of > computer science that emphasizes on how documents, spreadsheets and other data should be > handled. What kinds of technologies should students majoring in this subject be taught? > Gates replied quickly and with a smile: "Microsoft Office."
They should have asked him to provide them with a full specification of Word.DOC format for those classes.
Slashdot Mirror
No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.
After all, FORTRAN is basically assembler, only less readable
Is this article so uninteresting noone even cares to post 'first post' posts?
Which of the two articles am I now supposed to mod funny, smart guy?
Once Gentoo finishes compiling.
> I have an Indy. I used in in college for CS work, and it was perfect. Learned OpenGL stuff, etc. I was the biggest SGI fanboy. evar. ;)
I didn't know CounterStrike ran on IRIX
Here's a description of how using some OOo macros can help you with issues you encounter when converting WordPerfect documents to the OpenOffice.org file format: http://hektor.umcs.lublin.pl/~mikosmul/computing/a rticles/openoffice-macros.html
For precision's sake: you probably wanted to say it's an 'idiom', not a 'dialect'. C99 (or any other variant of the language) is what you call a dialect.
...why don't they also patent the number "30"?
A text-based adventure, that is. Just like ... nethack. Could the name be a coincidence ?
> A program is runnable at all times, no syntax errors are possible
> The program executes modifications tothe program as you make them, making debugging completely integrated with programming
Even if you get rid syntax errors, there's still plenty of room for logic errors, many of which can't be discovered before you actually run a particular branch of your program. Eclipse does on-the-fly syntax checking, which is very nice, but if you break something in the program logic, you will face an exception or your program will not work as expected. Unless you get some super AI to check the code's logic for you, such errors are going to happen. Besides, I don't think people who do a lot of programming make syntax errors that often (although seeing them right away is useful indeed).
Note that what Eclipse does doesn't require using XML for your source code, just a standard unicode text file. And you can use (almost) arbitrary characters in your code, should you somehow find typing Greek characters or smiley faces easier and faster than typing plain ASCII.
> More importantly, OOo just isn't that good. It's amazingly slow and ugly, uses a fileformat that takes forever to save and creates huge files,
While I do agree that startup time and the non-standard GUI are major issues with OpenOffice, I don't understand your "huge files" argument. What are you comparing the sizes of files OOo produces to? My experience is OOo files are usually much smaller than their MS Office counterparts.
You can use wpd2sxw, which is a part of libwpd). Since it's a command line tool, you can use it to convert all your old files to OOo in a single bash loop. If you hit problems with some of the formatting features after conversion, read this tutorial, which might help you get it back into shape.
Yes, you can pack all sorts of intelligent algorithms into your programming language (and this is quite often done now), but the CPU as it is today works at the lowest level with just electric signals. Maybe we can move to another technology, so it will not be electric but rather optical. Or we can even use living cells to do the calculations for us - whatever. Either way, there are going to be people who have to work at the lowest level near the hardware. Others, who don't need that can get their programming tasks done faster thanks to modern programming languages, but the CPU itself is (in a way, by definition) very primitive. If it starts getting smart, we don't speak of the CPU itself anymore, but rather of the firmware that runs on it. And that's software. Oops, that software must talk to the lower level - that primitive CPU. You can't get away from that. If you made your CPU 'smart', you would really be creating an operating system for it.
:)
By the way, there were quite a few good reasons for using paging instead of segmentation in modern operating systems.
-computer files not 'strongly typed'; files are not objects in some permanent storage but rather blobs of bytes. This leads to several problems:
Files on my hard disk are in some permanent storage (if the disk doesn't break). And yes, I can open each file in any application I like if that's what you mean by 'not strongly typed'. And that's the way it should be. I use a different application for viewing my images (fast and lightweight) than for editing them (heavy but with lots of editing tools). I can run a script (thus treating it as an executable) but I can also treat it as plain text and edit it with my favorite text editor. Yes, reasonable file associations are important, but if I really want to edit some file byte by byte with a hex editor, I should be allowed to do so.
a) viruses disguised as useful programs.
Even if your suggestions were introduced into mainstream computing, I highly doubt virus writers would label them with the application/x-virus mime type. Other than signing all software, there is no way to tell a virus from another program for sure (virus scanners use heuristics etc. but you don't really know for sure until some human labels a piece of code a virus and adds it to a virus database). And signing leads to problems: either the OS allows you to run unsigned apps after confirmation (which leads to users clicking OK to any dialog that pops up) or to the system only allowing signed code to run which leads to lock-in, freedom deprivation and terrorism
b) files destroyed from implicit actions of applications not intended to handle them. For example if I open a Word document with Wordpad, I might destroy some part of the document.
As mentioned above, file associations are probably such that you had to explicitly tell the system to open your file in that particular application. If you really want to shoot yourself in the foot, do so.
c) open source apps can't handle proprietary-format files, thus spending too much time on reverse-engineering formats (instead of focusing to the GUI and its usability issues).
It is very sad, but if OpenOffice wasn't able to open most Word files, hardly anyone would use it no matter how great usability it would have. Period. Life is brutal, proprietary data formats are a pain to work with but sometimes supporting them is simply a must.
While it is not currently a danger to 64-bit Windows users, it does show that virus writers are looking toward the future.
Maybe the virus is also a beta, so it still lacks some functionality the retail version is going to have.
With a screen small enough to fit in the phone, you could have a radio instead. I can't think of this as anything more than just a geek toy - it may _sound_ cool to have one, but you probably won't _see_ much.
One of my fellow students couldn't access his website's statistics. It turned out, they had been blocked because the URL ended in anal.cgi (as in ANALyse). Blocking sites based only on their names is really stupid.
I guess this sort of addons is usually considered cheating. You might get banned from all servers for that (and even worse - still get fragged by someone with a better model).
> If they don't want us to see it, well, they're the ones paying fer it.
On the other hand, nobody is forcing them to put it on the net. The 'raw' internet was designed for making information available to anyone, anywhere. If they want the information to be restricted to only a particular group, they should give them accounts and only let registered users in. Of course, the hard part is making sure each citizen gets his or her account - and doesn't simply post the username and password for public use.
So there's no perfect system for preventing people from other countries from viewing their broadcast. The 'standard' system (based on the physical limitations of receving transmissions from large distances) isn't perfect, either. I can go to Britain by plane and view or listen to any British Radio or TV. The difference is that it would be rather expensive - and probably not worth the fuss, whereas spoofing IP addresses or ripping streams via ports forwarded over SSH is relatively easy and inexpensive.
But this is a problem of all media - physical objects are hard to copy while digital data is not. When first CD titles appeared, nobody cared about them being copied - the 650 MB CD was larger than most hard disks sold at that time and CD burners weren't available or were terribly expensive. It was the physicla object (the disk) that prevented copying - and it did quite well. As larger hard disks appeared and cheap CD-recorders emerged, that stopped being an obstacle.
As technology progresses and faster, larger, cheaper storage and bandwidth capacities become common, any amount of digital data will be easy to duplicate on inexpensive equipment. So, once something's gone digital, copies will appear, no matter what. Even more or less restrictive laws cannot really stop this. Thus, if someone decides to put something in digital form on the web, they must cope with the fact that it will be copied. If they want to avoid copies being made or viewed by unauthorized people, they should better stick to paper and celluloid film.
And add some phosphors for X-ray and hard gamma wavelengths, so when someone shoots the BFG in your face, your eyes really get hit with some high energy radiation !
In the next version of slashcode, only three comments will be allowed for each post in order to reduce confusion among moderators.
Anyone with shell access to a server abroad can just SSH to a machine located outside of US and start their browser from there.
In my case, it was necessary to change Protocol to "ImPS/2" (from "auto") and add Resolution=400 (actually any number was ok, as long as the line was present). With Protocol="Auto" my mouse didn't work, so changing that might help you, too.
What exactly isn't working ? Is the mouse not recognized by the kernel at all, or does it function but not quite correctly ? I've had some issues with another Logitech model, and it was actually XFree86/XOrg problems after all (had to manually add a "Resolution=400" line to XF86Config and it started working).
From the article:
.DOC format for those classes.
> At a question-and-answer session between the academics and Gates, one professor asked the
> Microsoft founder about his views about the study of information technology, a part of
> computer science that emphasizes on how documents, spreadsheets and other data should be
> handled. What kinds of technologies should students majoring in this subject be taught?
> Gates replied quickly and with a smile: "Microsoft Office."
They should have asked him to provide them with a full specification of Word