Instead of trying to make all the distributions the same, why don't they make a library that abstract away the difference?
Example: If my program need to link to a ssl library(Such as openssl), version 2.3 or newer, I should call a function findLibrary("ssl",2,3) which would return the path to the needed.so file, or null if the file is not installed. There could then be a function to also ask the os to install the needed library if it were not there. Each linux distribution should then implement the library in a way, so that the Redhat version, might forward the call to rpm, while the debian version of the library would query the dep database insted.
And instead of the infinite debate on/opt vs/usr/local the program could just call getPathForUserInstalledSoftware(); And getDefaultCompilerPath() instead of the current autoconfig hack.
Then a linux standard base, would just be a specification of the needed functions in LinuxStandardBaseLibrary.
And we would newer have to use the autoconfig hack. (The library might ofcause also be implemented on Solaris, and maybe even cygwin/windows)
Aac (Not acc) is covered by patents and to quote from wikipedia: 'However, a patent license is required for all manufacturers or developers of AAC codecs [9].'
Why?? Both PostgreSQL and MySQL are install and forget, unless you need absolute top performence in which case you might need to do special magic to spread the data and log files on different partitions.
Not according to the book. According to the book the spice is needed to predict what will happen when you arrive, that is: To ensure that you don't arrive inside a planet, or other dangerous place. The point is that when you do something that amount to traveling faster then light, the only way to know anything about where you arrive, is to predict the future.
This is also a big reason, that the guild newer took over Dune. They were so conditioned to always seek the safe path(Because that was what their ships needed) that they could not imagine starting an operation that was not know to be 100% safe for the guild.
1: Well you don't have to code java, so that should not matter.
2: I don't think eclipse is that bad. It currently use less memmory then my Firefox 3.
3: Have you looked at eclipse? They use swt which mean that for linux they use real gtk widgets. (Swt is a wrapped to the native widget set of the platform. They even used to mave a swt-motif wrapper but that was stopped for some reason:}
4: What java version was that? My eclipse only use a few seconds to start with sun jre 1.5, but if you used it with the gcj that comes as default with most linux, that might be your problem. Gcj+eclipse=Really Really bad!. (And crashing and throwing exceptions and other hell).
I really think that you should only send carrige return in your mail if you want to start a new paragraph. Sending an entire paragraph as a single line is good, because then my mail program, can wrap the lines acording to my window size.
Sending mails with a specific line width sucks if my display is smaller or wider then what the sender think is the right linesize. What If I am on a mobile device which can only show 60 chars on a line. If you email have a newline after 80 chars, it will not look good.
And similary, my current mail program can show 200 chars on a single line, so why leave more then half the window empty, just because you want to wrap lines on an arbitrary position which have not really been a limit since we started using graphics display.
1: The reason that IE6 is so bad at standard complience is not that the ie team made a bad implementation, but that they choose not to implement html and css1+2.1 as specified in the standard. The reason most likely beeing a combination of backward compability, and the thought that their way were better then the standard way. (like guessing, that if the user specifiy a box that is not high enough to contain its content, the box should increase in size, even thoug the standard clearly say that it should overflow. This is not an implementation bug, but a design choice that the ie team made.)
2: All the other browsers have managed to implement html+css in a way that give consistent output and my guess is that if ie8 implements html+css as well as firefox 1.5, then it too will be able to display 99.99% of the web, similary to all the other browsers. The only page I currently know, that only works in internet explorer(And which don't use active X), is running in quirk mode anyway, so it will keep 'working' in ie8.
One problem that IE8 might encounter, is that some webpages might delivery html/css with workarounds for bugs in ie6 and ie7, but that problem is easy to work around. Microsoft just need to change their browser agent string to something that will not trigger theese.
So here is a challange, nobody have yet solved: Find 3 webpages that works now in ie6 and ie7, but will give problems if ie8 start in standard complience mode, With an user agent string so different from the existing one that it will not trigger special download.
To qualify a webpage must: a: Work in ie6 and ie7.
b: Not work in any other browser. And the reason must be due to difference in behavier in html/css handling. Sites that require active-x or special ie plugins will not qualify, as theese will also work in ie8.
c: Have a header, that causes it to be in "standards complience mode" because the quirks mode in ie8 will most like be like the one in ie 6 and 7.
There might be a few pages out there that qualify, I just havent been able to find them, and neither have the ie8 team, but something between 15 and 20% of the internet users now use an non ie browser, and our internet is not broken, and neither will it be, just because ie8 choose to handle the html4 standard, PROVIDED That they make a complete and proper implementation.
But the solution to that is simple. Just take the jre which is included with the java sdk, and put it in the application directory. Then you can instruct the application to always use that jre. Thus no installation of the jre is required at all, and the application will always pick the included jre.
That was what I did when we developed java desktop applications. It had the effect that we knew we would not mess with any java installed by the user, because we did not install java, and it meant that we know exactly which jre version the application were using.
I would not lose anything. If I spendt thousands of hours building my character it would be because doing so were fun, and I don't lose that fun time I had, just because my character died.
If I had spendt thousands of hours building my virtual character, and I thought that time was wasted, when he died, then I would also feel I hand wasted thousands of hours building my virtual character, even if he newer died.
Remember: It's a game. If it feels like work playing it, don't do it.
Now I don't know what the map looks like in Warhammer, but I would imagine that the low level instances were located behind the main city, and thus imposible to reach for the other teams unless they walk throu the enemy main city.
I just always imagined a map, where there are 2 'main cities' one for each team. And between them a lot of smaller cities, and other structures that the teams would want to capture. (They each start with half of them) Theese should be located between the 2 main cities, thus forming a kind of border. Thus the entire map would be part of a 'world conquest' quest.
Theese would provide some kind of attack/damage/magic/healing bonuses to nerby troops for the team that hold them, so that the farther you were from your cities, the more trouble you would be in.
That way, almost all pvp fighting would be located at the border between the 2 teams. The border could then move, if cities near the border were captured or destroyed.
And players whould would not want to be directly involved in pvp could then take quests, that would help their team by taking resources, that could be used to build/maintain defense structures.
So if you want to attace the other teams main city, you really have to take many of the smaller cities and structures first, so you can use them for some kind of support.
PLEASE PLEASE, make a single Realm where each players only have one life. And when he dies he dies. (The user can the ofcause then create a new player).
My arguments for this:
It will make it posible for users that don't play so much time to get player charactors that are within the 10% best, because a characters power will be the amount of time played since he last died, not the total amount of time played.
It will make the player levels a bell curve, meaning that there are only a few really powerfull players. There is nothing fun about reaching $MAX level if >25% of all the other players are also max level. This does mean that one team may have a player that can beat any player on the opposite time, but he still can't beat any team of other players.
It will also make guilds much more usefull. Just imagine that the guild leader is the person with the highest level, and the other members of the guild funciton as kind of "support troops" for the leader. This will be extra cool if the instances insted of limiting the number of players within a group, limit the total number of levels within a group. So if a instance is rated to level 100, you can bring either 2 level 50 players, or a single level 50 player, and 5 support players each at level 10.
The motivation for beeing a "support troop" in a guild is that a: It might be safer then beeing the front fighter, and b: At a time the front fighter and leader will die, and then the highest level support troop, will be the new leader. (This will be extra cool, if high level players get the ability to give bonuses to a limited number of players within their group).
(And yes, this system might mean that the xp that users get for killing monsters and players might need to be raised, so that there are top level players at all).
Giving each player one life, also have the effect that you don't have to limit the number of levels/classes/extras that each player can have. Just imagine a d&d mmorpg where a player can be dual class. So imagine he is both a fighter and a mage. The existing mmorpg games can't allow this because when that player reach $MAX level, he will have all the powers of both the mage and the fighter, thus owerpowering any single class player. But with unlimited levels and only one life that will not be a problem, because the player will newer really reach a max level where he can't be better, so for any amount of XP, a dual class fighter/mage might have both classes at level 35, while a single class mage with the same amount of xp, might be at level 50, thus preserving the game balance while allowing interesting combinations. (Dual class players advance slower, because they split their xp between their classes).
I don't think that Microsoft gives more value, because unlike Win32 and MFC, Qt does not make you want to scream each time you use it.
So qt might not be the cheepest, but for me ~1000$ is a small price to keep my sanity.
And qt just have to increase your development speed a few %, in order to pay for itself. Which it does, and much much more.
Win32 and MFC still gives me nightmare.
And if you are in a situation, where you would have to pay $126,000 for QT licenses, you would also have to pay sereval millions to pay all your developers in the timeframe covered by the license, so in the case the payment to qt would be so small, that it would not really matter.
But I really have to ask: Do you yourself code to win32 and/or mfc, and do you think it's a good framework?
1: The entire coruption problem. Giving money and other benefits for people/companies so they vote for you is not ok.
2: The entire rush is a big problem. The right way for microsoft to design OOXML as a ISO standard for text documents, would have been to start the ISO standard work at the same time they started their work on the format. That way Microsoft could have incorporated changes in the standard in their word 2007. Right now what Microsoft word 2007 call OOXML is not really the exactly same document standard as have been declared a standard by iso. The entire point of an iso standard is not "Here is how we at microsoft do things in Word, please declare it a standard" but insted "How can we design and implement a standard for word text documents, that can represent the things we want". Example: The standard include a lot of "please behave bug for bug compability with this specific old version of Word. The most infamous example beeing the flag that signal that the document should be layouded exactly with the margin rules that word 95 uses.
The problem here is also one of motivation. The normal motivation for an ISO standard is that a group of vendors and users need a standard they can all use and implement. But microsoft is not really interested in making OOXML the document standard that all word processors use. The only reason they want to make OOXML a iso standard is that they need it for polical reasons because some goverments and companies don't want to use Word unless it save in a "standard format"
3: Nobody know if OOXML can really be implemented by an independent software program. The problem beeing that Microsoft still control patents for parts of the standard that others might not be allowed to use. So it's a standard but Microsoft might still control who can and can't legally implement it. (The solution for this is simple: Microsoft should just grant the right to use any of their patents that are needed to read and write ooxml software to anyone, but they don't for some reason).
And the standard itself is rather bad some places, but that is to be expected when you try to fasttrack a 8000 pages standard quality do suffer.
That would be easy to do with google analytic. Just modify the javascript so that it look at the dom, and if the google analytic code is not last code in the html document, just above the tag, replace the entire website with a "PLACE THE JAVASCRIPT AT THE BOTTOM, THE WAY GOOGLE DOCUMENTET IT SO IT DON'T PREVENT THE LOADING OF THE PAGE
Imagine that slashdot uses InnoDB for all its tables(It don't but just imagene it does) and that slashdot want to add a feature where you can search other users Journals. To do this effective would require a full text index, but that conflict with the need for transactions and foregin keys. There are solutions to this. You can either use MyIsam on the table containing the journals, add a third party full text engine or analyze the situation, and find out that the search will not be used much, and all the data fits in ram, so just do a brute force search:}
Have they added indexed fulltext search to InnoDB? Having to choose between indexed full text search and transactions and foreign keys always seem a big problem.
So, yes you can have transactions and you can have indexed fulltext, but you can't have them at the same time.
The same thing that prevet google from just looking at your idear and cloning it(That is:Nothing).
But it is very very little web 2.0 software where looking at an existing implementation makes it any more easy to clone the implementation. Remember that google still have to do a complete and independent implementation.
I do for example not really think that looknig at the slasthdot code, would make it any more easy for me to implement a complete clone of slashdot.
quote:Microsoft has better system APIs than does Apple (End quote)
Are you insane? The native c api for win32 is about the worst api ever designed, and absolutely the worst api that is still in use.
And the c++ wrapper(I asume you mean MFC) is a hack job too. Even microsoft have admitted that. And MFC is not at all a part of windows, it is a part of "visual studio", which is not part of windows. Hint: You can't make an application that static link with mfc and which are compiled with a port of gcc.
Microsoft should just buy a full license for QT4 from trolltech, and declare that QT4.4 + whatever extra microsoft need is not the new standard for gui development for windows. (Microsoft would still be required to rewrite the part of win32 that is not cowered by QT).
Yes for commercial purpose, but not for non-opensource software, because the exception are only for OSI license approved software;
Quote: If your application is licensed under GPL or compatible OSI license approved by MySQL AB, you are free to ship any GPL software of MySQL AB with your application ('application' means any type of software application, system, tool or utility).
So I still can't make a close sourced application that includes the mysql client library and link with it.
Quote: If you include one or more of the MySQL drivers in your non-GPL application (so that your application can run with MySQL), you need a commercial license for the driver(s) in question. The MySQL drivers currently include an ODBC driver, a JDBC driver and the C language library. --------------- And if you look at http://www.mysql.com/about/legal/licensing/opensource-license.html
Quote: FLOSS License Exception. We have created a license exception which enables Free/Libre and Open Source software ("FLOSS") to be able to include the GPL-licensed MySQL client libraries despite the fact that not all open source licenses are compatible with the GPL (this includes the PHP license version 3.0). Read more about the FLOSS License Exception.
So they have made a special exception that allow opensource software to link with the mysql client library. That would not be needed if anyone were allowed to link to it.
The problem is that the client lib, which applications link with when they need to talk to mysql is also gpl. So I i write a c++ program which connect to mysql, I need to release my application under a gpl compability license.
Slashdot Mirror
Instead of trying to make all the distributions the same, why don't they make a library that abstract away the difference?
Example: If my program need to link to a ssl library(Such as openssl), version 2.3 or newer, I should call a function .so file, or null if the file is not installed. There could then be a
findLibrary("ssl",2,3) which would return the path to the needed
function to also ask the os to install the needed library if it were not there.
Each linux distribution should then implement the library in a way, so that the Redhat version, might forward the call to rpm, while the debian version of the library would query the dep database insted.
And instead of the infinite debate on /opt vs /usr/local the program could just call getPathForUserInstalledSoftware();
And getDefaultCompilerPath() instead of the current autoconfig hack.
Then a linux standard base, would just be a specification of the needed functions in LinuxStandardBaseLibrary.
And we would newer have to use the autoconfig hack. (The library might ofcause also be implemented on Solaris, and maybe even cygwin/windows)
Aac (Not acc) is covered by patents and to quote from wikipedia:
'However, a patent license is required for all manufacturers or developers of AAC codecs [9].'
(See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Audio_Coding#Licensing_and_patents)
Why?? Both PostgreSQL and MySQL are install and forget, unless you need absolute top performence in which case you might need to do special magic to spread the data and log files on different partitions.
Not according to the book. According to the book the spice is needed to predict what will happen when you arrive, that is: To ensure that you don't arrive inside a planet, or other dangerous place. The point is that when you do something that amount to traveling faster then light, the only way to know anything about where you arrive, is to predict the future.
This is also a big reason, that the guild newer took over Dune. They were so conditioned to always seek the safe path(Because that was what their ships needed) that they could not imagine starting an operation that was not know to be 100% safe for the guild.
(Only slightly offtopic)
1: Well you don't have to code java, so that should not matter.
2: I don't think eclipse is that bad. It currently use less memmory then my Firefox 3.
3: Have you looked at eclipse? They use swt which mean that for linux they use real gtk widgets. (Swt is a wrapped to the native widget set of the platform. They even used to mave a swt-motif wrapper but that was stopped for some reason :}
4: What java version was that? My eclipse only use a few seconds to start with sun jre 1.5, but if you used it with the gcj that comes as default with most linux, that might be your problem. Gcj+eclipse=Really Really bad!. (And crashing and throwing exceptions and other hell).
development IDE similar to Visual Studio (circa 2002) that handled python, javascript, and HTML, I would lay down some cash.
Any specific reason you do not want to use Eclipse? There is a rather good python(Just google python eclipse plugin).
For javascript I use JSEclipse. The repository for JSEclipse is at http://download.macromedia.com/pub/labs/jseclipse/autoinstall or browser to http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/jseclipse/
(There are plenty of html plugins but I havent used any of them, so I can't recomand any specific one.
Reboot the server to reload war files? What kind of hack was that???
Tomcat have always* suported reloading war files. They even include a web utility where each customer can start/stop/reload his servlet.
*At least at far back as I can remember.
And just let me be the devils advocate.
I really think that you should only send carrige return in your mail if you want to start a new paragraph. Sending an entire paragraph as a single line is good, because then my mail program, can wrap the lines acording to my window size.
Sending mails with a specific line width sucks if my display is smaller or wider then what the sender think is the right linesize. What If I am on a mobile device which can only show 60 chars on a line. If you email have a newline after 80 chars, it will not look good.
And similary, my current mail program can show 200 chars on a single line, so why leave more then half the window empty, just because you want to wrap lines on an arbitrary position which have not really been a limit since we started using graphics display.
But he is wrong on 2 counts.
1: The reason that IE6 is so bad at standard complience is not that the ie team made a bad implementation, but that they choose not to implement html and css1+2.1 as specified in the standard. The reason most likely beeing a combination of backward compability, and the thought that their way were better then the standard way. (like guessing, that if the user specifiy a box that is not high enough to contain its content, the box should increase in size, even thoug the standard clearly say that it should overflow. This is not an implementation bug, but a design choice that the ie team made.)
2: All the other browsers have managed to implement html+css in a way that give consistent output and my guess is that if ie8 implements html+css as well as firefox 1.5, then it too will be able to display 99.99% of the web, similary to all the other browsers. The only page I currently know, that only works in internet explorer(And which don't use active X),
is running in quirk mode anyway, so it will keep 'working' in ie8.
One problem that IE8 might encounter, is that some webpages might delivery html/css with workarounds for bugs in ie6 and ie7, but that problem is easy to work around. Microsoft just need to change their browser agent string to something that will not trigger theese.
So here is a challange, nobody have yet solved:
Find 3 webpages that works now in ie6 and ie7, but will give problems if ie8 start in standard complience mode, With an user agent string so different from the existing one that it will not trigger special download.
To qualify a webpage must:
a: Work in ie6 and ie7.
b: Not work in any other browser. And the reason must be due to difference in behavier in html/css handling. Sites that require active-x or special ie plugins will not qualify, as theese will also work in ie8.
c: Have a header, that causes it to be in "standards complience mode" because the quirks mode in ie8 will most like be like the one in ie 6 and 7.
There might be a few pages out there that qualify, I just havent been able to find them, and neither have the ie8 team, but something between 15 and 20% of the internet users now use an non ie browser, and our internet is not broken, and neither will it be, just because ie8 choose to handle the html4 standard, PROVIDED That they make a complete and proper implementation.
But the solution to that is simple. Just take the jre which is included with the java sdk, and put it in the application directory. Then you can instruct the application to always use that jre. Thus no installation of the jre is required at all, and the application will always pick the included jre.
That was what I did when we developed java desktop applications. It had the effect that we knew we would not mess with any java installed by the user, because we did not install java, and it meant that we know exactly which jre version the application were using.
I would not lose anything. If I spendt thousands of hours building my character it would be because doing so were fun, and I don't lose that fun time I had, just because my character died.
If I had spendt thousands of hours building my virtual character, and I thought that time was wasted, when he died, then I would also feel I hand wasted thousands of hours building my virtual character, even if he newer died.
Remember: It's a game. If it feels like work playing it, don't do it.
Now I don't know what the map looks like in Warhammer, but I would imagine that the low level instances were located behind the main city, and thus imposible to reach for the other teams unless they walk throu the enemy main city.
I just always imagined a map, where there are 2 'main cities' one for each team. And between them a lot of smaller cities, and other structures that the teams would want to capture. (They each start with half of them) Theese should be located between the 2 main cities, thus forming a kind of border. Thus the entire map would be part of a 'world conquest' quest.
Theese would provide some kind of attack/damage/magic/healing bonuses to nerby troops for the team that hold them, so that the farther you were from your cities, the more trouble you would be in.
That way, almost all pvp fighting would be located at the border between the 2 teams. The border could then move, if cities near the border were captured or destroyed.
And players whould would not want to be directly involved in pvp could then take quests, that would help their team by taking resources, that could be used to build/maintain defense structures.
So if you want to attace the other teams main city, you really have to take many of the smaller cities and structures first, so you can use them for some kind of support.
PLEASE PLEASE, make a single Realm where each players only have one life. And when he dies he dies. (The user can the ofcause then create a new player).
My arguments for this:
It will make it posible for users that don't play so much time to get player charactors that are within the 10% best, because a characters power will be the amount of time played since he last died, not the total amount of time played.
It will make the player levels a bell curve, meaning that there are only a few really powerfull players. There is nothing fun about reaching $MAX level if >25% of all the other players are also max level.
This does mean that one team may have a player that can beat any player on the opposite time, but he still can't beat any team of other players.
It will also make guilds much more usefull. Just imagine that the guild leader is the person with the highest level, and the other members of the guild funciton as kind of "support troops" for the leader. This will be extra cool if the instances insted of limiting the number of players within a group, limit the total number of levels within a group. So if a instance is rated to level 100, you can bring either 2 level 50 players, or a single level 50 player, and 5 support players each at level 10.
The motivation for beeing a "support troop" in a guild is that a: It might be safer then beeing the front fighter, and b: At a time the front fighter and leader will die, and then the highest level support troop, will be the new leader. (This will be extra cool, if high level players get the ability to give bonuses to a limited number of players within their group).
(And yes, this system might mean that the xp that users get for killing monsters and players might need to be raised, so that there are top level players at all).
Giving each player one life, also have the effect that you don't have to limit the number of levels/classes/extras that each player can have.
Just imagine a d&d mmorpg where a player can be dual class. So imagine he is both a fighter and a mage. The existing mmorpg games can't allow this because when that player reach $MAX level, he will have all the powers of both the mage and the fighter, thus owerpowering any single class player. But with unlimited levels and only one life that will not be a problem, because the player will newer really reach a max level where he can't be better, so for any amount of XP, a dual class fighter/mage might have both classes at level 35, while a single class mage with the same amount of xp, might be at level 50, thus preserving the game balance while allowing interesting combinations. (Dual class players advance slower, because they split their xp between their classes).
Martin
AWStats is able to give you an idea about what hits your server, but it can't tell you anything about each user.
Information such as "how many goes from PageA to PageB"
How many users are leaving the website from this page and so on.
I don't think that Microsoft gives more value, because unlike Win32 and MFC, Qt does not make you want to scream each time you use it. So qt might not be the cheepest, but for me ~1000$ is a small price to keep my sanity.
And qt just have to increase your development speed a few %, in order to pay for itself. Which it does, and much much more.
Win32 and MFC still gives me nightmare.
And if you are in a situation, where you would have to pay $126,000 for QT licenses, you would also have to pay sereval millions to pay all your developers in the timeframe covered by the license, so in the case the payment to qt would be so small, that it would not really matter.
But I really have to ask: Do you yourself code to win32 and/or mfc, and do you think it's a good framework?
There are 3 things.
1: The entire coruption problem. Giving money and other benefits for people/companies so they vote for you is not ok.
2: The entire rush is a big problem. The right way for microsoft to design OOXML as a ISO standard for text documents, would have been to
start the ISO standard work at the same time they started their work on the format. That way Microsoft could have incorporated changes in the standard in their word 2007. Right now what Microsoft word 2007 call OOXML is not really the exactly same document standard as have been declared a standard by iso. The entire point of an iso standard is not "Here is how we at microsoft do things in Word, please declare it a standard"
but insted "How can we design and implement a standard for word text documents, that can represent the things we want".
Example: The standard include a lot of "please behave bug for bug compability with this specific old version of Word. The most infamous example beeing the flag that signal that the document should be layouded exactly with the margin rules that word 95 uses.
The problem here is also one of motivation. The normal motivation for an ISO standard is that a group of vendors and users need a standard they can all use and implement. But microsoft is not really interested in making OOXML the document standard that all word processors use. The only reason they want to make OOXML a iso standard is that they need it for polical reasons because some goverments and companies don't want to use Word unless it save in a "standard format"
3: Nobody know if OOXML can really be implemented by an independent software program. The problem beeing that Microsoft still control patents for parts of the standard that others might not be allowed to use. So it's a standard but Microsoft might still control who can and can't legally implement it.
(The solution for this is simple: Microsoft should just grant the right to use any of their patents that are needed to read and write ooxml software to anyone, but they don't for some reason).
And the standard itself is rather bad some places, but that is to be expected when you try to fasttrack a 8000 pages standard quality do suffer.
Did that explain it?
That would be easy to do with google analytic. Just modify the javascript so that it look at the dom, and if the google analytic code is not last code in the html document, just above the tag, replace the entire website with a "PLACE THE JAVASCRIPT AT THE BOTTOM, THE WAY GOOGLE DOCUMENTET IT SO IT DON'T PREVENT THE LOADING OF THE PAGE
Anyone up for a greace monkey script?
An example for why i would want that:
:}
Imagine that slashdot uses InnoDB for all its tables(It don't but just imagene it does) and that slashdot
want to add a feature where you can search other users Journals. To do this effective would require a full text index, but
that conflict with the need for transactions and foregin keys. There are solutions to this. You can either use MyIsam on the table containing the journals, add a third party full text engine or analyze the situation, and find out that the search will not be used much, and all the data fits in ram, so just do a brute force search
Have they added indexed fulltext search to InnoDB? Having to choose between indexed full text search and transactions and foreign keys always seem a big problem.
So, yes you can have transactions and you can have indexed fulltext, but you can't have them at the same time.
The same thing that prevet google from just looking at your idear and cloning it(That is:Nothing).
But it is very very little web 2.0 software where looking at an existing implementation makes it any more easy to clone the implementation.
Remember that google still have to do a complete and independent implementation.
I do for example not really think that looknig at the slasthdot code, would make it any more easy for me to implement a complete clone of slashdot.
quote:Microsoft has better system APIs than does Apple (End quote)
Are you insane? The native c api for win32 is about the worst api ever designed, and absolutely the worst api that is still in use.
And the c++ wrapper(I asume you mean MFC) is a hack job too. Even microsoft have admitted that. And MFC is not at all a part of windows, it is a part of "visual studio", which is not part of windows. Hint: You can't make an application that static link with mfc and which are compiled with a port of gcc.
Microsoft should just buy a full license for QT4 from trolltech, and declare that QT4.4 + whatever extra microsoft need is not the new standard for gui development for windows. (Microsoft would still be required to rewrite the part of win32 that is not cowered by QT).
Wow .net is already a legacy frameworks now. I guess that will surprise some .net developers.
Yes for commercial purpose, but not for non-opensource software, because the exception are only for OSI license approved software;
Quote:
If your application is licensed under GPL or compatible OSI license approved by MySQL AB, you are free to ship any GPL software of MySQL AB with your application ('application' means any type of software application, system, tool or utility).
So I still can't make a close sourced application that includes the mysql client library and link with it.
Are you sure about that? I did a search on mysql.org and all I found was
(From http://www.mysql.com/about/legal/licensing/commercial-license.html)
Quote:
If you include one or more of the MySQL drivers in your non-GPL application (so that your application can run with MySQL), you need a commercial license for the driver(s) in question. The MySQL drivers currently include an ODBC driver, a JDBC driver and the C language library.
---------------
And if you look at
http://www.mysql.com/about/legal/licensing/opensource-license.html
Quote:
FLOSS License Exception. We have created a license exception which enables Free/Libre and Open Source software ("FLOSS") to be able to include the GPL-licensed MySQL client libraries despite the fact that not all open source licenses are compatible with the GPL (this includes the PHP license version 3.0). Read more about the FLOSS License Exception.
So they have made a special exception that allow opensource software to link with the mysql client library. That would not be needed if anyone were allowed to link to it.
The problem is that the client lib, which applications link with when they need to talk to mysql is also gpl. So I i write a
c++ program which connect to mysql, I need to release my application under a gpl compability license.