Well, perhaps Linux is maturing enough where it could be 2.6 forever.
Only if Linux had a fixed goal, and it's not the case. Like TeX, that does what it does and that's it: it's perfect, nothing more to envolve. It's version number is converging to "pi", and is now 3.14159 IIRC. Each release adds a new digit.:)
When the news appeared on/. the changelog was still not there. But now it is. Anyway, a good way to see what new things are supported is running make oldconfig after you copy your linux-2.6.10/.config to the new dir.
Great. Here I am having a on-topic relevant conversation and being modded down just 'cause they don't agree with my point of view. At least now they can give a reason and mod me offtopic! Go on, I have karma to burn..
As I read it, the saveme()/loadme() would handling file access itself
Why should the non-OO functions be any different? There can be functions that provide that higher-level interface, just the same.
The methods would basically be a setter and a getter.
bool myobject_save(save_struct* buf);// for each object type bool save_object(save_struct* buf);// one for all objects Just like the functions for each object on the non-OO approach. It's just a matter of names. The right organization and abstraction can be done with or without OO.
The non-OO approach would require knowledge about the the inside of the classes to be present outside the class and would be burdonsome when implementing new classes or changing old classes.
Yeah, there are some cases that the OOP semantics are handy. The trouble is that the OO people think everything have to be done that way, and when the OO model does not fit, it's just an extra level of bureoucracy.
In short; make every class which should save it's data inherit two methods from a custom class. One of the methods should write the data for that particular object in the format in which it should be exported (text, xml, binary). The other method should be able to read that data again.
How different this is from a saveme()/loadme() methods for every object, or even from the non-OO approach?
And as a competent admin, I choose the distro that don't get in the way, that let me do the things my way. By that aspect alone, LFS would be the best, but it a bit exagerated. (I highly recommend to install it once though, if you are interested in better understanding of the system, it's parts and how they work, from boot to the password prompt and applications. I used it at my machine at home for quite some time.)
I choose Slackware. I used to install everything (after the initial instalation from the distro CD) from source, but it got tedious. Now I use swaret to upgrade the security-related packages. The software more importantly used (in my case: postfix, clamav and spamassassin and squirrelmail) are monitored from freshmeat and upgraded manually as I see fit (some from source code). Other software are not upgraded unless needed (if it works, don't mess with it).
The main source of problem, in all the distributions I tried, is the package system. Ugrading (or, in some cases, even installing new packages) can break the system. Of course when installing from source you also have the risk, but things are more under control if you know what you're doing.
The submiter pointed out some negative side of it, but it is sure a victory for the openess of the world. Victory of a battle, but not the war. Let's warm our hearts with hope and continue to fight.
Ok for the features, but he said the new version FIXED PROBLEMS of the old one. He has the right to have the product working as expected, thus to have the problems fixed. If they don't release a 4.1 version that solve that problems, he has the moral right to get a pirate the new version.
The suffering is proportional to the evolution of the living being. We "know" more evoluted animals have more feelings. Well, there's just not enough complexity in the simpler organisms to actually feel anything. There are many degrees of evolution.. So torturing humans is not the same as dissecating frogs or injecting nicotine in mice, and that is also different from killing an ant or even a plant. Neither of these are nice, pros and cons have to be weighted anyway.
If the created being does not have enough brain to be concious, at least not much more then the original animal, it's really not much worse then what we already do with these animals at labs, and the gain in scientific advance can be greater.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, perhaps Linux is maturing enough where it could be 2.6 forever.
:)
Only if Linux had a fixed goal, and it's not the case. Like TeX, that does what it does and that's it: it's perfect, nothing more to envolve. It's version number is converging to "pi", and is now 3.14159 IIRC. Each release adds a new digit.
When the news appeared on /. the changelog was still not there. But now it is.
Anyway, a good way to see what new things are supported is running make oldconfig after you copy your linux-2.6.10/.config to the new dir.
for the best darkness.
Without GNU's GPL MS would've openly pirated various free implementations of UNIX.
What about the ones that are not released under GPL, like *BSD?
There is Linux for PowerPC also.
I tested it here on my Firefox 1.0 on Linux, and it didn't work.
let's terraform this sucker.
Agreed.
I got my hoe. When do we start?
Then maybe it's because of Adblock. I have many expressions like ads.*.com and *.com/ads/* filtered.
I opened that page, and not only no popup appeared, but also Firefox (1.0 on Linux) didn't show the notice about a blocked popup.
Great.
Here I am having a on-topic relevant conversation and being modded down just 'cause they don't agree with my point of view.
At least now they can give a reason and mod me offtopic!
Go on, I have karma to burn..
Why should the non-OO functions be any different? There can be functions that provide that higher-level interface, just the same.
bool myobject_save(save_struct* buf);
bool save_object(save_struct* buf);
Just like the functions for each object on the non-OO approach. It's just a matter of names. The right organization and abstraction can be done with or without OO.
Yeah, there are some cases that the OOP semantics are handy. The trouble is that the OO people think everything have to be done that way, and when the OO model does not fit, it's just an extra level of bureoucracy.
In short; make every class which should save it's data inherit two methods from a custom class.
One of the methods should write the data for that particular object in the format in which it should be exported (text, xml, binary). The other method should be able to read that data again.
How different this is from a saveme()/loadme() methods for every object, or even from the non-OO approach?
Exactly. I've been doing this for years now. Literally.
Of course I'm a geek, and I recognize it's not for general public yet.
It's exactly the same in X.org, as I pointed before.
Dear Taco,
Please post a link to a summary of changes when anouncing the release of a new version of any software.
art is in the eye of the observer
Right.
That's why photography can be art.
And here is a nice piece of unintentional computer-generated art: I call it bugart.
again
The parent is absolutely right.
And as a competent admin, I choose the distro that don't get in the way, that let me do the things my way. By that aspect alone, LFS would be the best, but it a bit exagerated. (I highly recommend to install it once though, if you are interested in better understanding of the system, it's parts and how they work, from boot to the password prompt and applications. I used it at my machine at home for quite some time.)
I choose Slackware. I used to install everything (after the initial instalation from the distro CD) from source, but it got tedious. Now I use swaret to upgrade the security-related packages. The software more importantly used (in my case: postfix, clamav and spamassassin and squirrelmail) are monitored from freshmeat and upgraded manually as I see fit (some from source code). Other software are not upgraded unless needed (if it works, don't mess with it).
The main source of problem, in all the distributions I tried, is the package system. Ugrading (or, in some cases, even installing new packages) can break the system. Of course when installing from source you also have the risk, but things are more under control if you know what you're doing.
especially when he got exactly what he purchased.
He did not. There was bugs in the software where it was supposed to work.
Apple just gave me a free iBook to replace a shoddy one
What's the difference from giving a free new version of a program to replace a buggy one?
The submiter pointed out some negative side of it, but it is sure a victory for the openess of the world.
Victory of a battle, but not the war. Let's warm our hearts with hope and continue to fight.
Just until all features of 04 are working properly, obviously.
Ok for the features, but he said the new version FIXED PROBLEMS of the old one. He has the right to have the product working as expected, thus to have the problems fixed. If they don't release a 4.1 version that solve that problems, he has the moral right to get a pirate the new version.
The suffering is proportional to the evolution of the living being. We "know" more evoluted animals have more feelings. Well, there's just not enough complexity in the simpler organisms to actually feel anything. There are many degrees of evolution.. So torturing humans is not the same as dissecating frogs or injecting nicotine in mice, and that is also different from killing an ant or even a plant. Neither of these are nice, pros and cons have to be weighted anyway.
If the created being does not have enough brain to be concious, at least not much more then the original animal, it's really not much worse then what we already do with these animals at labs, and the gain in scientific advance can be greater.
Alpha Centauri has a native Linux port that runs fine on any newer computer.
Since you already own the game, you can download it from edonkey.
Aff.. just when I ran out of mod points.
I agree 100% with you: o buraco é mais em baixo.