TCHAR has the property that it represents characters as ANSI or Unicode depending if the _UNICODE is defined.
Personally I'm not that keen on it and prefer to handle C strings via a object representation like std::sting.
Standard notiation such as hungrain notiation does make the code easier to read exceptioally when a number of programmers are working on the same piece of code. Its just one method in arsenal of tools, such as lint, that help improve the quality and maintenability of the code.
Right time to burn karma by saying that I primarily program Windows using MSVC (I love the smell of flmaebaiting myself in the afternoon).
There are several other differences that I have come across in IMHO (or more my humble experience) between Win32 and UNIX programming.
The first of the these is Hungrain notation which was dervied from MS coding. For those not in the know this is the naming of attributes and variables such that the name reflects its type. Over the years I've come to see several forms of this but the simplest and most useful is to prefix the name to note where the variable is declared.
i.e. g_X - denotes global
m_X - denotes class attribute
c_X - denotes constant variable
X - local variable.
Thus when reading through code using this notation it is easy to see where variables come from.
I've found the use of this notation common in Win32 programming but not in UNIX programming.
(OK - this is the point where I get crusified by the counter examples and the points that alot of UNIX code is written in C not C++ where this notiation is only applicable)
I definately agree with the article in that a good deal of UNIX work is aimed at CLI interfaces where as the Win32 tools are designed for the end user.
But in talking to other programs for Win32 there is the use of DLL's and COM interfaces. Or in short fixed APIs are used when programmers want to talk to other programs.
From my point of view as Win32 coder a final product is usually being aimed at someone who is not programmer. If the software is not functional and easy to use and intuitive then it really ain't going to cut it. Now if I want to expose my product so it can be expanded upon I will present a programmable, simple and documented API.
Reading this letter it is being argued that the laws and ideals surrounding copyright are designed to protect the ownership of an author's work.
Ok, thats fine and I have certainally have no problem with that.
But the fact that an author may wish to give other people permission to create derivative work based on their work is against the law and unconstitional.
Well copyright law protects my right to own the work that I create. But I have never seen a part of the law that states I cannot give another permission to create derivative works. And if such a law did exist then the right of an author to give expressed permission to allow another to create a derivative work would be removed.
As an example outside of the world of computers : A writer could not allow a screen writer to write a script based on his book. An independant screen writer could not allow a movie studio to film a movie based on the script.
Think Darl's "Open Letter" gives a new definition to hate mail. Or maybe coin a new phrase "Mass hate mail" or "Mail of mass hate". Mind you the former expression is sure to get Bush on the war path.:/
The BBC article is fairly accurate in that during 80s and early 90s there was a lot of foreign investment into Scotland by companies, mainly from the U.S. and Japanese economies. A good portion of this went into building electronic manufacturing and assembly plants.
The general idea was rather simple in that Scotland had about the right balance between providing highly skilled workers and the average level of pay. Thus, making it an attractive place for stable investment.
Off course we all know the tale now. Both the U.S. and Japanese economies went south. So closures were made along with the job loses.
Now that things are improving new markets have opened up offering better value for money. Scotland can't really compete with the Indians on this because in short India can provide the same skill set at a lower wage.
The other problem here is that Scottish politicians spend so much of their time breathing hot air and interfering in the business process that it scares investors away. In other words they are not the solution but in themselves form part of the problem. However that is my personal view and so somewhat subjective.
But it would not be like me to be such a pessimist. I think one of Scotland's greatest strengths comes from the engineering intellect and experience that this country has had from the early industrial revolution through to the modern day.
Now this strength doesn't manifest itself in large corporations now-a-days but more in R&D centres or small companies with good financial backing that take the cream of this brain power and focus it in on proper product development. And certainly I have witnessed a good growth in the number of these companies embracing the open source development model.
Couple of weeks back I was trying to get Samba 3.0 to run as a simple PDC for my home network. However the computers on the network were not visible in the network neighbourhood.
The network shares were available and browseable, by manually typing them in the path to the computer. i.e. "\\computer_name".
Now I have read through all the available documentation and went through a number of mailing lists trying to find a solution. Also tried all the possible configuration settings relating to browsing and WINS server trying to resolve the problem but with no success.
Eventually went back to Samba 2.2 for running the PDC and its working fine.
So was wondering has anyone else had this problem or know the solution for it?
After doing the Linux From Scratch project as a basis for building my own customized Linux box from the complete source code I would say I learnt far more about the structure and administration of Linux than I could have done sitting any formal exams.
The REAL pan-galatic-gargle-blaster
on
Skittlebrau
·
· Score: 1
A couple of weeks ago I think me my mates found how to make a proper pan-galatic-gargle-blaster.
For full effect it is best doing this towards the end of night when there is fair bit of alcohol in the blood stream. Doing this early is not a good idea because being sober you will look on the thought of doing this as nothing short of spectualy stupid.
The recipe is as follows. Find a bar that serves all 3 colours of Aftershock. Thats the red, green and blue.
Then ask for a round consisting of a shot of red and a shot of gin. So in effect a double shot of gin and aftershock mixed together.
This has earned it the approriate name *Gin-Shock*.
Take the red Gin-Shock and down it 1.
Next proceed to order a green Gin-Shock and down it 1.
Next proceed to order a blue Gin-Shock and again down this in 1.
I would recommend a 3-5 minute break between Gin-Shock rounds. This provides the optimimal time for the drink to be absorbed into the blood. (It also provides time for the screaming, cries of pain and cursing to die down).
Anyone who throws up during this most sacried of drinking rituals should be wisely given the boot and referred to as, well as we say in Scotland "A big jessy" or "A big girls blouse".
Now 10 minutes after performing this ritual the effect of the drink on your brain should kick in and to quote Douglas Adams it "is like getting your brain smashed out by a golden brick with a slice of lemon rapped round it".
The hangover from it is rather spectacular with you promising things like you will never ever do that again while lieing in hospital. (Stomach pumps have no effect on this drink as it melts through your stomach). But off course you will;)
If this is not enough proof for it to claim its place as the REAL pan-galatic-gargle-blaster then consider this.
Remembering the lore of the wisest phrase in the universe "Never drink more than 2 pan-galatic-gargle-blasters unless you are a 6-tonne Aruoterian Mega-Donkey with bronchail pneumonia". Now Aftershock is more or less 40% proof cough-medicine hence it acts to clear the lungs of a 6-tonne Aruoterian Mega-Donkey.
I would have to disagree about describing the GPL as being viral as being misinformation.
The reason I say this comes from the pratical experience of desiding weither or not to use a particular library that was distrubted under the GPL.
The problem arose from the fact that the embedded OS that we were using didn't implement the proper concept of libraries. Thus we would have to include the source code as part of the overall project. Now by the terms of the GPL by making this library part of the overall product would have implied that the entire project would fall under the GPL.
This and other similar kind of situations gives rise to the description of the GPL as being viral in that once a single piece of GPL'd code is add into a project then entire project must fall under the GPL.
As for the example given above the GPL library was not used and another library that had a more favourable license agreement, as far the requirements of the project, was used.
The GPL like any other license agreement sets out the terms and conditions under which the program and its source code can be used. So if a company creates a product derived from GPL'd source code then it follows that the source code for that product will fall under the GPL.
If the company does not like these terms then they can find or create alternative solutions to build their product from. Its entirely their choice and if a company choices to use GPL source code then they should be fully aware of the consequences of using it.
To me the author of the article is trying to cast the GPL in a bad light because companies that have violated the license terms of the GPL have lost money over it. I on the other hand think that the companies that have lost revenue are at fault because they should have been aware of the conditions of using such source code and that they can be brought to book on it.
It seems everytime some piece of encryption or protection is broken because it is weak the DMCA comes out the bag and is used to crush those individuals who showed us how to do it. Inside and outside of the U.S.
I was just wondering what Hitler's reaction in todays world would have been to know the British broke the Enigma code. Sue them via the DMCA.
I'm sure most/. readers know the full effect of what breaking that code had for the course of this world.
Mind you the good old British establishment did enact their revenge on one of the main code-breakers, Alan Turing, by hounding him for his sexuallity until he commited suicide.
So the moral of this story is that if you are code-breaker who breaks encryption for either the rights of the individual or the protection of the country then sooner or later you will get pissed on.
Ah thats me dosed up on SCO diesal power for the day.
I don't think he is any position to give lectures on the concequences of attacks to business when his company is making threats and legal attacks against any company that makes of Linux.
And of course his grand reasoning that the entire Linux development process is fundamentally flawed by holding up a single example. A brick don't make a house.
And even that example when looked at in the proper context has been removed from kernel even though it was released under open source license by AT&T.
Oh well, wish Darl would stop dribbling at the mouth and actually say something of substance otherwise this is all going to be rather boring and I will have to go back to sleep.;)
And after all the political speechs, the fanfare, the total information awareness programs, the $ billons spent of defence about how our freedom is being sacrificed in the name of increased security measures to protect us from terrorist attacks.
Yet this sort of this thing goes on when a bit of time spent on the security policy could have stated "No computer equipment should be removed from its place without written authorization from the head of secuirty" or something to that effect.
Its not really that difficult, it just requires a bit common sense.
Slashdot Mirror
"Underline the counterpoint of the unsurreal metaphore. Hmmm! Deaths to good for them"
TCHAR has the property that it represents characters as ANSI or Unicode depending if the _UNICODE is defined.
Personally I'm not that keen on it and prefer to handle C strings via a object representation like std::sting.
Standard notiation such as hungrain notiation does make the code easier to read exceptioally when a number of programmers are working on the same piece of code. Its just one method in arsenal of tools, such as lint, that help improve the quality and maintenability of the code.
Right time to burn karma by saying that I primarily program Windows using MSVC (I love the smell of flmaebaiting myself in the afternoon).
There are several other differences that I have come across in IMHO (or more my humble experience) between Win32 and UNIX programming.
The first of the these is Hungrain notation which was dervied from MS coding. For those not in the know this is the naming of attributes and variables such that the name reflects its type. Over the years I've come to see several forms of this but the simplest and most useful is to prefix the name to note where the variable is declared.
i.e. g_X - denotes global
m_X - denotes class attribute
c_X - denotes constant variable
X - local variable.
Thus when reading through code using this notation it is easy to see where variables come from.
I've found the use of this notation common in Win32 programming but not in UNIX programming.
(OK - this is the point where I get crusified by the counter examples and the points that alot of UNIX code is written in C not C++ where this notiation is only applicable)
I definately agree with the article in that a good deal of UNIX work is aimed at CLI interfaces where as the Win32 tools are designed for the end user.
But in talking to other programs for Win32 there is the use of DLL's and COM interfaces. Or in short fixed APIs are used when programmers want to talk to other programs.
From my point of view as Win32 coder a final product is usually being aimed at someone who is not programmer. If the software is not functional and easy to use and intuitive then it really ain't going to cut it. Now if I want to expose my product so it can be expanded upon I will present a programmable, simple and documented API.
Nah better yet put the rock under his feet so he trips up and onto the scissors which he is holding.
Oddly enough there is an article over at the BBC about how it looks like the radiation levels on mars are low enough to support a human mission.
Back the fact that by saying that you say "I lie for money" forms paradox on your words because you just told the truth.
;)
Unless of course you wrote the comment in your spare time or was on a break.
Reading this letter it is being argued that the laws and ideals surrounding copyright are designed to protect the ownership of an author's work.
Ok, thats fine and I have certainally have no problem with that.
But the fact that an author may wish to give other people permission to create derivative work based on their work is against the law and unconstitional.
Well copyright law protects my right to own the work that I create. But I have never seen a part of the law that states I cannot give another permission to create derivative works. And if such a law did exist then the right of an author to give expressed permission to allow another to create a derivative work would be removed.
As an example outside of the world of computers : A writer could not allow a screen writer to write a script based on his book. An independant screen writer could not allow a movie studio to film a movie based on the script.
Think Darl's "Open Letter" gives a new definition to hate mail. Or maybe coin a new phrase "Mass hate mail" or "Mail of mass hate". Mind you the former expression is sure to get Bush on the war path. :/
Anyway back to trying to find a shruberry.
The BBC article is fairly accurate in that during 80s and early 90s there was a lot of foreign investment into Scotland by companies, mainly from the U.S. and Japanese economies. A good portion of this went into building electronic manufacturing and assembly plants.
The general idea was rather simple in that Scotland had about the right balance between providing highly skilled workers and the average level of pay. Thus, making it an attractive place for stable investment.
Off course we all know the tale now. Both the U.S. and Japanese economies went south. So closures were made along with the job loses.
Now that things are improving new markets have opened up offering better value for money. Scotland can't really compete with the Indians on this because in short India can provide the same skill set at a lower wage.
The other problem here is that Scottish politicians spend so much of their time breathing hot air and interfering in the business process that it scares investors away. In other words they are not the solution but in themselves form part of the problem. However that is my personal view and so somewhat subjective.
But it would not be like me to be such a pessimist. I think one of Scotland's greatest strengths comes from the engineering intellect and experience that this country has had from the early industrial revolution through to the modern day.
Now this strength doesn't manifest itself in large corporations now-a-days but more in R&D centres or small companies with good financial backing that take the cream of this brain power and focus it in on proper product development. And certainly I have witnessed a good growth in the number of these companies embracing the open source development model.
As being on the subject of Samba 3.0
Couple of weeks back I was trying to get Samba 3.0 to run as a simple PDC for my home network. However the computers on the network were not visible in the network neighbourhood.
The network shares were available and browseable, by manually typing them in the path to the computer. i.e. "\\computer_name".
Now I have read through all the available documentation and went through a number of mailing lists trying to find a solution. Also tried all the possible configuration settings relating to browsing and WINS server trying to resolve the problem but with no success.
Eventually went back to Samba 2.2 for running the PDC and its working fine.
So was wondering has anyone else had this problem or know the solution for it?
Ah the daily SCO fix! Wells that me topped up on the dark force for the day. ;/
Sounds like he didn't get as far the Window's machine seeing as it has the Windows Update item in the menu.
After doing the Linux From Scratch project as a basis for building my own customized Linux box from the complete source code I would say I learnt far more about the structure and administration of Linux than I could have done sitting any formal exams.
A couple of weeks ago I think me my mates found how to make a proper pan-galatic-gargle-blaster.
;)
For full effect it is best doing this towards the end of night when there is fair bit of alcohol in the blood stream. Doing this early is not a good idea because being sober you will look on the thought of doing this as nothing short of spectualy stupid.
The recipe is as follows. Find a bar that serves all 3 colours of Aftershock. Thats the red, green and blue.
Then ask for a round consisting of a shot of red and a shot of gin. So in effect a double shot of gin and aftershock mixed together.
This has earned it the approriate name *Gin-Shock*.
Take the red Gin-Shock and down it 1.
Next proceed to order a green Gin-Shock and down it 1.
Next proceed to order a blue Gin-Shock and again down this in 1.
I would recommend a 3-5 minute break between Gin-Shock rounds. This provides the optimimal time for the drink to be absorbed into the blood. (It also provides time for the screaming, cries of pain and cursing to die down).
Anyone who throws up during this most sacried of drinking rituals should be wisely given the boot and referred to as, well as we say in Scotland "A big jessy" or "A big girls blouse".
Now 10 minutes after performing this ritual the effect of the drink on your brain should kick in and to quote Douglas Adams it "is like getting your brain smashed out by a golden brick with a slice of lemon rapped round it".
The hangover from it is rather spectacular with you promising things like you will never ever do that again while lieing in hospital. (Stomach pumps have no effect on this drink as it melts through your stomach). But off course you will
If this is not enough proof for it to claim its place as the REAL pan-galatic-gargle-blaster then consider this.
Remembering the lore of the wisest phrase in the universe "Never drink more than 2 pan-galatic-gargle-blasters unless you are a 6-tonne Aruoterian Mega-Donkey with bronchail pneumonia". Now Aftershock is more or less 40% proof cough-medicine hence it acts to clear the lungs of a 6-tonne Aruoterian Mega-Donkey.
Enjoy!
I would have to disagree about describing the GPL as being viral as being misinformation.
The reason I say this comes from the pratical experience of desiding weither or not to use a particular library that was distrubted under the GPL.
The problem arose from the fact that the embedded OS that we were using didn't implement the proper concept of libraries. Thus we would have to include the source code as part of the overall project. Now by the terms of the GPL by making this library part of the overall product would have implied that the entire project would fall under the GPL.
This and other similar kind of situations gives rise to the description of the GPL as being viral in that once a single piece of GPL'd code is add into a project then entire project must fall under the GPL.
As for the example given above the GPL library was not used and another library that had a more favourable license agreement, as far the requirements of the project, was used.
The GPL like any other license agreement sets out the terms and conditions under which the program and its source code can be used. So if a company creates a product derived from GPL'd source code then it follows that the source code for that product will fall under the GPL.
If the company does not like these terms then they can find or create alternative solutions to build their product from. Its entirely their choice and if a company choices to use GPL source code then they should be fully aware of the consequences of using it.
To me the author of the article is trying to cast the GPL in a bad light because companies that have violated the license terms of the GPL have lost money over it. I on the other hand think that the companies that have lost revenue are at fault because they should have been aware of the conditions of using such source code and that they can be brought to book on it.
It seems everytime some piece of encryption or protection is broken because it is weak the DMCA comes out the bag and is used to crush those individuals who showed us how to do it. Inside and outside of the U.S.
/. readers know the full effect of what breaking that code had for the course of this world.
I was just wondering what Hitler's reaction in todays world would have been to know the British broke the Enigma code. Sue them via the DMCA.
I'm sure most
Mind you the good old British establishment did enact their revenge on one of the main code-breakers, Alan Turing, by hounding him for his sexuallity until he commited suicide.
So the moral of this story is that if you are code-breaker who breaks encryption for either the rights of the individual or the protection of the country then sooner or later you will get pissed on.
The evidence for this kind of statement would about the same as going to war in Iraq. Prosumtions from the politians but no real proof.
Ah thats me dosed up on SCO diesal power for the day.
;)
I don't think he is any position to give lectures on the concequences of attacks to business when his company is making threats and legal attacks against any company that makes of Linux.
And of course his grand reasoning that the entire Linux development process is fundamentally flawed by holding up a single example. A brick don't make a house.
And even that example when looked at in the proper context has been removed from kernel even though it was released under open source license by AT&T.
Oh well, wish Darl would stop dribbling at the mouth and actually say something of substance otherwise this is all going to be rather boring and I will have to go back to sleep.
And after all the political speechs, the fanfare, the total information awareness programs, the $ billons spent of defence about how our freedom is being sacrificed in the name of increased security measures to protect us from terrorist attacks.
Yet this sort of this thing goes on when a bit of time spent on the security policy could have stated "No computer equipment should be removed from its place without written authorization from the head of secuirty" or something to that effect.
Its not really that difficult, it just requires a bit common sense.