Sun invented patterns?
on
Bitter Java
·
· Score: 3, Funny
The structure itself is devoted to uncovering antipatterns , a term Tate uses because it plays off the way that Sun offered Java patterns to help programmers use the new tools efficiently. Most of the chapters show the wrong way to build something and then show how to correct it.
And Al Gore invented the internet. Or was that Bill G again?
....This is way better than a lever-controlled rear-wheel parking brake, because in a panic situation the driver is likely to pull it up too hard, lock up the rear end, and spin.
No no no! BMW:s are real wheel drives. Instead of using the handbrake you just floor it!!:)
You need to realize that most low-level stuff isn't written in C++ (ie kernels, device drivers, TCP/IP stack, Apache, Perl, Python etc). C++ simply does not have the efficiency. I'm not saying C++ is slow, just that it isn't suitable for that kind of programming.
Uh.. I don't really agree with that. There is no inherent slowness in C++. Consider that many of the larger C projects use C in a kind of OO way (ie. structs with function pointers can be thought of as objects). There is no speed advantage in executing a function via a pointer in a struct compared to executing a non virtual method in a C++ object. The difference is that in C++ the compiler does a lot of the work for you behind the scenes, thus saving your time. The reason C is used lies mainly in the fact that many programmers are more used to it than C++. And for the projects you mention, they were all started quite a long time ago, when the GNU C++ really was nothing to cheer about. And also that C compilers exist for more platforms than C++ compilers, so if maximum portability is your priority number 1, plain C may be a better choice.
In fact, I remember there were some discussion on the python mailing lists that a future version of python should perhaps be implemented in C++. Apparently it turned out that Jython (the implementation of python in Java) is a lot cleaner than the classical Cpython, largely because the OO features in Java made a much cleaner design possible.
Uh, excuse me, but if it's "completely open source", couldn't you just change the connection limit in the code, and voilá! Or do you mean that you sell commercial support only for installations with >5000 users?
Eh.. Linux is still a monolithic kernel even with loadable modules. IANAKP (kernel programmer) but I remember that in microkernel systems everything but the core is in user space. The Linux loadable modules are still in kernel space. I think in the "purest" microkernels only process/context switching (interrupts) and memory management reside in the actual kernel. The rest runs in user space.
...Seems to me as if Compaq..... does more research...
That's a load of bollocks. Compaq always were vacuum cleaner salesmen compared to HP. As is Dell. Ok Compaq tried to fix this situation by buying Digital, which as everyone knows, was a real tech company like HP. They also bought Tandem, I think. Not that it changed stuff much. Even after Compaq bought Digital they still were hoover salesmen. I mean, via Digital they had the arguably best RISC processor architecture ever (alpha), a reasonably good commercial unix which made their high-end offerings quite good, had they pumped enough capital into it to keep it going. But no, instead they sold they whole lot to Intel, so that they could focus on selling low-margin-pc:s. Sheesh! Compete with Dell in a super-low-margin-cut-throat market. What a blindingly stupid idea! Uh, sorry, "focusing on services (the niche where there is little if none competition, right?)" is the buzzword du jour which masks all management blunders. And yes, well there were rumours that the Alpha sellout was in fact a part of the deal with HP, which perhaps puts it in a different light.
Uh oh. The SCUD is very much a ballistic missile. Therefore most of your points are moot as debris follows the same trajectory as the rest of the missile, disregarding air resistance of course.
From classical field theory [1] I'd guess EMP shielding consists of putting the electronics inside a conducting box, and having some sort of surge protectors on all external cables. Or maybe even optical cables, they don't have any problems with an EMP. Nothing to do with the chip itself.
Clearly your management wants exchange. Choose something else and when there are problems management backed by MS marketroids will say "This wouldn't have happened had you chosen exchange!". I not saying there wouldn't be problems with exchange, just that maybe management will not complain as loudly about them as exchange was after all their own favourite. Of course I might be wrong and you have a really nice management who trusts your judjement. But with a statement like "management wants all the bells and whistles offered by Exchange." I seriously doubt it. And depending on what you want to do with it, certainly the plethora of open source groupware suites (usually web-based) would fill most needs. phpgroupware and phprojekt seem to be among the more popular ones.
Well, it's like dope dealers: "The first hit is free". And tobacco multinationals giving free cigarettes to schoolchildren in countries where it's not forbidden etc.
I don't blame Microsoft. It's a company after all. It's mission is to increase the value of its stock. Not to feel sorry for people without net access.
The blame falls entirely on the mexican government. For _believing_ MS marketing bullshit and doing some shady backroom deal with MS. Instead of a proper public tendering where they could have compared the TCO of a MS solution with other solutions. I find it hard to believe that the TCO of a MS solution would be lower than, say, one using the linux terminal server project and second hand hardware.
Uh, it's quite logical when you think about it. Military gunnery ranges are usually off limits for civilians => less human activity there (they don't shoot _that_ much there...) => animals like it. Why not call it a wildlife range at the same time and make some tree-huggers happy.
Off course there will be incidents when animals are killed by shells, but I think they are quite rare after all. There are exceptions though. Reindeers during winter being a famous one. Now, contrary to what you might have understood from watching xmas movies, reindeers are not very smart animals. In fact, they are fucking stupid. No survival instinct whatsoever.
Now for a short introduction to artillery. Usually you fire calibration rounds to calibrate the tubes. Only when you know the rounds hit the target you shoot with all you got.
So, during winter artillery firing exercises, the calibration shells blow away the snow cover. This often leads to reindeers arriving at the scene to eat the newly exposed undervegatation. Usually just in time for the "big arty barrage" to hit them...;) IIRC, there was a case in Finland a few years back when an entire herd of like 50 reindeers were blasted in one go.
Furthermore, diesel engines are a cast-iron bitch in northern climates. The root problem is that the fuel solidifies at temperatures that are actually very easily attainable in Canada and the northern part of the U.S.
Here in northern europe at least gas stations sell what they call "winter grade" diesel. I don't know if it has some sort of additives or simply consists of shorter hydrocarbon chains or whatever, but it work just fine until about -30 degrees C. Further up north they sell something called "arctic grade", which supposedly works well at even lower temperatures. Another common trick is to mix some gasoline into the diesel, up to 10-15%. The problem is not that the fuel solidifies per se, but rather that at lower temperatures than the specified limit, paraffin compunds tend to stick to the fuel filter eventually starving the engine of fuel. This can be overcome by heating the fuel before it enters the filter, which I think is common in diesels adapted for cold climates.
We could talk about the particulates for a moment. I used to work for a systems integrator. One of our accounts was a fire department. At every firehouse in the department, I invariably cleaned a boatload of soot out of the computers. No, it didn't follow the firemen back from the scene, it was caused by the exhaust from the diesel-powered trucks, which were kept indoors for reasons related directly to my above statement about solidifying fuel, amongst other reasons. Emissions controls may help.
Well I think the main reason is that maintenance, checking equipment etc. is sooo much nicer when the trucks are inside, protected from the elements. Also of course cold starting an engine at -30 deg. C tends to cause a lot of wear because the lubricants are quite thick flowing at that temperature. In practice you need an engine block heater to get the engine to start at all when it's cold. Or the old russian trick of making a bonfire under the engine block:). Of course wouldn't work with modern engines machined to tight tolerances and stuffed full of electronics anyway...
Oh, let's not forget, except for biodiesl, diesel engines do nothing about our dependence on foreign oil.
Well diesel engines tend to be somewhat more fuel efficient than comparable gasoline engines.
Why bother with all this electronic stuff when a few kg:s of C4 under the seat will do the job as well, just connect the primer to the ignition in the car. Of course the car will be totalled too, but hey, at least you don't have to feed them crooks in prison. As an added bonus big explosions look cool too!
Disclaimer: I have used MySQL (a little) and PgSQL (a lot more) but not FB (nor IB), so I'm just repeating what I have read somewhere.
My impression is that FB and PgSQL are quite similar. Both have multiversion cuncurrency control, ACID compliancy, stored procedures, triggers, referential integrity and a lot of other cool stuff. Both support large subsets of SQL92, outer joins, subselects etc. PgSQL, on one hand, is a classical unix style forking multi-process server, whereas FB has both a multi-process and a multithreaded model. The advantage of the multithreaded model is of course a shared cache, but FB:s threaded version doesn't work on multiprocessor machines. Anyway, on unix at least PgSQL uses posix (or was it sysv?) shm to get a shared cache. On the other hand, the windows version of PgSQL is a cygwin hack, whereas FB has a native win version.
MySQL, on the other hand, does not (currently) play in the same league. Yes, with simple queries and low concurrency (albeit a common situation) it probably smokes both FB and PgSQL speedwise. IMHO MySQL suffers from limited SQL support, table level locking and lack of ACID properties. For more info check out this page which describes some of the problems with MySQL in more detail (and of course there is a super-long flamewar at the end too...). Anyway, MySQL 4 (alpha) apparently supports more SQL constructs, and new tablehandlers give it row-level locking (or even multiversion concurrency control) and at least some limited ACID capabilities, so the gap between MySQL and PgSQL/FB appears to be shrinking fast..
And then there is of course SAPDB, which appears to be very impressive according to the few people who have tried it.
In the end, I think all of them are excellent (with some reservations towards MySQL and SAPDB). And of course they are all free (duh!). I'd say FB has better windows support than PgSQL and certainly has better delphi drivers, whereas PgSQL would be better on a multiprocessor unix/linux box.
About >100 octane fuels, during WWII the allies used 150 octane gasoline for fighter planes starting in 1944. Apparently the stuff contained so much TEL that there were problems with lead deposits on engine internals, requiring frequent maintenance.
I remember reading a few years ago that an estimated 100 000 europeans die an early death each year because of air pollution. Air pollution is mainly caused by energy production with fossil fuels, and also traffic plays a minor part.
Slashdot Mirror
The structure itself is devoted to uncovering antipatterns , a term Tate uses because it plays off the way that Sun offered Java patterns to help programmers use the new tools efficiently. Most of the chapters show the wrong way to build something and then show how to correct it.
And Al Gore invented the internet. Or was that Bill G again?
Well, whatever turns his crank... ;)
....This is way better than a lever-controlled rear-wheel parking brake, because in a panic situation the driver is likely to pull it up too hard, lock up the rear end, and spin.
No no no! BMW:s are real wheel drives. Instead of using the handbrake you just floor it!!
You need to realize that most low-level stuff isn't written in C++ (ie kernels, device drivers, TCP/IP stack, Apache, Perl, Python etc). C++ simply does not have the efficiency. I'm not saying C++ is slow, just that it isn't suitable for that kind of programming.
Uh.. I don't really agree with that. There is no inherent slowness in C++. Consider that many of the larger C projects use C in a kind of OO way (ie. structs with function pointers can be thought of as objects). There is no speed advantage in executing a function via a pointer in a struct compared to executing a non virtual method in a C++ object. The difference is that in C++ the compiler does a lot of the work for you behind the scenes, thus saving your time. The reason C is used lies mainly in the fact that many programmers are more used to it than C++. And for the projects you mention, they were all started quite a long time ago, when the GNU C++ really was nothing to cheer about. And also that C compilers exist for more platforms than C++ compilers, so if maximum portability is your priority number 1, plain C may be a better choice.
In fact, I remember there were some discussion on the python mailing lists that a future version of python should perhaps be implemented in C++. Apparently it turned out that Jython (the implementation of python in Java) is a lot cleaner than the classical Cpython, largely because the OO features in Java made a much cleaner design possible.
About SMB suckiness and NFS:
h tml
"NFS also sucks but for different reasons"
-- Jeremy Allison himself at http://slashdot.org/interviews/00/03/24/0752258.s
Uh, excuse me, but if it's "completely open source", couldn't you just change the connection limit in the code, and voilá! Or do you mean that you sell commercial support only for installations with >5000 users?
Actually, the M16 has a cyclic rate of about 800/min...
Eh.. Linux is still a monolithic kernel even with loadable modules. IANAKP (kernel programmer) but I remember that in microkernel systems everything but the core is in user space. The Linux loadable modules are still in kernel space. I think in the "purest" microkernels only process/context switching (interrupts) and memory management reside in the actual kernel. The rest runs in user space.
...Seems to me as if Compaq
That's a load of bollocks. Compaq always were vacuum cleaner salesmen compared to HP. As is Dell. Ok Compaq tried to fix this situation by buying Digital, which as everyone knows, was a real tech company like HP. They also bought Tandem, I think. Not that it changed stuff much. Even after Compaq bought Digital they still were hoover salesmen. I mean, via Digital they had the arguably best RISC processor architecture ever (alpha), a reasonably good commercial unix which made their high-end offerings quite good, had they pumped enough capital into it to keep it going. But no, instead they sold they whole lot to Intel, so that they could focus on selling low-margin-pc:s. Sheesh! Compete with Dell in a super-low-margin-cut-throat market. What a blindingly stupid idea! Uh, sorry, "focusing on services (the niche where there is little if none competition, right?)" is the buzzword du jour which masks all management blunders. And yes, well there were rumours that the Alpha sellout was in fact a part of the deal with HP, which perhaps puts it in a different light.
Uh oh. The SCUD is very much a ballistic missile. Therefore most of your points are moot as debris follows the same trajectory as the rest of the missile, disregarding air resistance of course.
From classical field theory [1] I'd guess EMP shielding consists of putting the electronics inside a conducting box, and having some sort of surge protectors on all external cables. Or maybe even optical cables, they don't have any problems with an EMP. Nothing to do with the chip itself.
[1] J.D. Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics 3e
Clearly your management wants exchange. Choose something else and when there are problems management backed by MS marketroids will say "This wouldn't have happened had you chosen exchange!". I not saying there wouldn't be problems with exchange, just that maybe management will not complain as loudly about them as exchange was after all their own favourite. Of course I might be wrong and you have a really nice management who trusts your judjement. But with a statement like "management wants all the bells and whistles offered by Exchange." I seriously doubt it.
And depending on what you want to do with it, certainly the plethora of open source groupware suites (usually web-based) would fill most needs. phpgroupware and phprojekt seem to be among the more popular ones.
You mean this one?
Well, it's like dope dealers: "The first hit is free". And tobacco multinationals giving free cigarettes to schoolchildren in countries where it's not forbidden etc.
I don't blame Microsoft. It's a company after all. It's mission is to increase the value of its stock. Not to feel sorry for people without net access.
The blame falls entirely on the mexican government. For _believing_ MS marketing bullshit and doing some shady backroom deal with MS. Instead of a proper public tendering where they could have compared the TCO of a MS solution with other solutions. I find it hard to believe that the TCO of a MS solution would be lower than, say, one using the linux terminal server project and second hand hardware.
Uh, it's quite logical when you think about it. Military gunnery ranges are usually off limits for civilians => less human activity there (they don't shoot _that_ much there...) => animals like it. Why not call it a wildlife range at the same time and make some tree-huggers happy.
Off course there will be incidents when animals are killed by shells, but I think they are quite rare after all. There are exceptions though. Reindeers during winter being a famous one. Now, contrary to what you might have understood from watching xmas movies, reindeers are not very smart animals. In fact, they are fucking stupid. No survival instinct whatsoever.
Now for a short introduction to artillery. Usually you fire calibration rounds to calibrate the tubes. Only when you know the rounds hit the target you shoot with all you got.
So, during winter artillery firing exercises, the calibration shells blow away the snow cover. This often leads to reindeers arriving at the scene to eat the newly exposed undervegatation. Usually just in time for the "big arty barrage" to hit them...;) IIRC, there was a case in Finland a few years back when an entire herd of like 50 reindeers were blasted in one go.
No. billion = 10^9 = 1000 million. Perhaps you mean a "gibi". Or well, the prefix gibi means 2^30=1073741824... :)
IPv6?
Increasing usage of NAT and its ilk?
The end of civilization as we know it?
Seriously though, I'm sure it all works out nicely in the end.
I mean, what kind of guy calls his personal site smuniverse? Sounds like some black-leather-and-lots-of-pain pr0n site...
And think about it, "Slot 1" still has an absolutely huge advantage in burst data transfer rate!
Here in northern europe at least gas stations sell what they call "winter grade" diesel. I don't know if it has some sort of additives or simply consists of shorter hydrocarbon chains or whatever, but it work just fine until about -30 degrees C. Further up north they sell something called "arctic grade", which supposedly works well at even lower temperatures. Another common trick is to mix some gasoline into the diesel, up to 10-15%. The problem is not that the fuel solidifies per se, but rather that at lower temperatures than the specified limit, paraffin compunds tend to stick to the fuel filter eventually starving the engine of fuel. This can be overcome by heating the fuel before it enters the filter, which I think is common in diesels adapted for cold climates.
We could talk about the particulates for a moment. I used to work for a systems integrator. One of our accounts was a fire department. At every firehouse in the department, I invariably cleaned a boatload of soot out of the computers. No, it didn't follow the firemen back from the scene, it was caused by the exhaust from the diesel-powered trucks, which were kept indoors for reasons related directly to my above statement about solidifying fuel, amongst other reasons. Emissions controls may help.
Well I think the main reason is that maintenance, checking equipment etc. is sooo much nicer when the trucks are inside, protected from the elements. Also of course cold starting an engine at -30 deg. C tends to cause a lot of wear because the lubricants are quite thick flowing at that temperature. In practice you need an engine block heater to get the engine to start at all when it's cold. Or the old russian trick of making a bonfire under the engine block :). Of course wouldn't work with modern engines machined to tight tolerances and stuffed full of electronics anyway...
Oh, let's not forget, except for biodiesl, diesel engines do nothing about our dependence on foreign oil.
Well diesel engines tend to be somewhat more fuel efficient than comparable gasoline engines.
Why bother with all this electronic stuff when a few kg:s of C4 under the seat will do the job as well, just connect the primer to the ignition in the car. Of course the car will be totalled too, but hey, at least you don't have to feed them crooks in prison. As an added bonus big explosions look cool too!
700 kernels (it says 700 dual processor systems in the article). Communicating with MPI, I'd guess, which is the standard these days.
Hejsan Lasse! :)
Disclaimer: I have used MySQL (a little) and PgSQL (a lot more) but not FB (nor IB), so I'm just repeating what I have read somewhere.
My impression is that FB and PgSQL are quite similar. Both have multiversion cuncurrency control, ACID compliancy, stored procedures, triggers, referential integrity and a lot of other cool stuff. Both support large subsets of SQL92, outer joins, subselects etc.
PgSQL, on one hand, is a classical unix style forking multi-process server, whereas FB has both a multi-process and a multithreaded model. The advantage of the multithreaded model is of course a shared cache, but FB:s threaded version doesn't work on multiprocessor machines. Anyway, on unix at least PgSQL uses posix (or was it sysv?) shm to get a shared cache. On the other hand, the windows version of PgSQL is a cygwin hack, whereas FB has a native win version.
MySQL, on the other hand, does not (currently) play in the same league. Yes, with simple queries and low concurrency (albeit a common situation) it probably smokes both FB and PgSQL speedwise. IMHO MySQL suffers from limited SQL support, table level locking and lack of ACID properties. For more info check out this page which describes some of the problems with MySQL in more detail (and of course there is a super-long flamewar at the end too...). Anyway, MySQL 4 (alpha) apparently supports more SQL constructs, and new tablehandlers give it row-level locking (or even multiversion concurrency control) and at least some limited ACID capabilities, so the gap between MySQL and PgSQL/FB appears to be shrinking fast..
And then there is of course SAPDB, which appears to be very impressive according to the few people who have tried it.
In the end, I think all of them are excellent (with some reservations towards MySQL and SAPDB). And of course they are all free (duh!). I'd say FB has better windows support than PgSQL and certainly has better delphi drivers, whereas PgSQL would be better on a multiprocessor unix/linux box.
About >100 octane fuels, during WWII the allies used 150 octane gasoline for fighter planes starting in 1944. Apparently the stuff contained so much TEL that there were problems with lead deposits on engine internals, requiring frequent maintenance.
I remember reading a few years ago that an estimated 100 000 europeans die an early death each year because of air pollution. Air pollution is mainly caused by energy production with fossil fuels, and also traffic plays a minor part.