Exploring C++ is fun. I spent awhile doing it, but when it came to meeting deadlines I could do it faster (and better) in Java and have time to go home at night.
I've read some interesting articles about lisp, and I'm interested in learning to some extent.
One problem though is that most people stop at saying that feature X (which no other language can do) is really great, and stop there. Never having used feature X, I don't have enough context to say, yes that will help me solve problems more easily.
For example, somebody claims that LISP is better because a lisp program can write code as it goes, or something like that. Having never had that as an option I can't see circumstances where I'd want to do that.
Could you please describe in some detail the top features of lisp and why they are GOOD THINGS?
Also, I promise to not make fun of parenthesis if you don't state that infix notation is one of the reasons that lisp is good.;)
I did your test. The java program was slower than the c version. It took an agonizing 370 milliseconds to complete as opposed to 230 milliseconds. I'd be willing to bet that most of the difference was due to jvm initialization.
That could be because the clock speeds are not equivalent?
Power PCs do some things better than intels and intels do some things better than power pc. Either one will run your compiler or word processor just fine.
A few friends of mine were apple users, and trying really hard to make Linux work. As soon as OS X came out they basically ditched Linux. This happen to anybody else?
It's basically a customized look and feel for your desktop. It allows you to change fonts, window borders and darn near any thing else you'd like. KDE and Gnome allow you to do this.
It sounds like a great idea, and it is easy to create one. However, it's quite hard to do it well. Some themes look really cool, but are coolness doesn't make for the best or most usable user interface. They're fun to play with a little, but most people end up back with the one that came installed in the distribution, or with one that's pretty plain-jane.
First of all, I agree that John Roberts sounds like a Nazi.
However, I really have to wonder if this is a violation of privacy or not. After all, if you're suspected of doing something illegal, isn't it law enforcement's right to get a search warrent ant search your premises? Why wouldn't that extend to your PC at home?
It looks like they didn't actually get search warrents though.
"The threat of a court-authorized search of home computers..."
I certainly wouldn't surrender my PC w/o a search warrent.
Additionally, I really don't understand the comment on the front page about, "taking a free PC from your employer."
I agree. If you think about it that way, then you could never write or port an open source application for a closed source operating system. I suppose some people see no problem with this, but I see that as getting in the way of my freedom.
Write a Java program that allocates, say, a million 26 element arrays of char, or bytes or whatever primitive type makes you happy. Make sure to hold on to each reference.
Run it a few times with the default memory settings and pay attention to the time. Also, watch it (in whatever tool your OS provides, task manager for NT) and try to gauge about how much memory it needs. Call this trial 1.
Now, run it again, but set the starting heap size big enough so that it doesn't have to allocate much or any memory. Note the time. Call this trial 2.
Now, write the corresponding program in C or C++. Allocate a bunch of arrays on the heap. In all fairness, you should calloc them because Java initialized array elements to 0 for you.
Run it and note the times. The time differences between the c/c++ and trial 2 program should roughly equate to the raw performance of "internal" memory allocation. And the difference between trial 1 and the c/c++ version should roulghly account for the extra time it requires for the JVM to grow its own heap.
I did this awhile ago, and I wound up with numbers like these.
trial 1: ~7 sec. trial 2: ~3 sec. c/c++: ~2 sec.
So the internal guts of that JVM on that day under those conditions put it about 50% slower than C/C++. But when that JVM on that day under those conditions had to deal with the operating system to grow its heap, it really started to stink. Note that the C/C++ program had to grow its heap to complete.
Second, pick your servlet engine carefully. I saw the reference to some hello world tests in a previous post. The servlet tests look like they were run on Apache's servlet engine. Too bad its dog slow (last I read about it that is ~6 months ago--I'm sure that they will catch up). We used Servlet Exec, and it works well. Also, be careful to not to let yourself be misled by micro benchmarks.
Third, consider your needs. In our servlets we were able to take advantage of object caching, sophisticated object to relational mapping tools and CORBA connectivity to back end services. There's a very nice java servlet framework called Webmacro, which is free (as in software not beer). I also see potential in JSP's, although I have no direct experience with them.
I also saw some comments about Java being slow. Yes, that's true. However I would venture to guess that its fast enough for all but the most demanding applications. Comments from another post said that you'll require serious hardware to do servlets. No doubt. However, computers are getting faster and so are Java VM's. I'm sure that Java will be fast enough for those demanding applications in the next couple of years, and my opinion is that if you want to be ready to slide down that slippery slope (like Chevy Chase in Christmas vacation) when its slick enough, then there's no better time to start greasing up with the right lubricant and getting the experience than now.
In short, we've had good luck with servlets. Developement has been quick (most of the development speed gained in Java is cut out from debugging when compared to c/c++ I can't compare it to perl though). The web sites have performed well. Personally, I believe that developer time is more valuable than CPU time, so I would recommend (IMHO) spending the extra dollars on hardware, and saving on the developement and maintenence.
MicroSquish made it that way on purpose. Its a pain in the ass to administer.
Get this, we wanted to run a cgi-script. Fine, look through the dumb-ass gui for IIS. Figure something that might work. Try it and no joy.
O.k, check the winhelp, ah-hah, must twiggle the thing-a-ma-doodle on the dongle dialog. No problem. We twiggle the thinga-a-ma-doodle on the dongle dialog, smoke a ciggie. But no joy.
Get on Microsofts web site, check their buglist. It says go muck around in the registry. O.k, we're fearless. We muck around in the registry. No joy.
We switch to Netscape (Apache not company aproved, so flame-off please, not my choice either). Administration o.k. cgi runs.
We switch to servlets in the end. Such is life.
But what kind of crap assed web server won't run a cgi-script out of the box? Simple, one that Microsquish wants you to run ASP on.:)
Actually, IE's Javascript comes closer to the ECMA standard than Netscape's does. Or at least it did when I last reasearched it (about a year ago--too long I know).
Everybody,
Mozilla is important. More important than anything else. Those of you who think that Linux will do great because you can modify the source code are mistaken. Eric (whats his last name?) in a recent article compared open source software to a car. Because anybody can work on their car. Bull! It takes a lot of training, know-how, experience and equipment to repair cars.
I know how to get into a car, turn the key, push the pedals, and egads! shift the gears. I can't repair them. I'm not intimidated by the thought of working on my own software, but I don't have the time to commit to it. (If you're going to flame me for that, consider that I have a 10 month old daughter. Coding is fun, but it just doesn't stack up (pun intended))
My mom knows how turn the computer on, move the mouse, and push the keys on the keyboard. Even the concept of what source code IS is foreign to her. In fact, it took solitare on Windows 3.1 for her to get over her fear of the mouse!:)
Mozilla is important because it is THE interface to the internet.
Well, hey thats what dehacked is for. You can fix those problems. For example, make the csh's into chain-gunner, and make the chain-gunners invulerable to all damage except from, say... the chainsaw!!! Woo hoo!! Cut that shell to pieces baby!!
I hope a quake version comes out soon, that understands distributed objects.
We (the company) use Oracle. Our largest database is 300 gigs, and growing. It supports in excess of 4500 simultaneous connections during the day. Our system (we're a cog in the wheel mind you), executes in excess of 10,000 (moderately complicated) queries/hour. SQL/Net stinks, but its better than ODBC.
Recently, we dumped Alphas 'cause they couldn't keep up. Currently it runs on (2?) HP V-class machines with EMC storage.
Optimization is important. Go get the O'rielly books. Set yourself up for Cost based optimizer. I like Oracle, because you can really get into the guts of a query if you need to, and if you're adding as much data as you say you will be then you'll need to.
Oracle also supports partitioned tables. So you can take your 2GB table and make it into a series of smaller tables (although it appears as one). If you can come up with a good scheme to partition on, then you could get great benefits from this.
All of this is said w/o any real knowlege of postgres or mysql. So if they do those things to then kudos for them.
Slashdot Mirror
Because it still allow the stupid carriers to control what is on their stupid phones and phones will continue to suck and suck hard in the US.
Absolute stupidity.
Most people who boast about how smart they just aren't smart enough to realized that they're not the only smart peopl out there.
Exploring C++ is fun. I spent awhile doing it, but when it came to meeting deadlines I could do it faster (and better) in Java and have time to go home at night.
Come on.
I can see you not liking it for a whole host of reasons, but that just doesn't make sense.
Take a look at JDataStore from Borland. They claim it's inexpensive, and it's designed for exactly what you want.
look here
Good luck!
Ha ha. prefix that is.
I've read some interesting articles about lisp, and I'm interested in learning to some extent.
;)
One problem though is that most people stop at saying that feature X (which no other language can do) is really great, and stop there. Never having used feature X, I don't have enough context to say, yes that will help me solve problems more easily.
For example, somebody claims that LISP is better because a lisp program can write code as it goes, or something like that. Having never had that as an option I can't see circumstances where I'd want to do that.
Could you please describe in some detail the top features of lisp and why they are GOOD THINGS?
Also, I promise to not make fun of parenthesis if you don't state that infix notation is one of the reasons that lisp is good.
I did your test. The java program was slower than the c version. It took an agonizing 370 milliseconds to complete as opposed to 230 milliseconds. I'd be willing to bet that most of the difference was due to jvm initialization.
C:\>cat foo.c
#include
int main(void)
{
double x = 0;
int counter;
for(counter = 0; counter ntimer foo.exe
15915492717639.054688
ContextSwitches - 350
First level fills = 0
Second level fills = 0
ETime( 0:00:00.230 ) UTime( 0:00:00.230 ) KTime( 0:00:00.010 )
ITime( 0:00:00.000 )
C:\>cat foo.java
public class foo
{
public static void main(String args[])
{
double x = 0;
for(int counter = 0; counter ntimer java foo
1.591549271763905E13
ContextSwitches - 351
First level fills = 0
Second level fills = 0
ETime( 0:00:00.370 ) UTime( 0:00:00.300 ) KTime( 0:00:00.030 )
ITime( 0:00:00.000 )
That could be because the clock speeds are not equivalent?
Power PCs do some things better than intels and intels do some things better than power pc. Either one will run your compiler or word processor just fine.
A few friends of mine were apple users, and trying really hard to make Linux work. As soon as OS X came out they basically ditched Linux. This happen to anybody else?
Have you ever seen an organization try to build a serious organization on SQL Server?
I'd like to quote Beavis & Butthead...
"FIRE FIRE FIRE FIRE FIRE FIRE FIRE FIRE!!!"
It's basically a customized look and feel for your desktop. It allows you to change fonts, window borders and darn near any thing else you'd like. KDE and Gnome allow you to do this.
It sounds like a great idea, and it is easy to create one. However, it's quite hard to do it well. Some themes look really cool, but are coolness doesn't make for the best or most usable user interface. They're fun to play with a little, but most people end up back with the one that came installed in the distribution, or with one that's pretty plain-jane.
"Nobody splicing nothing from Fluffy!"
Sorry JC, I don't have moderator access right now. You get my vote.
Muppet Show fans will remember a similarly titled skit.
Holy shit! I'm old.
First of all, I agree that John Roberts sounds like a Nazi.
However, I really have to wonder if this is a violation of privacy or not. After all, if you're suspected of doing something illegal, isn't it law enforcement's right to get a search warrent ant search your premises? Why wouldn't that extend to your PC at home?
It looks like they didn't actually get search warrents though.
"The threat of a court-authorized search of home computers..."
I certainly wouldn't surrender my PC w/o a search warrent.
Additionally, I really don't understand the comment on the front page about, "taking a free PC from your employer."
Fortunantely, RMS is full of beans on that one.
I agree. If you think about it that way, then you could never write or port an open source application for a closed source operating system. I suppose some people see no problem with this, but I see that as getting in the way of my freedom.
Write a Java program that allocates, say, a million 26 element arrays of char, or bytes or whatever primitive type makes you happy. Make sure to hold on to each reference.
Run it a few times with the default memory settings and pay attention to the time. Also, watch it (in whatever tool your OS provides, task manager for NT) and try to gauge about how much memory it needs. Call this trial 1.
Now, run it again, but set the starting heap size big enough so that it doesn't have to allocate much or any memory. Note the time. Call this trial 2.
Now, write the corresponding program in C or C++. Allocate a bunch of arrays on the heap. In all fairness, you should calloc them because Java initialized array elements to 0 for you.
Run it and note the times. The time differences between the c/c++ and trial 2 program should roughly equate to the raw performance of "internal" memory allocation. And the difference between trial 1 and the c/c++ version should roulghly account for the extra time it requires for the JVM to grow its own heap.
I did this awhile ago, and I wound up with numbers like these.
trial 1: ~7 sec.
trial 2: ~3 sec.
c/c++: ~2 sec.
So the internal guts of that JVM on that day under those conditions put it about 50% slower than C/C++. But when that JVM on that day under those conditions had to deal with the operating system to grow its heap, it really started to stink. Note that the C/C++ program had to grow its heap to complete.
They tried giving their stuff away, but I wasn't interested. I talked to a couple of other people who were on their list, and they did the same thing.
I did get a T-shirt, but it was pretty cheap. the POS had a hole in it after two weeks.
Novell can't even give their stuff away.
Too bad, so sad.
First of all, I recommend the O'Reilly Servlet book.
Second, pick your servlet engine carefully. I saw the reference to some hello world tests in a previous post. The servlet tests look like they were run on Apache's servlet engine. Too bad its dog slow (last I read about it that is ~6 months ago--I'm sure that they will catch up). We used Servlet Exec, and it works well. Also, be careful to not to let yourself be misled by micro benchmarks.
Third, consider your needs. In our servlets we were able to take advantage of object caching, sophisticated object to relational mapping tools and CORBA connectivity to back end services. There's a very nice java servlet framework called Webmacro, which is free (as in software not beer). I also see potential in JSP's, although I have no direct experience with them.
I also saw some comments about Java being slow. Yes, that's true. However I would venture to guess that its fast enough for all but the most demanding applications. Comments from another post said that you'll require serious hardware to do servlets. No doubt. However, computers are getting faster and so are Java VM's. I'm sure that Java will be fast enough for those demanding applications in the next couple of years, and my opinion is that if you want to be ready to slide down that slippery slope (like Chevy Chase in Christmas vacation) when its slick enough, then there's no better time to start greasing up with the right lubricant and getting the experience than now.
In short, we've had good luck with servlets. Developement has been quick (most of the development speed gained in Java is cut out from debugging when compared to c/c++ I can't compare it to perl though). The web sites have performed well. Personally, I believe that developer time is more valuable than CPU time, so I would recommend (IMHO) spending the extra dollars on hardware, and saving on the developement and maintenence.
Good Luck
I'm definitely going to have to reconsider my pinto!
MicroSquish made it that way on purpose. Its a pain in the ass to administer.
:)
Get this, we wanted to run a cgi-script. Fine, look through the dumb-ass gui for IIS. Figure something that might work. Try it and no joy.
O.k, check the winhelp, ah-hah, must twiggle the thing-a-ma-doodle on the dongle dialog. No problem. We twiggle the thinga-a-ma-doodle on the dongle dialog, smoke a ciggie. But no joy.
Get on Microsofts web site, check their buglist. It says go muck around in the registry. O.k, we're fearless. We muck around in the registry. No joy.
We switch to Netscape (Apache not company aproved, so flame-off please, not my choice either). Administration o.k. cgi runs.
We switch to servlets in the end. Such is life.
But what kind of crap assed web server won't run a cgi-script out of the box? Simple, one that Microsquish wants you to run ASP on.
qwerjkl,
:)
Actually, IE's Javascript comes closer to the ECMA standard than Netscape's does. Or at least it did when I last reasearched it (about a year ago--too long I know).
Everybody,
Mozilla is important. More important than anything else. Those of you who think that Linux will do great because you can modify the source code are mistaken. Eric (whats his last name?) in a recent article compared open source software to a car. Because anybody can work on their car. Bull! It takes a lot of training, know-how, experience and equipment to repair cars.
I know how to get into a car, turn the key, push the pedals, and egads! shift the gears. I can't repair them. I'm not intimidated by the thought of working on my own software, but I don't have the time to commit to it. (If you're going to flame me for that, consider that I have a 10 month old daughter. Coding is fun, but it just doesn't stack up (pun intended))
My mom knows how turn the computer on, move the mouse, and push the keys on the keyboard. Even the concept of what source code IS is foreign to her. In fact, it took solitare on Windows 3.1 for her to get over her fear of the mouse!
Mozilla is important because it is THE interface to the internet.
L8R
Well, hey thats what dehacked is for. You can fix those problems. For example, make the csh's into chain-gunner, and make the chain-gunners invulerable to all damage except from, say... the chainsaw!!! Woo hoo!! Cut that shell to pieces baby!!
I hope a quake version comes out soon, that understands distributed objects.
We (the company) use Oracle. Our largest database is 300 gigs, and growing. It supports in excess of 4500 simultaneous connections during the day. Our system (we're a cog in the wheel mind you), executes in excess of 10,000 (moderately complicated) queries/hour. SQL/Net stinks, but its better than ODBC.
Recently, we dumped Alphas 'cause they couldn't keep up. Currently it runs on (2?) HP V-class machines with EMC storage.
Optimization is important. Go get the O'rielly books. Set yourself up for Cost based optimizer. I like Oracle, because you can really get into the guts of a query if you need to, and if you're adding as much data as you say you will be then you'll need to.
Oracle also supports partitioned tables. So you can take your 2GB table and make it into a series of smaller tables (although it appears as one). If you can come up with a good scheme to partition on, then you could get great benefits from this.
All of this is said w/o any real knowlege of postgres or mysql. So if they do those things to then kudos for them.
Good luck.