It seems reversed. When you put a *nix programmer in front of a Windows machine, he will code using Notepad and invoke the compiler by command line.
Windows programmers, on the other hand, immediately launch an IDE, pull up countless wizards to write hundreds of lines of (useless) template code and tinker with it from there, invoking the whole compile process with the push of a button.
I should know. Once upon a time, I felt that an IDE was neccessary to write code. Since the Enlightenment (about a year ago), I write code using non-integrated tools. (Although sometimes, I get frustrated looking for the source file I want to edit... At which point I start using Anjuta, but only to edit.)
Actually, derivative work is a gray area of the law.
In order for the FSF to achieve its goals, it defines derivative work as any work including the original in portion or in entirety. This means a statically linked binary is a derivative of the library - and they'd like dynamically linked binaries to be a derivative of the library too.
Of course, you can define derivative work as a library that includes the original library, but not a program that includes the original library. Or anything else you like.
The issue of the Linux kernel and the syscall interface was solved by saying that using the syscall interface does not constitute a derivative work.
Why? Changing the length of such a fundemental unit of time (other than one Planck unit of time) without changing its name is sure to cause confusion.
Not to mention, each measure of time will have to multiplied by a number not very much greater or smaller than 1, possibly causing precision problems, in order to convert it between Earth seconds and Mars seconds.
While I applaud the effort to make it easier to count time on Mars - I think, that in the bigger picture, it is not a good idea to use different fundemental units of time.
Even in the Clarke's 3001, the Ganymedes ignored the local time and measured the time in Earth units. If I recall correctly, they measured time with respect to UTC on Earth, completely ignoring local time.
Encapsulation may be done with saran wrappers. Unintentional encapsulation in hawks has been known to occur, with decapsulation being messy and the packets mangled.
Genetically, they [eggs, and embryos] are human beings. The big picture: they are the equivalent of brain-dead humans [until they are proven to be sentient]. They should have about the same rights as those.
Ethical or not - it will be greatly beneficial to be able to do research using cloning and stem cells. With cloning, you can do nature-nurture experiments more easily. With stem cells, you can eventually figure out how to grow organs instead of transplanting them.
The first country that legalises cloning and stem cell harvesting for research will have many medical researchers flocking to it. And get lots of insults along the line of 'unethical' and 'immoral'... I wonder, if that will ever happen?
When you block SYNs, you effectively shutdown incoming connections.
May as well cut the CAT5. Or co-ax. Whatever.
On the other hand... Linux does have a way to block SYNs for which there will be no ACK/SYN -- SYN cookies. No idea how it works, but basically no resources are allocated until the ACK/SYN is recieved... And perhaps the kernel completely forgets that they've ever recieved an SYN.
Another attack is the DRDOS attack... You forge SYN packets, with a source IP address of the victim, and send them out to high-bandwidth servers. The unwitting participants will then reply with serveral ACK/SYN packets to the victim...
Are you sure you don't mean specialisation? Those two terms are actually quite close... As far as I can tell, specialisation leads to speciation.
But in the land of computers... Is speciation possible? As far as I can tell, the fundemental logic is portable to all computer systems. But this is true only of algorithms... And software is much more than that.
Still, I doubt there's a point of no return where the difference between two branches are too vast to bridge, the changes impossible to port.
Competition is a good thing. But too much is bad. I'd say two or three major players is the most optimal.
But... I'd say there are more people who understand GNOME code than KDE code:
GNOME is built on C and CPP macros KDE is built on C++ and Qt extensions
There are more C programmers out there - they'd be able to learn GNOME faster than C++... And then not all C++ programmers know the Qt extensions, but admittedly, it takes at most one hour to learn those extensions, whereas learning GLib and GObject could easily take up days.
If all the people working under KDE and GNOME were forced to work on one unified DE... There'd be a lot more catfights. There are probably fundemental differences in philosophy between the users and developers of GNOME and KDE.
I'd also think the code would be more disjointed. When you put together a team of people with varying skill, the code that comes out will be cobbled together from fragments of varying quality. Thank goodness most people submit rejectable patches as opposed to commiting directly to a VCS... But this only affects the quality of code for one project. It isn't feasible to have one commitee to take care of code quality for every single KDE app, or GNOME app... Many reviewers are good for bug-hunting. Not neccessarily so about many programmers and code writing. There is no empirical evidence to reinforce my point though, so I might be wrong.
HIG may be a good thing... Apple enforces it through branding, and by integrating the guidelines with the Interface Builder. One does not even need to read the HIG... When moving or resizing widgets in Interface Builder, it snaps to the HIG recommended spacing and sizes.
I'd say both GNOME and KDE are at a feature-for-feature stalemate. That is, other than the GTK+ file selector issue... But hey, it's the GTK+ file selector, not the GNOME file selector...
I go with GNOME because I don't need the eyecandy of KDE. I've outgrown the need to be surrounded by flashy colours and useless gradients. I don't need to have a file manager that can also render webpages, man pages and info pages. GNOME has this warm, fuzzy feeling to it, as opposed to the cool, flashy KDE feel. (If you're wondering - I use Graphite on my Mac, not Aqua)
But when it comes down to code - I feel more attracted to Qt and KDE.
Summarising: choice is important. People have different tastes. You cannot appeal to the masses that easily - they're all slightly different.
The difference? The examples on the Hello World page all have source code. Hanoimania... Not so.
But.... solving the Towers of Hanoi shows a lot more of the programming environment than Hello World does... Conditionals, branching, recursion, function calls...
You know, this is eerily reminiscent of this story, from rec.humor.funny, http://www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/87/3491.1.html
Late-breaking news: Federal investigators have revealed that yesterday's record drop in the stock market was apparently triggered by two high-school students operating out of a basement somewhere in Western Pennsylvania. The names of the suspects, both minors, have not been released. Arrest warrants have allegedly been issued, but the student hackers apparently have not yet been apprehended. A spokesman for the FBI refused to comment on the rumor that the two had managed to leave the country carrying millions of dollars in cash and gold.
Just after the close of stock trading on Monday, the Washington Post received a call from two individuals who claimed to be the stock market "hackers." The callers explained that they have been breaking into the computer systems of major brokerage houses for several months, "adjusting" the price of various stocks. This was done by telephone, using a Macintosh personal computer and, later, a Perq workstation that the pair had retrieved from a dumpster at CMU. The callers claim that they finally "cracked" security on the New York Stock Exchange's new supercomputer about two weeks ago.
"It was ridiculously easy," said one of the hackers, who identified himself only as "Captain Weenie." "The password was `Scrooge'. What turkeys! After we bounced a few stocks, they got suspicious and changed the password, but it was too late. We had Trojan horses planted all over that system by the time they got wind of us. We were just playing around, trying to keep ahead of them, and making some pocket money on the side. We had a big pile of gold hidden in this hollow tree. We joked about buying a Cray with it, but we didn't have enough yet. You can't just buy the machine and put it in the basement, and my mother would have been pretty suspicious if we put up a big air-conditioned building in the back yard. The projection TV was bad enough--we told her we did some programming for the guy who owned the store. Anyway, today the (expletive deleted) Perq went crazy and we decided that we had better go underground in a hurry."
The two went on to explain that the record-breaking plunge in stock prices was triggered unintentionally when faulty floating-point microcode on the Perq put the machine into an infinite loop in the middle of a routine that selected a stock at random and issued bogus "sell" orders. By the time the machine's plug was pulled, nervous investors had noticed the dramatic downward trend and had begun to sell off their own holdings. "The market was probably going to crash anyway," one of the callers claimed, "but I wish they had debugged that microcode."
Professor Douglas Tygar of Carnegie-Mellon University, an expert on computer security, has been summoned to the White House for urgent consultation on how such break-ins can be prevented in the future. As he was boarding the private jet at Greater Pittsburgh Airport, Tygar was heard to comment that the root password for the stock exchange's main computer should have been at least eight characters long, and probably should not have been the name of a comic book character. Tygar denied rumors that he had accepted the post of Secretary of the Treasury, claiming that he would rather be director of the National Security Agency.
"Two imaginary friends of mine reproduced, with negative results" - Anon.
Look up synonyms of reproduce if confounded.
Re:How can IBM provide what SCO is requesting?
on
SCOrched Earth
·
· Score: 1
It's possible actually... Think of version control. CVS, SVN, or even RCS - these should all retain the full history of a file for as long as it was in the repository.
And the best part is - there's no duplication of files. The history tracks changes, like diffs, rather than whole copies.
Repeat after me... Linux is not Unix. Minix is not Unix. Linux did not inherit any code from Unix or UNIX. Minix is completely free of Unix and UNIX code.
Continuing... Minix is designed to provide a UNIX-like environment. Linux is designed like UNIX to provide a UNIX-like environment. Linux is not Minix. Minix is not Unix. UNIX is not Linux.
But... I wonder, will it produce 'In Soviet Russia' pseudo-paraphrasing.
I wonder what its' application could be, other than to detect duplicates... Perhaps, a tool to suggest ways of rewriting sentences? Or maybe part of a more advanced grammar check?
Slashdot Mirror
It seems reversed. When you put a *nix programmer in front of a Windows machine, he will code using Notepad and invoke the compiler by command line.
Windows programmers, on the other hand, immediately launch an IDE, pull up countless wizards to write hundreds of lines of (useless) template code and tinker with it from there, invoking the whole compile process with the push of a button.
I should know. Once upon a time, I felt that an IDE was neccessary to write code. Since the Enlightenment (about a year ago), I write code using non-integrated tools. (Although sometimes, I get frustrated looking for the source file I want to edit... At which point I start using Anjuta, but only to edit.)
Actually, derivative work is a gray area of the law.
In order for the FSF to achieve its goals, it defines derivative work as any work including the original in portion or in entirety. This means a statically linked binary is a derivative of the library - and they'd like dynamically linked binaries to be a derivative of the library too.
Of course, you can define derivative work as a library that includes the original library, but not a program that includes the original library. Or anything else you like.
The issue of the Linux kernel and the syscall interface was solved by saying that using the syscall interface does not constitute a derivative work.
Specifically, Mac OS X Panther. I can tell those non-pinstriped title bars any day!
Every changing schedule, eh? Ever heard of some hacker's 28-hour days?
Why? Changing the length of such a fundemental unit of time (other than one Planck unit of time) without changing its name is sure to cause confusion.
Not to mention, each measure of time will have to multiplied by a number not very much greater or smaller than 1, possibly causing precision problems, in order to convert it between Earth seconds and Mars seconds.
While I applaud the effort to make it easier to count time on Mars - I think, that in the bigger picture, it is not a good idea to use different fundemental units of time.
Even in the Clarke's 3001, the Ganymedes ignored the local time and measured the time in Earth units. If I recall correctly, they measured time with respect to UTC on Earth, completely ignoring local time.
You're right, of course... This is what comes of not proofreading posts...
What I mean is fertilised eggs. They have potential, yes. They are, at that stage, brain-dead, yes.
Genetically, they [eggs, and embryos] are human beings. The big picture: they are the equivalent of brain-dead humans [until they are proven to be sentient]. They should have about the same rights as those.
Ethical or not - it will be greatly beneficial to be able to do research using cloning and stem cells. With cloning, you can do nature-nurture experiments more easily. With stem cells, you can eventually figure out how to grow organs instead of transplanting them.
The first country that legalises cloning and stem cell harvesting for research will have many medical researchers flocking to it. And get lots of insults along the line of 'unethical' and 'immoral'... I wonder, if that will ever happen?
Dear Mr. D. M.,
Would you like to be like the Deutschmark post-WWII, ultra devalued? Hmm, 10^9 DMs to a dollar sounds interesting...
Absolutely correct.
When you block SYNs, you effectively shutdown incoming connections.
May as well cut the CAT5. Or co-ax. Whatever.
On the other hand... Linux does have a way to block SYNs for which there will be no ACK/SYN -- SYN cookies. No idea how it works, but basically no resources are allocated until the ACK/SYN is recieved... And perhaps the kernel completely forgets that they've ever recieved an SYN.
Another attack is the DRDOS attack... You forge SYN packets, with a source IP address of the victim, and send them out to high-bandwidth servers. The unwitting participants will then reply with serveral ACK/SYN packets to the victim...
Are you sure you don't mean specialisation? Those two terms are actually quite close... As far as I can tell, specialisation leads to speciation.
But in the land of computers... Is speciation possible? As far as I can tell, the fundemental logic is portable to all computer systems. But this is true only of algorithms... And software is much more than that.
Still, I doubt there's a point of no return where the difference between two branches are too vast to bridge, the changes impossible to port.
Competition is a good thing. But too much is bad. I'd say two or three major players is the most optimal.
But... I'd say there are more people who understand GNOME code than KDE code:
GNOME is built on C and CPP macros
KDE is built on C++ and Qt extensions
There are more C programmers out there - they'd be able to learn GNOME faster than C++... And then not all C++ programmers know the Qt extensions, but admittedly, it takes at most one hour to learn those extensions, whereas learning GLib and GObject could easily take up days.
If all the people working under KDE and GNOME were forced to work on one unified DE... There'd be a lot more catfights. There are probably fundemental differences in philosophy between the users and developers of GNOME and KDE.
I'd also think the code would be more disjointed. When you put together a team of people with varying skill, the code that comes out will be cobbled together from fragments of varying quality. Thank goodness most people submit rejectable patches as opposed to commiting directly to a VCS... But this only affects the quality of code for one project. It isn't feasible to have one commitee to take care of code quality for every single KDE app, or GNOME app... Many reviewers are good for bug-hunting. Not neccessarily so about many programmers and code writing. There is no empirical evidence to reinforce my point though, so I might be wrong.
HIG may be a good thing... Apple enforces it through branding, and by integrating the guidelines with the Interface Builder. One does not even need to read the HIG... When moving or resizing widgets in Interface Builder, it snaps to the HIG recommended spacing and sizes.
I'd say both GNOME and KDE are at a feature-for-feature stalemate. That is, other than the GTK+ file selector issue... But hey, it's the GTK+ file selector, not the GNOME file selector...
I go with GNOME because I don't need the eyecandy of KDE. I've outgrown the need to be surrounded by flashy colours and useless gradients. I don't need to have a file manager that can also render webpages, man pages and info pages. GNOME has this warm, fuzzy feeling to it, as opposed to the cool, flashy KDE feel. (If you're wondering - I use Graphite on my Mac, not Aqua)
But when it comes down to code - I feel more attracted to Qt and KDE.
Summarising: choice is important. People have different tastes. You cannot appeal to the masses that easily - they're all slightly different.
The keyword here is all.
/proc
The page clearly states that there are 4 for which there is no source code.They are:
* Hanoi OS for SPARC
* Sun Solaris
* Sun Solaris STREAMS
* Sun Solaris kernel module
Curious, isn't it, that they are all related to Sun?
http://www2.latech.edu/~acm/HelloWorld.shtml
The Hello World page.
The difference? The examples on the Hello World page all have source code. Hanoimania... Not so.
But.... solving the Towers of Hanoi shows a lot more of the programming environment than Hello World does... Conditionals, branching, recursion, function calls...
Actually, its not that, its a rewrite of the whole mailnews component.
If you look carefully, the source code is just a standard Mozilla Seamonkey tarball with one extra directory. A lot of unused code in there...
Also... The brain has been known to put material in place when in a suggestive state, i.e. hypnosis.
There was a whole movie about a person who was used as a data transfer medium... Curious, isn't it, that Hollywood forgot about the brain...
The brain has the potential remember everything. Most of the time, it doesn't - because there are only so many neurons, and many, many more details.
So... Yes, the brain could be considered a recording device, but imperfect. (i.e. lossy in terms of detail, fragmented and possibly reordered as well)
"Two imaginary friends of mine reproduced, with negative results" - Anon.
Look up synonyms of reproduce if confounded.
It's possible actually... Think of version control. CVS, SVN, or even RCS - these should all retain the full history of a file for as long as it was in the repository.
And the best part is - there's no duplication of files. The history tracks changes, like diffs, rather than whole copies.
Now, I wonder what O(i) means... I know what O(1) means, I know what O(n) means... What does O(i) mean?
Repeat after me... Linux is not Unix. Minix is not Unix. Linux did not inherit any code from Unix or UNIX. Minix is completely free of Unix and UNIX code.
Continuing... Minix is designed to provide a UNIX-like environment. Linux is designed like UNIX to provide a UNIX-like environment. Linux is not Minix. Minix is not Unix. UNIX is not Linux.
* Unix = genetic descendant, say, BSD
* UNIX = trademarked & certified, say, Solaris
This definition probably matches the 2, 3, 5... prime series.
(a) Positive
(b) Has exactly two positive integer factors
(c) Is an integer
1 is not a prime because it fails (b)... It only has one positive integer factor.
-1 (factors, -1 and 1) is not prime, because it fails (a) and (b).
0 fails (b), having an infinite number of factors.
About 45cm... that is approximately the length of the forearm from the tip of the middle finger to the elbow.
In Corporate America... The Constitution violates the DMCA!
In reality... The DMCA violates the Constitution!
The compromise statement: The DMCA is incompatible with the Constitution.
But... I wonder, will it produce 'In Soviet Russia' pseudo-paraphrasing.
I wonder what its' application could be, other than to detect duplicates... Perhaps, a tool to suggest ways of rewriting sentences? Or maybe part of a more advanced grammar check?
Normally, it's spelled 'Nyet'. .Nyet, Nyetworks...
* Nyet = No