they have no mutable variables in the usual sense... You can't do this in C or Java because it might be necessary for one function to see a variable modified by another.
I think the key word here is "might".
Nothing prevents a C compiler from figuring out "int foo(int a) { return a + 2; }" is pure. In fact gcc can do this to some extent; the relevant compiler flag (enabled by default w/optimization) is "-fipa-pure-const".
gcc also lets you specify the attribute 'const' to declare that a function is pure (in the sense that we're using it here).
Sure, it's coarse, and an afterthought, but it's also flexible.
Yes I probably wouldn't enjoy being on a site that went on and on about "Windows Rocks/Linux Sucks" (as much as this site does the reverse, anyway).
But that kind of rhetoric is not really why I read this site. As an example, I found the (apparently) 1st-person accounts about air traffic and ATC procedures yesterday to be one of the most informative and entertaining bits I've read in awhile.
Slashdot has (more than?) its fair share of trolls, and troll articles, but there is (sometimes) a depth here that I haven't really found anywhere else yet; and that includes your local newspaper.
I used ClearCase at my previous job, and the mode of use you mentioned, while interesting (files could change in your source tree as others checked in code, I believe), was impractical for me. Building out of one of those directories was like building out of an NFS-mounted directory... an order of magnitude slower, too slow to be usable.
ClearCase also supported the typical 'check your workspace ("view"?) out to a local place on your hard drive, rebase it occasionally, make your changes, and check it in' model, and that seemed to work fine.
And yes we had a full-time administrator for the system. Would've been suicide not to.
Well, let's pretend for a moment that the scientists didn't take that into account. If I didn't like something I might actually eat it just to get the experiment over with so I could get out of there and go play with some toys or something. I might hold out for a marshmellow, they're so-so. But if, for example, you gave me a peppermint (which I don't like)... I would probably give it a "what is the point" look and then eat it.
I mean, the reward for waiting actually needs to be worth something.
And for my own personal use, I'd love to be able to throttle a dos 6.22 VM to 486 speeds so some of those ancient programs can be ran for historical purposes. (Without bombing the processor with dummy NOP and other MOSLO crap so we keep our power consumption down.)
I assume you've checked out DosBox and its 'cycles' configuration option/command? It's not precise but it works quite well for me.
the tradition is continued by Linux developers who generally provide little or no man page documentation
Debian, at least, requires all packages to provide manpages for every "program, utility, and function". To not do so is a bug (policy manual 12.1)
So at least on that distribution, I find the manpage selection to be very broad. I have also not generally had a problem with manpage quality. But YMMV.
Mod up please. I got several critical FPS back in quake3 (on an otherwise very borderline system) by running X w/out a window manager or any other apps.
In my case I didn't even have to specify geometry, because q3 was running full-screen.
debian out of the gate recognized the need for both dpkg *and* apt
Not exactly "out of the gate". debian shipped in 1993. apt shipped in debian-stable in 1999. Before apt, there was dselect. From the little I've seen of dselect, it... was pretty bad. In fact that's probably why apt was so good, they were overcompensating.
I hope that kid won the science competition he was in!
"... and for my science project, I proved NASA wrong and made a discovery of potentially epic proportions..."
Kindof tough to follow that one.
Re:shhh! don't go blabbing this all over the place
on
The Return of Ada
·
· Score: 1
I worked on Ada code for about 3 years (1997-2000, so it was a long time ago).
The language was really ahead of its time. It got a lot of things right: -- decent type checking -- exceptions -- direct assignment of arrays -- slices -- range discriminator (think "foreach") -- default values and designated initializers for record^Wstruct fields -- strict separation of interfaces via modules -- decent interface to external languages -- generics -- (arguably) 'in out' instead of ptrs -- probably other stuff I've forgotten
All of this, and typically with a better syntax than C++. Not that that is saying much.
On the downside...
-- Garbage collection which was optional to implement. We never used it. -- Concurrency primitives built into the language, as opposed to library calls. I think this was an attempt to simplify programmers' lives, but it complicated the compiler support, and was limited anyway. You couldn't do spinlocks/rwlocks etc. w/out having to fall back to a library. --... which you got to write the interface for yourself, because the standard Ada library support was weak. -- GNAT is decent, but my understanding is that a lot of Ada compilers sucked. -- No standard support for bitwise operators in Ada83 (fixed in Ada95). -- I never got the hang of the Ada95 OO support. We never used it.
I'm a C programmer, and love it, but the worst Ada code I ever dealt with was code that looked like it had been written in C and directly converted. Unchecked_conversion()s everywhere. Ugh...
Please note that Matrox did the same thing in 1999 - They gave partial card specs (insufficient for implementing any 3D) and promised more, but never delivered
Bull! I used to routinely play Quake3, as well as TuxRacer (full version) with a matrox g200 card in my Linux box.
See this site for instance, the documentation may not have been the best, but it was enough.
I know they had problems getting an OpenGL driver out for Windows, I'm not sure they ever got it right, and a lot of people were pissed, but that's completely different.
Oops, you addressed that. Damnit, that'll teach me to read the entire post. I still contend it's easier to find a non-overloaded place when people aren't being stupid with the water they've got.
...and I can guarantee that the whole idea of "wasting water" is ridiculous in the first place. Where do people think "wasted" water goes? When it evaporates, it comes back as rain; when it soaks into the ground, it is transpired by plant life, and again evaporates and comes back as rain; when it goes into the sewer system, it dilutes the sewage, makes it easier to process, is replaced into the groundwater, evaporates, comes back as rain...
If you live in a place like Palm Desert, CA, fed only by an aquifer that recharges incredibly slowly, you should see the problem better -- basically, local conditions sometimes cannot sustain the amount of water draw from the given local resources.
Sexual transmission is the most common, but not the only, vector for the HPV strains prevented by Gardasil. So I don't think you can reject mandatory vaccination out-of-hand on those grounds.
A better reason would be that the health risk of HPV is too small. HPV is certainly not AIDS. But high-risk HPV does have that nagging, though quite low, possibility of killing you someday (w/out appropriate vigilance/checkups). So I'm ambivalent.
And I'm dragging this off-topic but I would just like to say high-risk HPV sucks. It can lie latent for years. Condoms are only partially effective at prevention, and it's very widespread. There is no decent detection test for men, so once you've been exposed, even if you were careful, you can never tell if you've fought it off, or even picked it up in the first place. If you weren't careful, you probably did.
If that vaccine was licensed for guys, although it's expensive, I would pay to take it.
Earplugs, on the other hand, are very effective and quite cheap.
Also consider some decent gun muffs. I use them when I need to focus. They're just as effective, still pretty cheap, and more convenient/comfortable for me (I'm also paranoid about ear infections with earplugs.) They're not as suitable if you wear glasses, though.
Of course "Free Software" wasn't invented (although perhaps the term was coined) by Stallman, and that's your bad.
But the definition of "Free Software" used by the GP doesn't appear to recognize X- and BSD-licensed code (for example) as "Free", and that's even more incorrect.
I'm going to say that your first benchmark, at least, is completely fucked up.
No, those are cached reads, not hitting the drive at all. The man page for 'hdparm' says -T "is essentially an indication of the throughput of the processor, cache, and memory of the system under test".
Sabal palms are also occur naturally in (at least) south Texas and Louisiana, and of course there is the much-propagated California Fan Palm. And those are just the species I can think of off the top of my head.
Any engineer or dev worthy of the title should have fled SCO years ago, or at least tried to (maybe the Lindon, UT job market is really awful, or something).
Slashdot Mirror
they have no mutable variables in the usual sense ... You can't do this in C or Java because it might be necessary for one function to see a variable modified by another.
I think the key word here is "might".
Nothing prevents a C compiler from figuring out "int foo(int a) { return a + 2; }" is pure. In fact gcc can do this to some extent; the relevant compiler flag (enabled by default w/optimization) is "-fipa-pure-const".
gcc also lets you specify the attribute 'const' to declare that a function is pure (in the sense that we're using it here).
Sure, it's coarse, and an afterthought, but it's also flexible.
Well, maybe both.
Yes I probably wouldn't enjoy being on a site that went on and on about "Windows Rocks/Linux Sucks" (as much as this site does the reverse, anyway).
But that kind of rhetoric is not really why I read this site. As an example, I found the (apparently) 1st-person accounts about air traffic and ATC procedures yesterday to be one of the most informative and entertaining bits I've read in awhile.
Slashdot has (more than?) its fair share of trolls, and troll articles, but there is (sometimes) a depth here that I haven't really found anywhere else yet; and that includes your local newspaper.
ClearCase also supported the typical 'check your workspace ("view"?) out to a local place on your hard drive, rebase it occasionally, make your changes, and check it in' model, and that seemed to work fine.
And yes we had a full-time administrator for the system. Would've been suicide not to.
I mean, the reward for waiting actually needs to be worth something.
And for my own personal use, I'd love to be able to throttle a dos 6.22 VM to 486 speeds so some of those ancient programs can be ran for historical purposes. (Without bombing the processor with dummy NOP and other MOSLO crap so we keep our power consumption down.)
I assume you've checked out DosBox and its 'cycles' configuration option/command? It's not precise but it works quite well for me.
I'm not trying to badmouth him, it's amazing that he does what he does, but it isn't immediately obvious why he carries so much respect.
The site at least (anandtech) gets respect because from them, articles of this quality level are not perceived as a fluke.
Merely as an example, if this had come from Tom's Hardware, I would have been floored.
You do realize that at the end of the world, no one's going to care if you put out a new beta of your new Robocode robot, even if it is unbeatable.
Some of us think it's funny you had to actually link to robocode to call out a nerd. Only nerds make jokes they have to explain.
The rest of us are busy optimizing our movement strategy routines for the next beta.
the tradition is continued by Linux developers who generally provide little or no man page documentation
Debian, at least, requires all packages to provide manpages for every "program, utility, and function". To not do so is a bug (policy manual 12.1)
So at least on that distribution, I find the manpage selection to be very broad. I have also not generally had a problem with manpage quality. But YMMV.
Mod up please. I got several critical FPS back in quake3 (on an otherwise very borderline system) by running X w/out a window manager or any other apps.
In my case I didn't even have to specify geometry, because q3 was running full-screen.
debian out of the gate recognized the need for both dpkg *and* apt
Not exactly "out of the gate". debian shipped in 1993. apt shipped in debian-stable in 1999. Before apt, there was dselect. From the little I've seen of dselect, it ... was pretty bad. In fact that's probably why apt was so good, they were overcompensating.
I hope that kid won the science competition he was in!
"... and for my science project, I proved NASA wrong and made a discovery of potentially epic proportions..."
Kindof tough to follow that one.
I worked on Ada code for about 3 years (1997-2000, so it was a long time ago).
...
... which you got to write the interface for yourself, because the standard Ada library support was weak.
The language was really ahead of its time. It got a lot of things right:
-- decent type checking
-- exceptions
-- direct assignment of arrays
-- slices
-- range discriminator (think "foreach")
-- default values and designated initializers for record^Wstruct fields
-- strict separation of interfaces via modules
-- decent interface to external languages
-- generics
-- (arguably) 'in out' instead of ptrs
-- probably other stuff I've forgotten
All of this, and typically with a better syntax than C++. Not that that is saying much.
On the downside
-- Garbage collection which was optional to implement. We never used it.
-- Concurrency primitives built into the language, as opposed to library calls. I think this was an attempt to simplify programmers' lives, but it complicated the compiler support, and was limited anyway. You couldn't do spinlocks/rwlocks etc. w/out having to fall back to a library.
--
-- GNAT is decent, but my understanding is that a lot of Ada compilers sucked.
-- No standard support for bitwise operators in Ada83 (fixed in Ada95).
-- I never got the hang of the Ada95 OO support. We never used it.
I'm a C programmer, and love it, but the worst Ada code I ever dealt with was code that looked like it had been written in C and directly converted. Unchecked_conversion()s everywhere. Ugh...
Just to follow up, the g400 series was out in '99, and it had one of the best open-source 3d drivers for linux for quite awhile.
Bull! I used to routinely play Quake3, as well as TuxRacer (full version) with a matrox g200 card in my Linux box. See this site for instance, the documentation may not have been the best, but it was enough.
I know they had problems getting an OpenGL driver out for Windows, I'm not sure they ever got it right, and a lot of people were pissed, but that's completely different.
Hard drives are actually vented. There's no pressurized compartment.
Not always correct. From the wikipedia article on 'hard disk':
"Specially manufactured sealed and pressurized disks are needed for reliable high-altitude operation, above about 10,000 feet (3,000 m)."
Oops, you addressed that. Damnit, that'll teach me to read the entire post. I still contend it's easier to find a non-overloaded place when people aren't being stupid with the water they've got.
...and I can guarantee that the whole idea of "wasting water" is ridiculous in the first place. Where do people think "wasted" water goes? When it evaporates, it comes back as rain; when it soaks into the ground, it is transpired by plant life, and again evaporates and comes back as rain; when it goes into the sewer system, it dilutes the sewage, makes it easier to process, is replaced into the groundwater, evaporates, comes back as rain...
If you live in a place like Palm Desert, CA, fed only by an aquifer that recharges incredibly slowly, you should see the problem better -- basically, local conditions sometimes cannot sustain the amount of water draw from the given local resources.
Only so they wouldn't steal all my crack.
A better reason would be that the health risk of HPV is too small. HPV is certainly not AIDS. But high-risk HPV does have that nagging, though quite low, possibility of killing you someday (w/out appropriate vigilance/checkups). So I'm ambivalent.
And I'm dragging this off-topic but I would just like to say high-risk HPV sucks. It can lie latent for years. Condoms are only partially effective at prevention, and it's very widespread. There is no decent detection test for men, so once you've been exposed, even if you were careful, you can never tell if you've fought it off, or even picked it up in the first place. If you weren't careful, you probably did.
If that vaccine was licensed for guys, although it's expensive, I would pay to take it.
Also consider some decent gun muffs. I use them when I need to focus. They're just as effective, still pretty cheap, and more convenient/comfortable for me (I'm also paranoid about ear infections with earplugs.) They're not as suitable if you wear glasses, though.
Of course "Free Software" wasn't invented (although perhaps the term was coined) by Stallman, and that's your bad.
But the definition of "Free Software" used by the GP doesn't appear to recognize X- and BSD-licensed code (for example) as "Free", and that's even more incorrect.
No, those are cached reads, not hitting the drive at all. The man page for 'hdparm' says -T "is essentially an indication of the throughput of the processor, cache, and memory of the system under test".
You are completely incorrect, sir
Sabal palms are also occur naturally in (at least) south Texas and Louisiana, and of course there is the much-propagated California Fan Palm. And those are just the species I can think of off the top of my head.
Zero-copy. ... well, in Linux anyway.
Also, GP said "Unix and socket interfaces", not "unix sockets". The concepts are related but not equivalent.