1) http://202.88.234.250/ shows the "new server setup" page. 2) 202.88.234.250 is in India (WHOIS returns Asianet's local office in Trivandrum, Kerala). The contest time is in terms of "IST", and the Slashdot submitter is named Sujit, so the server ought to be in India.
I'm being serious. Tell me something neat and impressive that I can make it do, so I too can start preaching the genious of Google.
* It has automatic IM logging and fast searching among logs. I used to save all my chats in a folder and use Windows file find to find stuff. I still save the chats, but I use GDS to search the text (and pull up the original if necessary).
* It finds most common file types (read: MS Office, and whatever you write a plugin for) and can search within them, quickly. It searches all recognized file types in all parts of the hard drive within insignificant time.
I tried searching, for example, for some phrases that I know are in some sourcecode files I have. It didn't find the files containing the code. I guess it doesnt recognize.c or.h as text to index them?
You bring up an interesting point. When we develop FTL travel, the colonists will be lost as soon as they start traveling. Remember that even the light from their spaceship won't reach us like light from normal objects.
Once they stop, they'll have to wait for any light-speed signals to reach them, since those travel slower than the ship.
Even so, the time for light to reach anywhere on earth is negligible. If it's easier to travel FTL than exactly at light speed, it may be interesting to use that for intraplanet transport.
I've actually configured my firewall to block outgoing 80 for my IP when I have too much homework to do and I don't have the self-control to stay off without help.
Wait a second..aren't you making a moral judgement upon Falwell and McCarthy?
I think that even the author of that comment would have a hard time claiming that the results of McCarthy's actions (if not the man himself) werre morally wrong.
The answer to the question depends on your own sense of morality. Game developers have no more of a moral requirement than we all do when living our daily lives.
What would have been great is if AOL released the specs for OSCAR third party AIM clients that do not show ads.
They can take care of both. "Open" OSCAR under the following absolutely non-free-as-in-speech license:
"The following is the specificiation for the OSCAR protocol. You may use this to create helper applications for the AIM network. Unless you have separate permission from AOL, you may not create a client that, in AOL's opinion, substantially recreates the official AIM client interface, unless the client displays OSCAR-provided advertisements in an analogous manner to the official AIM client. You may not use pre-existing OSCAR documentation or a reverse-engineered protocol to connect to OSCAR. Clients that do not follow these rules may not receive the same service as compliant clients, and the developers may face legal action for lost revenue."
By "receive the same service", AOL thus reserves the right to deny connections, give low priority to rogue clients, or spam the users with text forms of the ads. This license would allow all sorts of add-ons to the protocol without worry, but clone clients would have to display the ads of the real client. (The definition of a clone is open to interpretation; I would not consider a command-line client or a non-interactive client to "substantially recreate" the traditional interface.)
Oh, and AOL would have to stop providing Flash or Java ads or whatever.
This isn't an issue in c, but in c++ where operator overloading of ++ is common
Don't you mean in ++c? Why'd you generate the temporary language?;-)
In a sense, that's why I tend to use i++. Yes, I use ++i on occasion (e.g., in for (some_strange_iterator i=foo.begin(); ifoo.end(); ++i)) where I especially don't want to generate a temporary. But if it's an int, and it's a statement by itself, i++ is (or seems to me) the standard idiom, since the language itself is called "C++", and most textbook examples on for-loops use i++.
However, since "i++;" and "++i;" as a single statement have the same intent, and as you point out temporaries and classes are worth considering, I think I'll change my style. I didn't know people think about ++i vs. i++.
Adenosine triphosphate doesn't have much bearing on the mass of a quantity of water, even though it does provide biochemical energy to the physicists who're measuring it.:-)
I think proper use of idiomatic expressions *enhances* maintainability.
I was about to say the same thing. I like !ptr better than ptr==NULL, probably because I don't like NULL (is it a keyword? is it a #define? defined as what? I just use 0), and ptr==0 is no better. Besides, the English reading "If there isn't a pointer" is better than "If the pointer equals zero".
Similarly, "i++" is a lot more readable than "i=i+1" to me. Unless you're writing for students in an introductory course, "i++" is better. And statements such as "int i; i = 0;" are actually less readable than "int i=0;", because people will wonder why you didn't write it the normal way, which distracts them from the program.
Remember that the most likely future maintainer of the code is you yourself. Write the code the way you'd find easiest to read -- which is normally the way you instinctively write. If you have to write annoying optimizations, write in a comment the most concise yet readable unoptimized code you can.
As for comments: unless you're writing a language-agnostic textbook, avoid true pseudocode. Language-specific pseudocode like "while (obj.fn() returns something valid) i++;" makes sense, because you're thinking in C already.
If the RAR is self-extracting, it's an executable.
A) The virus scanner should stop executables in e-mail, and scan all new executables. If you can run a self-extracting RAR, you can run an arbitrary virus EXE.
B) As soon as it executes, assuming the self-extracting header is safe, it extracts to a temporary location. The virus scanner can track the disk write and subsequent read, and find the virus that was within the RAR.
Can AVG scan your RAR files if you don't have WinRAR installed?
How the bleep do you expect a user to get infected from a file inside a RAR (which is the point of this discussion) if he doesn't have a RAR decompressor?
If he can decompress, so can AVG. If he can't, AVG only scans the outside of the RAR, which is the only part that can infect him. Where's the problem?
That's almost what I was going to suggest: stick a flat-screen behind a window frame, or put a window frame on one side of the room and a projector on the other. Get a nice webcam of somewhere, or a slowly moving virtual 3D render, or a music visualization, etc.
The current system of using photography with near-automatic conviction deprives people of privacy.
Don't you mean that it encourages people not to speed?
Of course, I also have the opinion that if there's no victim then there's no crime.
I would agree with that in most cases. This instance is an exception. When you violate traffic laws, you make it extremely easy for some random passerby to become a victim. The point of speeding laws is to deter people from speeding before somebody becomes a victim. I don't think we need to wait for a victim to penalize speeders, especially if the punishment is just a relatively small fine.
Slashdot Mirror
Kashyyyk!? Why, why, why?
HRESULT hReply = authEECummings (atTheLeast) vhlpDidNot vrbUse adjHungarian nNotation;
Indian Standard Time. GMT+5.5. So it's close to the same 12-hour time as US time zones.
Acronym Finder: FTFA.
People who like breaking into other people's stuff because it's wrong, but they would never do so without permission, because it's wrong.
That roughly describes me. I'd give it a try if I had any free time.
1) http://202.88.234.250/ shows the "new server setup" page.
2) 202.88.234.250 is in India (WHOIS returns Asianet's local office in Trivandrum, Kerala). The contest time is in terms of "IST", and the Slashdot submitter is named Sujit, so the server ought to be in India.
It recognizes .cpp perfectly fine.
Oh yeah, and that screenshot is from an older beta. I haven't upgraded yet to 1.0.
I'm being serious. Tell me something neat and impressive that I can make it do, so I too can start preaching the genious of Google.
.c or .h as text to index them?
.cpp perfectly fine.
* It has automatic IM logging and fast searching among logs. I used to save all my chats in a folder and use Windows file find to find stuff. I still save the chats, but I use GDS to search the text (and pull up the original if necessary).
* It finds most common file types (read: MS Office, and whatever you write a plugin for) and can search within them, quickly. It searches all recognized file types in all parts of the hard drive within insignificant time.
I tried searching, for example, for some phrases that I know are in some sourcecode files I have. It didn't find the files containing the code. I guess it doesnt recognize
It recognizes
You are actually posting on Slashdot anonymously, personally attacking someone, and insulting Microsoft products? Gotta be a troll.
Why not 1 G of P2P with FTP ?
IIRC, FTP (TCP 21) isn't P2P. RTFM: RFC 959.
You bring up an interesting point. When we develop FTL travel, the colonists will be lost as soon as they start traveling. Remember that even the light from their spaceship won't reach us like light from normal objects.
Once they stop, they'll have to wait for any light-speed signals to reach them, since those travel slower than the ship.
Even so, the time for light to reach anywhere on earth is negligible. If it's easier to travel FTL than exactly at light speed, it may be interesting to use that for intraplanet transport.
I've actually configured my firewall to block outgoing 80 for my IP when I have too much homework to do and I don't have the self-control to stay off without help.
Wait a second..aren't you making a moral judgement upon Falwell and McCarthy?
I think that even the author of that comment would have a hard time claiming that the results of McCarthy's actions (if not the man himself) werre morally wrong.
The answer to the question depends on your own sense of morality. Game developers have no more of a moral requirement than we all do when living our daily lives.
Emacs doesn't have Clippy, but VI does. :-)
(This was inspired by the webcomic User Friendly, specifically the January 2000 storyline.)
What would have been great is if AOL released the specs for OSCAR
third party AIM clients that do not show ads.
They can take care of both. "Open" OSCAR under the following absolutely non-free-as-in-speech license:
"The following is the specificiation for the OSCAR protocol. You may use this to create helper applications for the AIM network. Unless you have separate permission from AOL, you may not create a client that, in AOL's opinion, substantially recreates the official AIM client interface, unless the client displays OSCAR-provided advertisements in an analogous manner to the official AIM client. You may not use pre-existing OSCAR documentation or a reverse-engineered protocol to connect to OSCAR. Clients that do not follow these rules may not receive the same service as compliant clients, and the developers may face legal action for lost revenue."
By "receive the same service", AOL thus reserves the right to deny connections, give low priority to rogue clients, or spam the users with text forms of the ads. This license would allow all sorts of add-ons to the protocol without worry, but clone clients would have to display the ads of the real client. (The definition of a clone is open to interpretation; I would not consider a command-line client or a non-interactive client to "substantially recreate" the traditional interface.)
Oh, and AOL would have to stop providing Flash or Java ads or whatever.
This isn't an issue in c, but in c++ where operator overloading of ++ is common
;-)
Don't you mean in ++c? Why'd you generate the temporary language?
In a sense, that's why I tend to use i++. Yes, I use ++i on occasion (e.g., in for (some_strange_iterator i=foo.begin(); ifoo.end(); ++i)) where I especially don't want to generate a temporary. But if it's an int, and it's a statement by itself, i++ is (or seems to me) the standard idiom, since the language itself is called "C++", and most textbook examples on for-loops use i++.
However, since "i++;" and "++i;" as a single statement have the same intent, and as you point out temporaries and classes are worth considering, I think I'll change my style. I didn't know people think about ++i vs. i++.
Don't you mean 1 L H2O at STP?
:-)
Adenosine triphosphate doesn't have much bearing on the mass of a quantity of water, even though it does provide biochemical energy to the physicists who're measuring it.
I think proper use of idiomatic expressions *enhances* maintainability.
I was about to say the same thing. I like !ptr better than ptr==NULL, probably because I don't like NULL (is it a keyword? is it a #define? defined as what? I just use 0), and ptr==0 is no better. Besides, the English reading "If there isn't a pointer" is better than "If the pointer equals zero".
Similarly, "i++" is a lot more readable than "i=i+1" to me. Unless you're writing for students in an introductory course, "i++" is better. And statements such as "int i; i = 0;" are actually less readable than "int i=0;", because people will wonder why you didn't write it the normal way, which distracts them from the program.
Remember that the most likely future maintainer of the code is you yourself. Write the code the way you'd find easiest to read -- which is normally the way you instinctively write. If you have to write annoying optimizations, write in a comment the most concise yet readable unoptimized code you can.
As for comments: unless you're writing a language-agnostic textbook, avoid true pseudocode. Language-specific pseudocode like "while (obj.fn() returns something valid) i++;" makes sense, because you're thinking in C already.
and if the rar is self-extracting?
Okay, these arguments are bordering on stupid.
If the RAR is self-extracting, it's an executable.
A) The virus scanner should stop executables in e-mail, and scan all new executables. If you can run a self-extracting RAR, you can run an arbitrary virus EXE.
B) As soon as it executes, assuming the self-extracting header is safe, it extracts to a temporary location. The virus scanner can track the disk write and subsequent read, and find the virus that was within the RAR.
Problem solved. Already.
Can AVG scan your RAR files if you don't have WinRAR installed?
How the bleep do you expect a user to get infected from a file inside a RAR (which is the point of this discussion) if he doesn't have a RAR decompressor?
If he can decompress, so can AVG. If he can't, AVG only scans the outside of the RAR, which is the only part that can infect him. Where's the problem?
That's almost what I was going to suggest: stick a flat-screen behind a window frame, or put a window frame on one side of the room and a projector on the other. Get a nice webcam of somewhere, or a slowly moving virtual 3D render, or a music visualization, etc.
The current system of using photography with near-automatic conviction deprives people of privacy.
Don't you mean that it encourages people not to speed?
Of course, I also have the opinion that if there's no victim then there's no crime.
I would agree with that in most cases. This instance is an exception. When you violate traffic laws, you make it extremely easy for some random passerby to become a victim. The point of speeding laws is to deter people from speeding before somebody becomes a victim. I don't think we need to wait for a victim to penalize speeders, especially if the punishment is just a relatively small fine.
Don't you mean a GNU/lentil bean?
Indeed. Witness "Seventeen" magazine.
The Google Anti-Bomb: oblige them, and watch their Google PageRank go to zero.
The majority of my spam today is for Cialis instead. Anti-Viagra would've helped a couple of years ago....