The same thing happened to me. I am running a mail server from a static ip DSL connection. I got bounced from businesses using a mail service provider because my HELO/EHLO didn't reverse DNS to my ip number. It was bounced from the server with a nasty message saying they do not accept spam.
The admin who bounced me says he was following the RFC's in doing this. Fortunately, my provider was able to set up the reverse DNS for me and the admin whitelisted me for a few days.
I looked up the RFC's. I "must, if possible" make sure that the reverse dns matches the HELO. It also says that the receiver must accept the email, no matter what.
The worst thing was the guy thinks he was doing his customers a service by disallowing potential business. If every mail server on the net started doing this, spammers will find a way around it while legitimate mail servers are blacked out.
I would not call auto_ptr smart by any stretch of the would. It has a lot of problem. Besides, it does would with !=, so does not fit your argument. BOOST is not part of of the standard, so also do not fit your argument. By the by, the BOOST libraries that are going into the next release of the standard have already been chosen (though I'm not privy to that info.)
Really, I guess Josuttis is incorrect in his book when he refers to an auto_ptr ". . . as a kind of a smart pointer that helps to avoid resource leaks when exceptions are thrown." You are right though, it is pretty useless. It also appears that the auto_ptr implementation does not include operator's == and !=.
Thanks for the info about the boost library. I am hoping to see more useful smart pointers in the next STL. Even if the boost smart pointers don't become part of the standard, I would recommend them instead of rolling your own.
Except that there are not so called "smart pointers" defined by Standard C++.
An auto_ptr is part of the standard template library (STL) and it is a kind of smart pointer. The STL is a c++ standard. Unfortunately in can't be used in containers. Boost http://boost.org/ has an excellent collection of smart pointers which may become part of a future c++ standard.
I know this is off topic, but.. "Methodology" is a pretentious way of saying "method". Literally translated means "study of methods" which is rarely what is intended. I hear it used all the time by intelligent people, but if you stop and think about it for a second, it really is pretty silly.
In this context, and according to m-w.com, it means:
1 : a body of methods , rules, and postulates employed by a discipline : a particular procedure or set of procedures
You may not know if ptr is a smart pointer in c++. An operator!= would then have to be written for every type the smart pointer class would interact with.
Easier said than done. If you try and hide the plugin, mozilla and firefox often go looking for it. Eventually I had to just delete the shared library on linux. On windows, I had to edit the preferences file to look for a version of acrobat that didn't exist yet.
The plugin is so annoying because its toolbars take up a lot of space along with firefox's.
As an electrical engineer, think about domain knowledge and how it may help you get your next job. Did you take any extra courses outside of programming? Do you like DSP, embedded systems, or circuit design? Its tougher to get jobs right now, so you have to be persistent in your job search.
If your company can afford it, consider Perforce. If it cannot, consider a free revision control system that allows atomic commits (Subversion?). The company I work for went to Perforce and I am glad. The ability to group changes together, check in symlinks, and other niceties make this system great. Your entire CVS revision history can be imported to Perforce going back to the beginning of your project. In addition, the software is well documented.
I am strongly considering using the free version of Perforce for my home projects.
Using the suggested new system, how would parallel make work? Parallel make on a uniprocessor or multiprocessor machine allows multiple compilation units to be compiled simultaneously. While one process is waiting on file I/O, the other process can be chugging away on another compilation unit. In addition, only compilation units depending on a changed header will need to be recompiled.
I used xfce extensively when it was still based on CDE (years ago). I had to stop because the "focus follows mouse" policy had changed. When a new window popped up, the focus changed to the new window even if my mouse was still over the window I needed to be typing in. The pop up window was presenting output, but all my interaction was in this other window. It had something to do with a focus stack. I think one of the other users was offering a reward to whoever could bring back the old behavior.
I finally gave up and moved to blackbox. Is this problem fixed yet?
Also, my current installation pretty much breaks things down into/var/log/maillog,/var/log/secure, and/var/log/messages.
The reporting from the logwatch package also seems to be pretty good.
Re:Thanks for your responses...
on
Ph.D Employment?
·
· Score: 1
Where exactly is the physical layer? Do you design the radio at the transistor level?
An rf design engineer is a great job with many opportunities? If you have any interest in programming consider the EDA industry (Synopsys, Mentor, Cadence). If you are in the analog design space, there are a tremendous opportunities. Just research and find the right company for you. As the economy is picks up, your knowledge will be in demand.
A BSEE exposes you to a wide range of subjects and you don't really have enough time to learn much about them. The degree is more about teaching you how to think like an electrical engineer. It does not teach you creativity, intelligence, or motivation.
All of the specialized knowledge comes with doing projects. As a hobbyist, she was able to identify and acquire all of the knowledge required to complete this project. I think this is a great accomplishment.
If you're teaching beginners how to program, Java is simpler anyway. You don't have to understand memory allocation and pointers because it's all taken care of for you. Also you can write non-object-oriented programs to start with by making all functions static.
Unfortunately Java hides how computers actually work. I would first start out with a BASIC interpreter to teach basic algorithms and structured programming. I would then move to C to teach about pointers. Then move into Java or C++.
The problem with starting with an Object-Oriented language is that it hides how computers actually work. The benefits of a language like C++ or Java is that you can teach the merits of generic programming with something like the STL.
In addition, Java might place an excessive load on an older machine.
A long time ago, software programming was done by people with some exposure to electrical engineering and specifically computer hardware. But from there programming became increasingly messy, less of a science. Lisp lost to C, then C++, then Java. Software Engineering has become an oxymoron; Cutler's latest Operating System has become WinXP and the situation you describe for hardware is the norm for operating systems. It would not surprise me if hardware industry becomes more infected by the "hack and check mentality." I think EDA tool venders are unlikely to do the "right thing"
The important of electrical engineers in EDA is that they have domain knowledge, and are able to understand the problems that customers are trying to solve. The problem is getting good EE's with decent programming skills working on a software system that was well architected in the first place.
The code has to be correct, but it also has to be fast in order to compete in this industry. C and C++ are excellent languages to do this. They require an understanding of how computers work and allow you to trade off efficiency for elegance.
You might think that "hack and check mentality" is bad in the EDA companies. It is even worse at the hardware companies who have to deliver EDA software to their fellow coworkers under serious time pressure. They cannot wait 6-9 months for the next software release from a vendor.
Thats a wonderful debate tactic. Respond to one comment and write off the others as ludicrous.
These are not trolls. These are my honest opinions after being in rpm hell for so many years.
It is possible to target applications for more than distribution. Most of the apps I write are console based, and depend on a stable libstdc++. No one, including Redhat and Suse, seems to agree on how to provide one which will work across the different systems.
A window manager is not the same as a linux distro, even I know that. Happily enough, Suse supports my favorite, blackbox. I don't even need to start up kde to use yast.
In addition to the "Linux Kiddies" (you really must be an admin), major customers are pressuring us to support Suse.
I have used Redhat for about 6 years and they have been fickle for many years in their package selections. In addition, they oftentimes chose bleeding edge applications and kernels in order to be on the cutting edge with the consumer market. Now that they are focusing on the business customers, they may be more conservative in their decisions, but they choose to charge ridiculous sums for it.
Solaris has been around a hell of a lot longer than Redhat/Linux and has a much superior reputation for stability. FreeBSD is an incredibly stable os and I am happy to start learning more about it.
While no Linux distribution is without its challenges, I am sick of the ones posed by Redhat and I see Suse as a welcome vacation.
No, they are not playing nice. If they were playing nice, it would be less of an issue getting applications to work across different linux distributions. This is not in the best interests of Redhat as they can charge a lot of money for consulting. This is where Solaris is trying to break into the x86 market. Giving away a better (more stable) product with less expensive support.
Now that Redhat is EOL'ing their older versions and forcing customers to pay for enterprise (stable) versions of their products, there is little benefit to staying with Redhat. In fact some of our customer's are demanding that we support Suse or Solaris 10 instead.
I've tried their "free version" Fedora and it is way to unstable for home use. I got the free suse developer DVD and I am very happy. As a bonus, the suse distribution you can download for free is the same as what is shipped to their paying customers, not some bleeding edge stuff that Redhat wants alpha tested.
In the end, I don't care if Redhat is under the GPL or not. Their package management sucks and their "special" modifications to the kernel and compilers make for non-portability.
That is why I have moved to SUSE and FreeBSD at home. It is also why I will start experimenting with Solaris 10.
With Suse backed by Novell and Solaris 10 by Sun, I hope that more ISV's will make the capital expense in supporting alternative distributions for the x86 32 and 64 bit platforms.
I work for a large software company and we only support Redhat for linux platforms. We are now moving our customers to Enterprise 3.
Apparently it is really difficult to take an application that was developed for Redhat and then use it on other Linux distributions. We don't support them if they try. If Redhat played nice, perhaps this would be less of an issue.
Unfortunately no amplifier is perfect. That is why there are such specs as total harmonic distortion (THD). Often times audio amps use 2 transistors so that when there is no signal, little power is dissipated. One transistor conducts for the top half of the signal and the other transistor conducts for the bottom half. If the switching between transistors is imperfect, you get some unpleasant sounding distortion. The same goes if the signal is to large that the amplifier clips.
I am not an audiofile (IANAA), but tube amps where only one tube is conducting the the entire time supposedly sound better. This is since you have no distortion from switching. In addition tubes have "softer" clipping so that you get pleasant sounding 2nd order distortion (octaves) versus unpleasent 3rd order distortion.
I can't hear the difference, but I guess there are some who can.
If the software was compiled using shared system libraries, you can do the same thing with C/C++ apps. If there is a flaw is in the program, and not in the "framework", you'd have to redistribute (or patch) the application anyways.
If you are concerned about people falling asleep, it might be easier/cheaper to attach a sensor to detect when the driver's head tilts forward.
If the driver is otherwise easily distracted, perhaps he/she shouldn't be allowed to drive at all.
Slashdot Mirror
The same thing happened to me. I am running a mail server from a static ip DSL connection. I got bounced from businesses using a mail service provider because my HELO/EHLO didn't reverse DNS to my ip number. It was bounced from the server with a nasty message saying they do not accept spam.
The admin who bounced me says he was following the RFC's in doing this. Fortunately, my provider was able to set up the reverse DNS for me and the admin whitelisted me for a few days.
I looked up the RFC's. I "must, if possible" make sure that the reverse dns matches the HELO. It also says that the receiver must accept the email, no matter what.
Please see http://www.cs.niu.edu/~rickert/cf/bad-ehlo.html/
The worst thing was the guy thinks he was doing his customers a service by disallowing potential business. If every mail server on the net started doing this, spammers will find a way around it while legitimate mail servers are blacked out.
Cool, Emacs users can now take all their settings with them.
Really, I guess Josuttis is incorrect in his book when he refers to an auto_ptr ". . . as a kind of a smart pointer that helps to avoid resource leaks when exceptions are thrown." You are right though, it is pretty useless. It also appears that the auto_ptr implementation does not include operator's == and !=.
Thanks for the info about the boost library. I am hoping to see more useful smart pointers in the next STL. Even if the boost smart pointers don't become part of the standard, I would recommend them instead of rolling your own.
An auto_ptr is part of the standard template library (STL) and it is a kind of smart pointer. The STL is a c++ standard. Unfortunately in can't be used in containers. Boost http://boost.org/ has an excellent collection of smart pointers which may become part of a future c++ standard.
In this context, and according to m-w.com, it means:
1 : a body of methods , rules, and postulates employed by a discipline : a particular procedure or set of procedures
You may not know if ptr is a smart pointer in c++. An operator!= would then have to be written for every type the smart pointer class would interact with.
Therefore you should do.
(ptr != 0)
Easier said than done. If you try and hide the plugin, mozilla and firefox often go looking for it. Eventually I had to just delete the shared library on linux. On windows, I had to edit the preferences file to look for a version of acrobat that didn't exist yet.
The plugin is so annoying because its toolbars take up a lot of space along with firefox's.
http://sepwww.stanford.edu/software/ratfor.html
It would suck if Purify wasn't available for Solaris. For some reason it never quite worked right on linux x86.
As an electrical engineer, think about domain knowledge and how it may help you get your next job. Did you take any extra courses outside of programming? Do you like DSP, embedded systems, or circuit design? Its tougher to get jobs right now, so you have to be persistent in your job search.
If your company can afford it, consider Perforce. If it cannot, consider a free revision control system that allows atomic commits (Subversion?). The company I work for went to Perforce and I am glad. The ability to group changes together, check in symlinks, and other niceties make this system great. Your entire CVS revision history can be imported to Perforce going back to the beginning of your project. In addition, the software is well documented.
I am strongly considering using the free version of Perforce for my home projects.
I like currvita, look it up on ctan.org. I've been using it for my resume for years.
Using the suggested new system, how would parallel make work? Parallel make on a uniprocessor or multiprocessor machine allows multiple compilation units to be compiled simultaneously. While one process is waiting on file I/O, the other process can be chugging away on another compilation unit. In addition, only compilation units depending on a changed header will need to be recompiled.
I used xfce extensively when it was still based on CDE (years ago). I had to stop because the "focus follows mouse" policy had changed. When a new window popped up, the focus changed to the new window even if my mouse was still over the window I needed to be typing in. The pop up window was presenting output, but all my interaction was in this other window. It had something to do with a focus stack. I think one of the other users was offering a reward to whoever could bring back the old behavior. I finally gave up and moved to blackbox. Is this problem fixed yet?
grep -v ssh
Also, my current installation pretty much breaks things down into
The reporting from the logwatch package also seems to be pretty good.
Where exactly is the physical layer? Do you design the radio at the transistor level? An rf design engineer is a great job with many opportunities? If you have any interest in programming consider the EDA industry (Synopsys, Mentor, Cadence). If you are in the analog design space, there are a tremendous opportunities. Just research and find the right company for you. As the economy is picks up, your knowledge will be in demand.
A BSEE exposes you to a wide range of subjects and you don't really have enough time to learn much about them. The degree is more about teaching you how to think like an electrical engineer. It does not teach you creativity, intelligence, or motivation.
All of the specialized knowledge comes with doing projects. As a hobbyist, she was able to identify and acquire all of the knowledge required to complete this project. I think this is a great accomplishment.
Unfortunately Java hides how computers actually work. I would first start out with a BASIC interpreter to teach basic algorithms and structured programming. I would then move to C to teach about pointers. Then move into Java or C++.
The problem with starting with an Object-Oriented language is that it hides how computers actually work. The benefits of a language like C++ or Java is that you can teach the merits of generic programming with something like the STL.
In addition, Java might place an excessive load on an older machine.
The important of electrical engineers in EDA is that they have domain knowledge, and are able to understand the problems that customers are trying to solve. The problem is getting good EE's with decent programming skills working on a software system that was well architected in the first place.
The code has to be correct, but it also has to be fast in order to compete in this industry. C and C++ are excellent languages to do this. They require an understanding of how computers work and allow you to trade off efficiency for elegance.
You might think that "hack and check mentality" is bad in the EDA companies. It is even worse at the hardware companies who have to deliver EDA software to their fellow coworkers under serious time pressure. They cannot wait 6-9 months for the next software release from a vendor.
These are not trolls. These are my honest opinions after being in rpm hell for so many years.
It is possible to target applications for more than distribution. Most of the apps I write are console based, and depend on a stable libstdc++. No one, including Redhat and Suse, seems to agree on how to provide one which will work across the different systems.
A window manager is not the same as a linux distro, even I know that. Happily enough, Suse supports my favorite, blackbox. I don't even need to start up kde to use yast.
In addition to the "Linux Kiddies" (you really must be an admin), major customers are pressuring us to support Suse.
I have used Redhat for about 6 years and they have been fickle for many years in their package selections. In addition, they oftentimes chose bleeding edge applications and kernels in order to be on the cutting edge with the consumer market. Now that they are focusing on the business customers, they may be more conservative in their decisions, but they choose to charge ridiculous sums for it.
Solaris has been around a hell of a lot longer than Redhat/Linux and has a much superior reputation for stability. FreeBSD is an incredibly stable os and I am happy to start learning more about it. While no Linux distribution is without its challenges, I am sick of the ones posed by Redhat and I see Suse as a welcome vacation.
Now that Redhat is EOL'ing their older versions and forcing customers to pay for enterprise (stable) versions of their products, there is little benefit to staying with Redhat. In fact some of our customer's are demanding that we support Suse or Solaris 10 instead.
I've tried their "free version" Fedora and it is way to unstable for home use. I got the free suse developer DVD and I am very happy. As a bonus, the suse distribution you can download for free is the same as what is shipped to their paying customers, not some bleeding edge stuff that Redhat wants alpha tested.
In the end, I don't care if Redhat is under the GPL or not. Their package management sucks and their "special" modifications to the kernel and compilers make for non-portability.
That is why I have moved to SUSE and FreeBSD at home. It is also why I will start experimenting with Solaris 10.
With Suse backed by Novell and Solaris 10 by Sun, I hope that more ISV's will make the capital expense in supporting alternative distributions for the x86 32 and 64 bit platforms.
I work for a large software company and we only support Redhat for linux platforms. We are now moving our customers to Enterprise 3. Apparently it is really difficult to take an application that was developed for Redhat and then use it on other Linux distributions. We don't support them if they try. If Redhat played nice, perhaps this would be less of an issue.
Unfortunately no amplifier is perfect. That is why there are such specs as total harmonic distortion (THD). Often times audio amps use 2 transistors so that when there is no signal, little power is dissipated. One transistor conducts for the top half of the signal and the other transistor conducts for the bottom half. If the switching between transistors is imperfect, you get some unpleasant sounding distortion. The same goes if the signal is to large that the amplifier clips.
I am not an audiofile (IANAA), but tube amps where only one tube is conducting the the entire time supposedly sound better. This is since you have no distortion from switching. In addition tubes have "softer" clipping so that you get pleasant sounding 2nd order distortion (octaves) versus unpleasent 3rd order distortion.
I can't hear the difference, but I guess there are some who can.
If the software was compiled using shared system libraries, you can do the same thing with C/C++ apps. If there is a flaw is in the program, and not in the "framework", you'd have to redistribute (or patch) the application anyways.
If you are concerned about people falling asleep, it might be easier/cheaper to attach a sensor to detect when the driver's head tilts forward. If the driver is otherwise easily distracted, perhaps he/she shouldn't be allowed to drive at all.