I don't know very much about programming, but I'm pretty sure that converting a single-threaded app the size of Firefox to a multi-threaded model is anything but straightforward.
So here's a promise about threads, one that I will keep or else buy someone a trip to New Zealand and Australia (or should I say, a trip here for those over there): JS3 will be ready for the multicore desktop workload.
Well, here's what Brendan Eich, Mozilla's chief technology officer, has to say about multithreading:
Threads suck
I'm not very clueful on such matters, but it seems like maybe the most important statement is:
A requirement for JS3 (along with hygienic macros) is to do something along these more implicit lines of concurrency support. In all the fast yet maintainable MT systems I've built or worked on, the key idea (which Will Clinger stated clearly to me over lunch last fall) is to separate the mutable unshared data from the immutable shared data. Do that well, with language and VM support, and threads become what they should be: not an abstraction violator from hell, but a scaling device that can be composed with existing abstractions.
Further advantages of GPLv3 include better internationalization, gentler termination, support for BitTorrent, and compatibility with the Apache license.
What does the bit about BitTorrent refer to?
Re:Lemme check my last home appraisal...
on
Linus on GIT and SCM
·
· Score: 4, Funny
You missed the point of the thread; to discuss git, not to be one.
Wait, what? I don't think LJ carries ads, at least, none that I've ever seen. (And no, I don't have adblock or the like running, nor am I a paid member.)
No, they were passed into law by jackasses who didn't know the real meaning of them. I imagine the people who actually conceived the laws had a pretty clear idea.
That's an interesting *sigh* you have there. It managed to convince me that ligitimate is not, in fact, the same as legal, since the second definition linked to is "in accordance with established rules, principles, or standards."
I'm a bit uncertain of your intention, but thanks anyway.:)
If everyone's life were public, you'd know if Piotr was an agent. You'd know who in your circle of friends ran to authorities. You'd know the personal lives of those running the country. This isn't just some pedantic point, it gets at the heart of how the systme worked; the government didn't eliminate privacy, they controlled it.
A society without any privacy at all would be unimaginably different from our own; I don't think you can claim a priori that it would be worse.
The article misses a pretty large point: the w3 has already decided to work on the next version of HTML. The post linked to is a recommendation that the HTML 5 spec be used as a starting point for that work.
Want to compare numbers, it should be with Dell, Acer, HP and all PC manofacturers *together*.
I don't want to compare numbers. Few people do, it's trivially easy to tell which of two given numbers is larger, as long as the notation isn't deliberately obscure.
I might want to compare the profits of only two companies, in which case, the sales figures of other companies irrelevant. Or, I might want to compare the money generated by in a particular OS's ecosystem, in which case, your numbers are more apt.
Oops; forgot to be clear that I meant the state of laptops when the technology was new. ^_^ Obviously now they've caught up quite a bit, but at first the screens, hard drives, and processors were all inferior to desktops of the time, and yet people used them anyway.
All of your arguments apply when comparing laptops to desktops; but people use them anyway because of the enormous convenience of being able to carry around your computer.
The question is whether the convenience of this particular device is enough to get people to buy it; probably not right now. This is exactly what I want from a device, but I wouldn't pay 2k for it.
It would be nice if the submitter actually gave a source for that quote; I couldn't find it in any of the articles. He might have been referring to the premise that an admin might not give their real name, rather than presenting fake credentials. It's impossible to tell without context.
Slashdot Mirror
There's no information here about whether Yahoo has been contacted about this (and their response if so.)
I don't know very much about programming, but I'm pretty sure that converting a single-threaded app the size of Firefox to a multi-threaded model is anything but straightforward.
You do realize the statement that X is not a solution to problem Y is not the same as saying that problem Y won't or shouldn't be solved. Right?
(And make sure to read his comments on the main post for specific responses to the issue of UI.
I'm not very clueful on such matters, but it seems like maybe the most important statement is:
You missed the point of the thread; to discuss git, not to be one.
Wait, what? I don't think LJ carries ads, at least, none that I've ever seen. (And no, I don't have adblock or the like running, nor am I a paid member.)
No, they were passed into law by jackasses who didn't know the real meaning of them. I imagine the people who actually conceived the laws had a pretty clear idea.
That's an interesting *sigh* you have there. It managed to convince me that ligitimate is not, in fact, the same as legal, since the second definition linked to is "in accordance with established rules, principles, or standards."
I'm a bit uncertain of your intention, but thanks anyway. :)
If everyone's life were public, you'd know if Piotr was an agent. You'd know who in your circle of friends ran to authorities. You'd know the personal lives of those running the country. This isn't just some pedantic point, it gets at the heart of how the systme worked; the government didn't eliminate privacy, they controlled it.
A society without any privacy at all would be unimaginably different from our own; I don't think you can claim a priori that it would be worse.
For the record, ditto for my KY license.
Hmm, I tagged it pseduo-science before I saw this post. Is the tag system smart enough to recognize that these are the same?
This is the only way I know how...
I'm sure it will ease your mind to know that the chair of the working group works for MS... :P
The article misses a pretty large point: the w3 has already decided to work on the next version of HTML. The post linked to is a recommendation that the HTML 5 spec be used as a starting point for that work.
Cheese can't answer a phone!
You do realize that many real life rockstars play GH, right? And that trained drummers are often better than guitarists at it? :)
You're right! I demand mod point subsidies for libertarian posts on slashdot!
I think that the slider being accessible in fullscreen mode happened with the most recent version of VLC; older versions didn't have that.
I don't want to compare numbers. Few people do, it's trivially easy to tell which of two given numbers is larger, as long as the notation isn't deliberately obscure.
I might want to compare the profits of only two companies, in which case, the sales figures of other companies irrelevant. Or, I might want to compare the money generated by in a particular OS's ecosystem, in which case, your numbers are more apt.
Oops; forgot to be clear that I meant the state of laptops when the technology was new. ^_^ Obviously now they've caught up quite a bit, but at first the screens, hard drives, and processors were all inferior to desktops of the time, and yet people used them anyway.
All of your arguments apply when comparing laptops to desktops; but people use them anyway because of the enormous convenience of being able to carry around your computer.
The question is whether the convenience of this particular device is enough to get people to buy it; probably not right now. This is exactly what I want from a device, but I wouldn't pay 2k for it.
It would be nice if the submitter actually gave a source for that quote; I couldn't find it in any of the articles. He might have been referring to the premise that an admin might not give their real name, rather than presenting fake credentials. It's impossible to tell without context.