I am not necessarily a fan of checked exceptions either, but the mess that exists now is much worse.
In an ideal world people would know what sorts of exceptions are likely to arise from what they call. Checked exceptions make the developer quite clear of what happens at compile time, but they can be a pain for trivial exceptions.
The problem that exists now in my experience is that junior people are using functions without regard for what type of exceptions they may throw, and nothing shows up till run time. I've seen so many "unchecked exception in..." error messages it is disgusting, and every single one could of been caught by the compiler with checked exceptions.
I think the best probably lies somewhere in between the Java - check everything and the.NET - check nothing until the program crashes philosophies. But.NET does not have the functionality to force checking. It is not a "feature" as they claim (Yes I read their little paper on why they aren't there and no I don't think it holds water). In Java, when creating new code they are optional, unfortunately they are over used in many libraries, but atleast the option is there if I want to use it.
Sorry for whatever I said, but the "treat developers poorly" anti-suggestion got me really riled up. If you ever were to develop in shell and vi (which is quite obvious you haven't) and you were forced to move to VS, you would be extraordinariy pissed at what you just said. Sometimes you just want to do your own thing, and not have 1000 lines of code generated for you.
I will just leave it at this: If you had your own thing and then had VS forced upon you, you would not be happy. Sorry, obviously I must be crazy and posting on Digg.
OMG (MSN speak rocks!!! DYKWTFYAD?) you need to get out (of that world). If you try half the stuff that is out there (eclipse, netbeans, vi, xcode, etc. +++) and you still think VS is awesome, you should move yourself to Redmond and do us all a favour. (sorry, but it's true)
Do you not like to see what you are actually doing??
Like OMG I missed a key, intellisense to the rescue with more fill ins that I don't want. Like my "i" counter should be some class from the depths of hell like "iHateTheseWidgetsJustGiveMeAGodDamn"Please the lameness filter"VariableTypeWindowsBoxNamespaceGoFindItYourSelfInDLLHell" Ha, sorry got kinda carried away but the point is still the same.
Analogous to GCC except it only runs on windows... If you can call that analogous. Yes I would love a compiler that is stuck to one platform and comes with no documentation. Us geeks aren't anti microsoft (.NOT) just for the kicks...:)
Sorry for replying but one thing I forgot to mention is that they also have a weekly program to discuss the Google zeitgeist. How cool is that? Anyway all in all, they have much smart discussion for smart people (even if your not good at grammar:) ), and that is very hard to find.
I am Canadian, and I am a regular listener/watcher of the CBC (the radio is much better than the television) and I agree that the article is pretty off base. However I just want to point out that for the most part CBC's news is usually very good and fiairly unbiased on most issues, although their slant is detectable in certain instances. (but who's isn't?).
CBC radio has some great programs http://www.cbc.ca/radio/. Especially Quirks and Quarks (A weekly science show, probably better than any other radio program for it's type (that i have heard anyway)). Also check out Brave New Waves and Radio 3 for some great underground music.
You "free market" capitalists can laugh at our "socialist" economy all you want, but it does produce some good:)
Venturing off-topic here, but I can only imagine how many Einstein's and Newtons that have been killed by such a BS education system and societal upbringing. If find it very likely that the next Eianstein is collecting my trash and I just can't stand it anymore damn it.
So Darwin was right, but his whole theory is breaking down with time. Survival of the fittest my ass. Survival of the economic producers and consumers, nuts to everyone else. Only stupid people are breeding. I'd really like to think that there must be something better than we have. Just think if Einstein grew up now, would anybody listen to him at all?
Yes, I can see where you are coming from on this, and yes his conclusions are almost always resultant against US foreign policy. But can you say that the US (or any other country for that matter) mass media does not wear the same blinders of a different sort? His view are no more or less distorted than that of the average popular opinion piece. Yet, somehow his view never gets any airplay. Why is that? Anyone can bitch about the state of things but Noam actually proposes some ideas to change it, which is much more than I could say for any politician that I have ever heard. Quite frankly, whether you agree with him or not, atleast he has some ideas. Unfortunatley it seems that ideas seem to get you trouble now.
In fact, in regards to your criticism, I would like for you to present any politician who has not used selective evidence or presupposes his conclusions because I would like to vote for him/her. I really can't think of anyone in the modern era who fits that mould.
He doesn't necessarilly place blame on the US he just states the obvious that no one, it seems, can accept. The US is after total world domination and nothing else will do.
First off, I will agree that 'He did way more than "put his own spin on things".' however, I do believe that you are missing the point of his work.
It seems that yout are already aware of what the Bush administration has done wrong already. But Moore's work is intended to speak to the relatively 'unenlightened', who have been fed way more than just spin for their whole lives.
If you consider Moore's film as just a criticism of the Bush administration, it is fairly mediocre and filled with half truths, granted. Although, there were certainly enough jokes in the movie to warn the educated viewer not to take it too seriously.
Yet, if you consider the film as a criticism of the american media's coverage of the whole situation it is a satirical masterpiece. It makes a total mockery of their blind following behind bush. Essentially, it asks the viewer "Where's the balance?". Here's the rub, becuase his use of sensationalist tactics(american mass media's trademark) to take an entirely different look at the situation was just brilliant. Didn't you find some parts of the film were like your local newscast, but from bizaro world? Moore is essentially laughing at the media singing "Anything you can do, I can do better...". The satirical angle is somewhat understated however, and it easy to see how many would fall into the trap of taking it too seriously. Reading Moore's book: "Dude Where's My Country?" really gives a better understanding of where he's coming from. (Double Whooper with Cheese!)
It is certainly possible that some got washed from this movie. But no more or less than what they have been already. (And providing a different point of view to boot!). But the main premise is to question, and if the movie got even one "unenlightened" person to question the media they consume everyday, it was an outright success.
"A large cloud appeared over North Korea in satellite images several days ago, but a U.S. official told CNN it is "no big deal" and not the result of a nuclear explosion."
And therefore it must be true.
from your sig:
Open Your Mind. Open Your Source.
Rather ironic that you advocate openess yet believe this closed source blurb at face value.
After going over that website( I had heard about it before but never looked into it.) I'd have to agree that it is definitely more readable, which lends itself much better to editing config files in a text editor.
Is there any specific standard format for config files in YAML then?
These are some really good ideas, and in my opinion are things that really need to be addressed as linux moves forward.
A unified method for installing packages like you mentioned would be absolutely great. It would be so much more convienient for programmers and users alike. It does however seem like a huge task considering how patriotic people can be towards their distro of choice.
Your idea about XML configuration files, if implemented, would be an absolute godsend for writing GUI configuration apps. In turn making staying away from the command line a possibility for all users under all distros. Even though coming up with a format and developing the libraries may not be a tremendous amount of work, convincing all the programmers to switch over to this configuration file type would probably prove to be.
If you download all the individual patches it will take longer because some of the later patches replace some of the files from the earlier patches. It's better to have them all rolled into a single service pack.
Besides the fact that the service pack contains updates which I may not even have a use for, I understand what your saying here. However, it is a lot easier for me to download several small chunks over a long period of time than a 260+MB file at once. I dont have much of an aversion to downloading that much data at 28.8 (as painful and time consuming as that is), but it is a little risky to anything breakable in my immediate area if that file gets corrupted at 95%.
Obviously service packs have some use, but it would be convienient if the individual pieces were available also. For the download and also for choosing what pieces to install. (not every thing in that service pack is a security update, or a fix of a previous security update, and I highly doubt I want all that MS bloa^H^H^H^Hfunctionality anyway.)
Totally agree, what's wrong with having all the individual pieces of this as seperate updates?
Being on dialup (that connects at 28.8k at best)it is a total bitch to download. Sure there is a free CD available, but when the hell is that going to show up?
Is microsoft trying to tell me that each individual component of this was just ready now? When maintaining a piece of software does it not make sense to work in small increments so you know what piece causes errors?
See it's kind of like marbles, throw one in the air and it's relatively easy to catch if the wind or something else throws it off track. Throw up a hundred and see what happens. Sound's like a good time to cook some popcorn.
Slashdot Mirror
Got it. Thanks to all.
Would love an invite please. Although it seems like I just might be going for the lesser of two evils here.
slashdot user name at gmail dot com.
Thanks in advance.
I am not necessarily a fan of checked exceptions either, but the mess that exists now is much worse. In an ideal world people would know what sorts of exceptions are likely to arise from what they call. Checked exceptions make the developer quite clear of what happens at compile time, but they can be a pain for trivial exceptions.
.NET - check nothing until the program crashes philosophies. But .NET does not have the functionality to force checking. It is not a "feature" as they claim (Yes I read their little paper on why they aren't there and no I don't think it holds water). In Java, when creating new code they are optional, unfortunately they are over used in many libraries, but atleast the option is there if I want to use it.
The problem that exists now in my experience is that junior people are using functions without regard for what type of exceptions they may throw, and nothing shows up till run time. I've seen so many "unchecked exception in..." error messages it is disgusting, and every single one could of been caught by the compiler with checked exceptions.
I think the best probably lies somewhere in between the Java - check everything and the
Yes, the problem is that Vista was planned 7 years ago and was never updated to match reality.
Sorry for whatever I said, but the "treat developers poorly" anti-suggestion got me really riled up. If you ever were to develop in shell and vi (which is quite obvious you haven't) and you were forced to move to VS, you would be extraordinariy pissed at what you just said. Sometimes you just want to do your own thing, and not have 1000 lines of code generated for you.
I will just leave it at this: If you had your own thing and then had VS forced upon you, you would not be happy. Sorry, obviously I must be crazy and posting on Digg.
OMG (MSN speak rocks!!! DYKWTFYAD?) you need to get out (of that world). If you try half the stuff that is out there (eclipse, netbeans, vi, xcode, etc. +++) and you still think VS is awesome, you should move yourself to Redmond and do us all a favour. (sorry, but it's true) Do you not like to see what you are actually doing?? Like OMG I missed a key, intellisense to the rescue with more fill ins that I don't want. Like my "i" counter should be some class from the depths of hell like "iHateTheseWidgetsJustGiveMeAGodDamn"Please the lameness filter"VariableTypeWindowsBoxNamespaceGoFindItYourSelfInDLLHell" Ha, sorry got kinda carried away but the point is still the same.
Analogous to GCC except it only runs on windows... If you can call that analogous. Yes I would love a compiler that is stuck to one platform and comes with no documentation. Us geeks aren't anti microsoft (.NOT) just for the kicks... :)
Yes this is what we call "advertisement" in the new millennium. Sad but True.
Unfortunately they aren't really targetting the car racer market until they have a real force feedback wheel. (Allthough I do enjoy Forza)
Sorry for replying but one thing I forgot to mention is that they also have a weekly program to discuss the Google zeitgeist. How cool is that? Anyway all in all, they have much smart discussion for smart people (even if your not good at grammar :) ), and that is very hard to find.
I am Canadian, and I am a regular listener/watcher of the CBC (the radio is much better than the television) and I agree that the article is pretty off base. However I just want to point out that for the most part CBC's news is usually very good and fiairly unbiased on most issues, although their slant is detectable in certain instances. (but who's isn't?).
:)
CBC radio has some great programs http://www.cbc.ca/radio/. Especially Quirks and Quarks (A weekly science show, probably better than any other radio program for it's type (that i have heard anyway)). Also check out Brave New Waves and Radio 3 for some great underground music.
You "free market" capitalists can laugh at our "socialist" economy all you want, but it does produce some good
Venturing off-topic here, but I can only imagine how many Einstein's and Newtons that have been killed by such a BS education system and societal upbringing. If find it very likely that the next Eianstein is collecting my trash and I just can't stand it anymore damn it.
So Darwin was right, but his whole theory is breaking down with time. Survival of the fittest my ass. Survival of the economic producers and consumers, nuts to everyone else. Only stupid people are breeding. I'd really like to think that there must be something better than we have. Just think if Einstein grew up now, would anybody listen to him at all?
Yes, I can see where you are coming from on this, and yes his conclusions are almost always resultant against US foreign policy. But can you say that the US (or any other country for that matter) mass media does not wear the same blinders of a different sort? His view are no more or less distorted than that of the average popular opinion piece. Yet, somehow his view never gets any airplay. Why is that? Anyone can bitch about the state of things but Noam actually proposes some ideas to change it, which is much more than I could say for any politician that I have ever heard. Quite frankly, whether you agree with him or not, atleast he has some ideas. Unfortunatley it seems that ideas seem to get you trouble now.
In fact, in regards to your criticism, I would like for you to present any politician who has not used selective evidence or presupposes his conclusions because I would like to vote for him/her. I really can't think of anyone in the modern era who fits that mould.
He doesn't necessarilly place blame on the US he just states the obvious that no one, it seems, can accept. The US is after total world domination and nothing else will do.
First off, I will agree that 'He did way more than "put his own spin on things".' however, I do believe that you are missing the point of his work.
It seems that yout are already aware of what the Bush administration has done wrong already. But Moore's work is intended to speak to the relatively 'unenlightened', who have been fed way more than just spin for their whole lives.
If you consider Moore's film as just a criticism of the Bush administration, it is fairly mediocre and filled with half truths, granted. Although, there were certainly enough jokes in the movie to warn the educated viewer not to take it too seriously.
Yet, if you consider the film as a criticism of the american media's coverage of the whole situation it is a satirical masterpiece. It makes a total mockery of their blind following behind bush. Essentially, it asks the viewer "Where's the balance?". Here's the rub, becuase his use of sensationalist tactics(american mass media's trademark) to take an entirely different look at the situation was just brilliant. Didn't you find some parts of the film were like your local newscast, but from bizaro world? Moore is essentially laughing at the media singing "Anything you can do, I can do better...". The satirical angle is somewhat understated however, and it easy to see how many would fall into the trap of taking it too seriously. Reading Moore's book: "Dude Where's My Country?" really gives a better understanding of where he's coming from. (Double Whooper with Cheese!)
It is certainly possible that some got washed from this movie. But no more or less than what they have been already. (And providing a different point of view to boot!). But the main premise is to question, and if the movie got even one "unenlightened" person to question the media they consume everyday, it was an outright success.
2) From Cnn,
"A large cloud appeared over North Korea in satellite images several days ago, but a U.S. official told CNN it is "no big deal" and not the result of a nuclear explosion."
And therefore it must be true.
from your sig: Open Your Mind. Open Your Source.
Rather ironic that you advocate openess yet believe this closed source blurb at face value.
After going over that website( I had heard about it before but never looked into it.) I'd have to agree that it is definitely more readable, which lends itself much better to editing config files in a text editor. Is there any specific standard format for config files in YAML then?
These are some really good ideas, and in my opinion are things that really need to be addressed as linux moves forward.
A unified method for installing packages like you mentioned would be absolutely great. It would be so much more convienient for programmers and users alike. It does however seem like a huge task considering how patriotic people can be towards their distro of choice.
Your idea about XML configuration files, if implemented, would be an absolute godsend for writing GUI configuration apps. In turn making staying away from the command line a possibility for all users under all distros. Even though coming up with a format and developing the libraries may not be a tremendous amount of work, convincing all the programmers to switch over to this configuration file type would probably prove to be.
If you download all the individual patches it will take longer because some of the later patches replace some of the files from the earlier patches. It's better to have them all rolled into a single service pack.
Besides the fact that the service pack contains updates which I may not even have a use for, I understand what your saying here. However, it is a lot easier for me to download several small chunks over a long period of time than a 260+MB file at once. I dont have much of an aversion to downloading that much data at 28.8 (as painful and time consuming as that is), but it is a little risky to anything breakable in my immediate area if that file gets corrupted at 95%.
Obviously service packs have some use, but it would be convienient if the individual pieces were available also. For the download and also for choosing what pieces to install. (not every thing in that service pack is a security update, or a fix of a previous security update, and I highly doubt I want all that MS bloa^H^H^H^Hfunctionality anyway.)
Since when did corporate interests/organisations have any say in school curriculum? Does nobody see anything wrong with this??
Oh brave new world.
Totally agree, what's wrong with having all the individual pieces of this as seperate updates?
Being on dialup (that connects at 28.8k at best)it is a total bitch to download. Sure there is a free CD available, but when the hell is that going to show up?
Is microsoft trying to tell me that each individual component of this was just ready now? When maintaining a piece of software does it not make sense to work in small increments so you know what piece causes errors?
See it's kind of like marbles, throw one in the air and it's relatively easy to catch if the wind or something else throws it off track. Throw up a hundred and see what happens. Sound's like a good time to cook some popcorn.
http://booble.com/ is still in operation.