Well, as a non-U.S. citizen working in D.C., I can assure you that cuts both ways.
I don't think he was addressing DC representative issue, however I am aware of it. (The media would not shut up about it during the election.) I think I am well informed enough. Apparently you are not.
I think you are reading a different parent. So, before you don a white cap and tell people off, you should click on the parent's link and verify that you are responding to right thread. To avoid looking like an ass.
Right! The billionaire should keep paying so she can get it back when she retires! That would bust the system. You are paid based on what you put in.
Obviously, you do not have any idea why the 88k cap is there.
It *protects* the system from the wealthy. SS is NOT a progressive tax. It is flat. Further, the employer pays half, not the rich. If the employer pays more then they have to hire less. There is no benefit for society or anyone to pay more.
SS provides a *minimal* amount of money for retried people who otherwise would not have responsibly saved money. If you want more money when you retire save more. 401k IRA L.I.
I realize SS is also allocated for other things besides retirement, but that is the exception.
Lets see... I will probably be considered a bigot for say this. You have several options.
1. Become a citizen. 2. Not work in the U.S. and return home. 3. Stay and pay for the infrastructure that allows you to get to work and enjoy your life style.
I take issue with your misuse of my country's founding war cry, "taxed without representation". NO ONE HAS REPRESENTATION IN ANY COUNTRY THEY ARE NOT A CITIZEN.
If it so bad here in the U.S. why stay? It must be better than anywhere else. Even with the taxes.
Well I made two posts and I appreciate your well-written, civil replies. Sorry for using the word naive.
True, looking at your original post I am not sure where memory management came into play so I will not harp on it too much. I will point out that the pager works at a low interrupt (which makes sense because disk i/o is required and if it was higher it could preempt threads that don't expect memory moved on them). If a higher interrupt is being serviced it will not have access to virtual memory. Memory simply cannot be created at this level. You are right about the guarantee - for exceptions, the stack is easiest to use. You also right about throwing a primitive in C++ -- it uses no memory.
I agree that SEH (Structured Exception Handling) has its place in the kernel. As a matter of fact, NT has always had this built into its C compiler. (I actually already made reference to this in a post below.) It even has a finally block for cleanup like you are describing (kind of like a destructor). I have found this feature indispensable. So we both agree this is a good feature.
BUT! I take issue with most other C++ features which I *love* in user mode, but would be a pain to debug in kernel mode. Interestingly I have done some from polymorphism in the kernel by building my own objects with a variant function table. I find this easier to debug while working in the kernel, but in user mode I would never dream of wasting my time doing this myself.
As far as defines... I guess I have gotten so use to them; they don't bother me. I can track down the symbol.
When it comes to C++ for me, it is not the system itself. It is the time it takes to debug it. User mode has much better tools for debug C++. Maybe that is the problem.
You can have the last word. I am done with this subject.
Oh, I would like to add one thing the system wide catch on NT is the BSOD.
Especially the use of deterministic? Exception handling is very deterministic. Sometimes it maybe a little to tricky to follow.
As a matter of fact, even the Windows kernel (and compiler) makes extensive use of structured exception handling. Not only does it have a try and catch block (they call it try & except), but a finally block which is essentially a nested out of order execution after all the handlers have been evaluated. Also the exception handler has the ability to continue execution right where the exception was raised like nothing happened.
I don't mean to be too hard, but I feel I have to bring a different prospective.
Macros in C are used for readability and easily debugged. All you have to do is grep for the #define.
The locking order in C code? THERE IS NO LOCKING ORDER. You have to explicitly mange these aspects in C and anyone can immediately determine it from looking at the code.
Your explanation of memory management within the kernel is at best naive. What if the code is called within a context that is higher (or the same) IRQ level as the VM pager? There is no heap! There is only a small amount of non-paged memory that had to allocated ahead of time and the very limited kernel stack.
And your notion of what an exception is (in both user mode and kernel mode) is beyond naive. Exceptions can happen for any number of reasons. Simply catching them and cleaning up may not be sufficient. Maintaining an understood state for the rest of the system is the proper course of action. In a network application it may require invalidating a cache to avoid data corruption, or in a kernel routine setting up an I/O request to be handled at a lower IRQ level. Do you propose having all this in the destructor?
Sure you can randomly clean up everything you can think of, return to the caller, and hope everything works, but in the kernel an unknown exception results in an inevitable reboot. And on a clustered network -- data loss.
Have you ever debugged at the kernel (protected) level?
C++ is best avoided at the kernel because of implicate nature of the language. Bugs are harder to find in C++. When an exception occurs, the whole machine must rebooted.
If you want try this for yourself, just take any amount of code you are working with and every time an exception occurs restart your computer and wait. See how much work you get done.
Also, while at the kernel mode you must be aware of the whole machine's state including IRQ level, virtual memory, entry context, what IRQs can preempt, and a slough of other details. In user mode you can rely of the state of the machine being fairly stable. However, I would agree that large multi-tiered have many network states that make user mode programming complicated. I have worked in these environments as well.
Further, you still can write object-orientated code in C if necessary. It just requires the C programmer to manually manipulate the v-table which they create themselves. I have done this. You can do it in ASM too with structs of jump tables.
Someday C++ will make it into kernel programming, but I think it would be start in a micro-kernel, which is easier to debug.
WHAT? I was wondering if anyone on./ would catch that. The cross multiplication would not work out for x^2+y^2. Had to think of something.
I know this is all in good fun, but I must defend Oregon State. (Heaven knows their football team isn't... But the other smart public school is doing well... Go #7 Cal)
While I think most software patents are crap, just because a patent is obvious doesn't make it a bad patent. Plenty of good patent seem obvious (especially now), like maybe Interchangeable Parts for a Musket Gun.
I have seen many claims that Ford patented the assembly line; I have never seen a patent number. He did patent things, but is generally is credited with the transmission which is a big patent. I think he would have patent assembly lines if he could have. Think that is what most software is doing... Getting away with patenting the assembly line.
RSA was not such an obvious method of encryption 20 years ago, but now public keys are everywhere. And I can remember a world without them. Look at it now, it seems so obvious. But it was a deserved patent.
I do not know why Software Engineering got lumped under IT in job posts.
IT was a business major at my school.
I am a Software Engineer / Computer Science with a BS from the College of Engineering at my school. With more upper division classes I could build bridges or making chemicals like my other Engineering friend do. Even Computer Science is a science discipline.
In most companies I have worked for, my development group reported to a CTO or VP of Engineering while IT groups report to CIO or VP of Biz. They are different.
I am not sure, but I think./ has an IT slant. Not many conversions about NP-complete problems, graph theory, grammars, or abstract syntax trees.
While I agree that formal QA is budgeted in large companies. Small and Mid-size companies usually skimp here
From what I can tell, FOSS QA is done though alpha and beta releases. Where hackers get their names into the comment list by testing and fixing bugs by combing through code and testing. If the tester resolves the bug, it is a great way to get some recognition when the code is checked in. And you don't even need much of a programming background to find and fix some bugs.
Oddly I would never waste my time. If I fixed a bug it would only be because it bothered me to point that I had to fix it. BTW, that is like most car mechanics I know: they drive junkers and only fix them when they are broken otherwise they get paid to work on other cars and always have too much work. On the other hand, their spouse drives some new car that gets repaired by the dealer or someone else. Or maybe it more like a gynecologist...
Slashdot Mirror
Well, as a non-U.S. citizen working in D.C., I can assure you that cuts both ways.
I don't think he was addressing DC representative issue, however I am aware of it. (The media would not shut up about it during the election.) I think I am well informed enough. Apparently you are not.
I think you are reading a different parent. So, before you don a white cap and tell people off, you should click on the parent's link and verify that you are responding to right thread. To avoid looking like an ass.
Right! The billionaire should keep paying so she can get it back when she retires! That would bust the system. You are paid based on what you put in. Obviously, you do not have any idea why the 88k cap is there. It *protects* the system from the wealthy. SS is NOT a progressive tax. It is flat. Further, the employer pays half, not the rich. If the employer pays more then they have to hire less. There is no benefit for society or anyone to pay more. SS provides a *minimal* amount of money for retried people who otherwise would not have responsibly saved money. If you want more money when you retire save more. 401k IRA L.I. I realize SS is also allocated for other things besides retirement, but that is the exception.
I love you. Are you dating anyone? ;)
This mostly what I do too. That and eat out all the time.
Lets see... I will probably be considered a bigot for say this. You have several options.
1. Become a citizen.
2. Not work in the U.S. and return home.
3. Stay and pay for the infrastructure that allows you to get to work and enjoy your life style.
I take issue with your misuse of my country's founding war cry, "taxed without representation". NO ONE HAS REPRESENTATION IN ANY COUNTRY THEY ARE NOT A CITIZEN.
If it so bad here in the U.S. why stay? It must be better than anywhere else. Even with the taxes.
I am glad you do not have security clearance.
Well I made two posts and I appreciate your well-written, civil replies. Sorry for using the word naive.
True, looking at your original post I am not sure where memory management came into play so I will not harp on it too much. I will point out that the pager works at a low interrupt (which makes sense because disk i/o is required and if it was higher it could preempt threads that don't expect memory moved on them). If a higher interrupt is being serviced it will not have access to virtual memory. Memory simply cannot be created at this level. You are right about the guarantee - for exceptions, the stack is easiest to use. You also right about throwing a primitive in C++ -- it uses no memory.
I agree that SEH (Structured Exception Handling) has its place in the kernel. As a matter of fact, NT has always had this built into its C compiler. (I actually already made reference to this in a post below.) It even has a finally block for cleanup like you are describing (kind of like a destructor). I have found this feature indispensable. So we both agree this is a good feature.
BUT! I take issue with most other C++ features which I *love* in user mode, but would be a pain to debug in kernel mode. Interestingly I have done some from polymorphism in the kernel by building my own objects with a variant function table. I find this easier to debug while working in the kernel, but in user mode I would never dream of wasting my time doing this myself.
As far as defines... I guess I have gotten so use to them; they don't bother me. I can track down the symbol.
When it comes to C++ for me, it is not the system itself. It is the time it takes to debug it. User mode has much better tools for debug C++. Maybe that is the problem.
You can have the last word. I am done with this subject.
Oh, I would like to add one thing the system wide catch on NT is the BSOD.
I totaly agree with you.
Especially the use of deterministic? Exception handling is very deterministic. Sometimes it maybe a little to tricky to follow.
As a matter of fact, even the Windows kernel (and compiler) makes extensive use of structured exception handling. Not only does it have a try and catch block (they call it try & except), but a finally block which is essentially a nested out of order execution after all the handlers have been evaluated. Also the exception handler has the ability to continue execution right where the exception was raised like nothing happened.
I don't mean to be too hard, but I feel I have to bring a different prospective.
Macros in C are used for readability and easily debugged. All you have to do is grep for the #define.
The locking order in C code? THERE IS NO LOCKING ORDER. You have to explicitly mange these aspects in C and anyone can immediately determine it from looking at the code.
Your explanation of memory management within the kernel is at best naive. What if the code is called within a context that is higher (or the same) IRQ level as the VM pager? There is no heap! There is only a small amount of non-paged memory that had to allocated ahead of time and the very limited kernel stack.
And your notion of what an exception is (in both user mode and kernel mode) is beyond naive. Exceptions can happen for any number of reasons. Simply catching them and cleaning up may not be sufficient. Maintaining an understood state for the rest of the system is the proper course of action. In a network application it may require invalidating a cache to avoid data corruption, or in a kernel routine setting up an I/O request to be handled at a lower IRQ level. Do you propose having all this in the destructor?
Sure you can randomly clean up everything you can think of, return to the caller, and hope everything works, but in the kernel an unknown exception results in an inevitable reboot. And on a clustered network -- data loss.
Have you ever debugged at the kernel (protected) level?
C++ is best avoided at the kernel because of implicate nature of the language. Bugs are harder to find in C++. When an exception occurs, the whole machine must rebooted.
If you want try this for yourself, just take any amount of code you are working with and every time an exception occurs restart your computer and wait. See how much work you get done.
Also, while at the kernel mode you must be aware of the whole machine's state including IRQ level, virtual memory, entry context, what IRQs can preempt, and a slough of other details. In user mode you can rely of the state of the machine being fairly stable. However, I would agree that large multi-tiered have many network states that make user mode programming complicated. I have worked in these environments as well.
Further, you still can write object-orientated code in C if necessary. It just requires the C programmer to manually manipulate the v-table which they create themselves. I have done this. You can do it in ASM too with structs of jump tables.
Someday C++ will make it into kernel programming, but I think it would be start in a micro-kernel, which is easier to debug.
Xtreme Programming (that's a damn stupid name, isn't it?)
YES! YES! YES!
WHAT? I was wondering if anyone on ./ would catch that. The cross multiplication would not work out for x^2+y^2. Had to think of something.
I know this is all in good fun, but I must defend Oregon State. (Heaven knows their football team isn't... But the other smart public school is doing well... Go #7 Cal)
Sorry to be a stickler ;)
Actually Evil A^2 + Evil B^2 = (Evil A - Evil B) x (Evil A + Evil B)
And if 'Evil A' is as evil as 'Evil B' (which is the case here):
Evil A^2 + Evil B^2 = Evil^4
While I think most software patents are crap, just because a patent is obvious doesn't make it a bad patent. Plenty of good patent seem obvious (especially now), like maybe Interchangeable Parts for a Musket Gun.
I have seen many claims that Ford patented the assembly line; I have never seen a patent number. He did patent things, but is generally is credited with the transmission which is a big patent. I think he would have patent assembly lines if he could have. Think that is what most software is doing... Getting away with patenting the assembly line.
RSA was not such an obvious method of encryption 20 years ago, but now public keys are everywhere. And I can remember a world without them. Look at it now, it seems so obvious. But it was a deserved patent.
I do not know why Software Engineering got lumped under IT in job posts.
./ has an IT slant. Not many conversions about NP-complete problems, graph theory, grammars, or abstract syntax trees.
IT was a business major at my school.
I am a Software Engineer / Computer Science with a BS from the College of Engineering at my school. With more upper division classes I could build bridges or making chemicals like my other Engineering friend do. Even Computer Science is a science discipline.
In most companies I have worked for, my development group reported to a CTO or VP of Engineering while IT groups report to CIO or VP of Biz. They are different.
I am not sure, but I think
Because it is memory...
External memory technically. Common conception that it is not. I just part of the memory hierarchy. Granted low on the pyramid, but faster than tape.
This not flamebait. It is insightful.
why not develop a standard
Great idea. Make this ability standard for other means of embedding data and other operations via USB.
Also, I agree. I think we would be outraged if the gov't was developing this.
Why is this flamebait? MODUP
While I agree that formal QA is budgeted in large companies. Small and Mid-size companies usually skimp here
From what I can tell, FOSS QA is done though alpha and beta releases. Where hackers get their names into the comment list by testing and fixing bugs by combing through code and testing. If the tester resolves the bug, it is a great way to get some recognition when the code is checked in. And you don't even need much of a programming background to find and fix some bugs.
Oddly I would never waste my time. If I fixed a bug it would only be because it bothered me to point that I had to fix it. BTW, that is like most car mechanics I know: they drive junkers and only fix them when they are broken otherwise they get paid to work on other cars and always have too much work. On the other hand, their spouse drives some new car that gets repaired by the dealer or someone else. Or maybe it more like a gynecologist...