OK, so I appreciate that RedHat was very responsive, but perhaps "reactive" is the correct word. What ever happened to proactive QA work? This problem indicates to me that noone thought to run 7.0 in beta for more than 3 weeks with the absolute standard installation setup. That sounds like a standard QA task to me...
Right, my mistake. Someone else noted Bleem functions in a slightly different manner. However, that is actually irrelevant to the actual implications of the loss to Sony.
> should us plebs look towards more honourable
> projects, such as trying to help research into
> the global warming, that all these boxes dug
> out retirement are going to contribute to?
Hmm, let me solve this one for you. Everyone starts to drag their boxes out of retirement just to run tasks to solve something worthy like global warming. Given all the extra load that will put on power stations, thus exacerbating the global warming problem, the solution would be to turn all those old boxes off and clock down all those idle cycles on ever-on machines. That would definitely help (a bit) in preventing global warming.
>Ever programmed with a dual-head display? >Code editor/IDE up on one, references on the >other, execution on one, debugger on the >other... I miss those projects....
What's wrong with multiple virtual screens? Does anybody really run without that nowadays? I don't even run Windows without a virtual window manager. Sure I'd never say no if the boss were to offer me the Roentgen monitor, but I can make do with my 21" trinitron and virtual screens for quite a while. $10K is quite a hefty price, and I manage to make the space for a CRT still.
No really--the hood is almost literally welded shut on every Mac.
I disagree, have you seen the latest G4s? Talk about beauty in design. To open, you have to simply lift up one latch and the whole side opens up to you. I'd kill to have such elegantly designed cases in the PoS PC tower cases that I routinely want to get in to.
As for older Macs - I never met a Mac I couldn't hack, inside and out. Although it wasn't easy to add memory to that first Fat-Mac. Anyway, the important point is that I believe the author is referring to the "new" Apple, which has an Open Source core in OS X, and seems to be getting more developer friendly in that area. Though I still think it's safe to say that the developer to technically-unsavvy user ratio on Macs is completely different than that for Linux (or even Windows).
Both Python and Tcl's license are less restrictive than GPL (GPL having the viral effect of forcing derivatives to be GPL). Python is just basically an open license, and Tcl has the BSD license (do with it what you will). The only req from either is to maintain the copyright signatures.
Tk is by no means tied to Tcl, which is why you see bindings for it in Python, Perl, Scheme, Guile, and a couple others. On the flip side, Tcl is easy to integrate with C or Java, which is why people have placed it in apps that use Motif, Gtk, MFC, etc...
Also, Tk is cross-platform and requires no recompiling, which none of the other mentioned toolkits can claim. There is an elegance and simplicity there that is just not matched.
And for this "ugly like hell" language the author (John Ousterhout) receives the ACM Software System Award? Of course, we can expect a level of noise in such unmoderated discussions, but at least justifying your comments would be appropriate. Perhaps it is because you cannot?
I find Tcl to have a nice level of elegance for a scripting language. It does have an element of quoting hell, but once past this (relatively minor) curve point, it is quite easy and standard across the language. This extends to Tk, with which one can write very nice setups in almost zero investment time.
Slashdot Mirror
OK, so I appreciate that RedHat was very responsive, but perhaps "reactive" is the correct word. What ever happened to proactive QA work? This problem indicates to me that noone thought to run 7.0 in beta for more than 3 weeks with the absolute standard installation setup. That sounds like a standard QA task to me...
Right, my mistake. Someone else noted Bleem functions in a slightly different manner. However, that is actually irrelevant to the actual implications of the loss to Sony.
> should us plebs look towards more honourable
> projects, such as trying to help research into
> the global warming, that all these boxes dug
> out retirement are going to contribute to?
Hmm, let me solve this one for you. Everyone starts to drag their boxes out of retirement just to run tasks to solve something worthy like global warming. Given all the extra load that will put on power stations, thus exacerbating the global warming problem, the solution would be to turn all those old boxes off and clock down all those idle cycles on ever-on machines. That would definitely help (a bit) in preventing global warming.
>Ever programmed with a dual-head display?
>Code editor/IDE up on one, references on the
>other, execution on one, debugger on the
>other... I miss those projects....
What's wrong with multiple virtual screens? Does anybody really run without that nowadays? I don't even run Windows without a virtual window manager. Sure I'd never say no if the boss were to offer me the Roentgen monitor, but I can make do with my 21" trinitron and virtual screens for quite a while. $10K is quite a hefty price, and I manage to make the space for a CRT still.
I disagree, have you seen the latest G4s? Talk about beauty in design. To open, you have to simply lift up one latch and the whole side opens up to you. I'd kill to have such elegantly designed cases in the PoS PC tower cases that I routinely want to get in to.
As for older Macs - I never met a Mac I couldn't hack, inside and out. Although it wasn't easy to add memory to that first Fat-Mac. Anyway, the important point is that I believe the author is referring to the "new" Apple, which has an Open Source core in OS X, and seems to be getting more developer friendly in that area. Though I still think it's safe to say that the developer to technically-unsavvy user ratio on Macs is completely different than that for Linux (or even Windows).
Both Python and Tcl's license are less
restrictive than GPL (GPL having the viral
effect of forcing derivatives to be GPL).
Python is just basically an open license, and
Tcl has the BSD license (do with it what you
will). The only req from either is to maintain
the copyright signatures.
Tk is by no means tied to Tcl, which is why you see bindings for it in Python, Perl, Scheme, Guile, and a couple others. On the flip side, Tcl is easy to integrate with C or Java, which is why people have placed it in apps that use Motif, Gtk, MFC, etc...
Also, Tk is cross-platform and requires no recompiling, which none of the other mentioned toolkits can claim. There is an elegance and simplicity there that is just not matched.
And for this "ugly like hell" language the
author (John Ousterhout) receives the ACM
Software System Award? Of course, we can
expect a level of noise in such unmoderated
discussions, but at least justifying your
comments would be appropriate. Perhaps it
is because you cannot?
I find Tcl to have a nice level of elegance
for a scripting language. It does have an
element of quoting hell, but once past this
(relatively minor) curve point, it is quite
easy and standard across the language. This
extends to Tk, with which one can write very
nice setups in almost zero investment time.