Microsoft is copying, and in a really broad sense, Windows sucks.
See, thing is, I have a PC. I do have other options, but your OS isn't one of them. And no I don't have over a thousand extra just lying around to spend on your option.
> Most of the gotchas are non-existant when you run MySQL with a brain larger than that of a legume in your head as well.
This is the same tired old argument old-style MacOS zealots always pulled when called on the lack of memory protection: "properly written apps don't crash".
The whole fucking PURPOSE of integrity constraints is to protect your data from stupid mistakes. Databases are designed with improperly written apps in mind. That's why the database manages the data, and the apps don't.
Yes, if a schema is designed by morons, then you don't have much recourse. If a database ENGINE is designed by morons, then everyone downstream is screwed.
> Okay, mshaft (lower-casing/deprecation of mshaft's name intentional/perpetual with me...
Oh gosh you're so clever. No one's ever thought of mangling Microsoft's name before. Your argument just glows with erudition from this clever twist alone.
Dude, MySQL doesn't support foreign keys. At all. Though it's good at ignoring them. It doesn't even have VIEWS, mmkay?
There's reasons for the hate, and a lot of it has to do with MySQL AB flogging their mediocre system as the sine qua non of OSS databases, to the point of openly disparaging things like transactions at the time when MySQL didn't support those.
And you thought using a hex editor was acceptable. Wow.
> If you want to help, then help with code not commentary
Fact is, this is slashdot. It's the nee plus ultra of peanut galleries. Note well that Linus doesn't read or post to slashdot -- he's been busy working on git, which is not a great SCM itself, but it's turning out to be pretty hot as a library. Arch is adopting git as a backend, and darcs is talking about using libgit (once there is a libgit) for a performance boost.
Marriage IS PRECIOUS and I will defend it with the same vigor you are expressing. You would see marriage trampled for the sake of the convenience of those that want to live counter to accepted culture.
Trampled, eh? After reading that, I can confirm for myself and for you that I don't have a problem hearing you at all.
> Two men cannot get married (nor two women) because a marriage is between a man and a woman.
San Francisco said otherwise. Uh oh, cognitive dissonance time. It's like that robot from star trek. "ILLOGICAL! ILLOGICAL! DOES NOT COMPUTE!"
I wasn't going to get nearly this snarky until I saw that I was arguing against the same old soft-pedalled bigotry. Well I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to stand for hemming and hawing while injustice takes place. People are losing their homes because the inheritance goes to parents. People are losing their health because their partner can't insure them. And on and on, because people like YOU will gladly crush others so you can enjoy your precious definitions.
Well, since you're fine and dandy with legal equality, I trust you won't mind while others go out and seek legal remedy to their inequality problem by pursuing marriage rights, while you and the rest of the faithful go work on a new dictionary entry that that they can refer to later on.
Or do you really value syntax over equality and rights?
Now...if gays want to be civilly-united so they can have all the legal, state-created rights afforded to those that are married then I say go for it. I have no problem with that because that is just a legal concept.
I trust I can expect your signature expressing support for a federal constitutional amendment that gives exactly the same rights and protections to civil unions as to married couples then, and that you'll work to overturn the various laws that have actually pre-empted the possibility of even civil unions?
Nope, didn't think so. Deep down, you just say "civil unions are fine" and don't want actual equality to exist. Separate But Equal, and it's all true because you say it's equal.
> Have you never used commercial software? Most commercial applications have the same kind of restrictions
Show me just one. Even Oracle doesn't disallow you from using Oracle if one of your employees also uses Oracle and happens to work on database code that's compatible.
Know what? Call Tridge a bastard all you want, it =doesn't matter. If you want to say he blew everything up, go ahead. At least he did send the whole rickety edifice tumbling down. Unbelievable, that all Linux's code management depended on the good graces of one mercurial control freak... even Linus doesn't have that power.
Re:Why isn't this already out?
on
Next Generation X11
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Well actually, yes it does. You still have to marshal pixmaps (a wretched and primitive yet still bloated format) into a shared memory segment just so the server can pull them out of there and transfer them to the graphics driver. And X's implementation of network transparency doesn't give clients any way to tell the server to aggregate events or even tell it to "shut the hell up already" with all the mouseover events over regions where they're not listening to the events.
Network transparency is a good thing. X's implementation of it stinks.
I for one want someone who is capable of using all the power Dreamweaver has to offer, to prototype sites rapidly, then maintain reusable templates that be inserted with perl or php, and understand and document how the templates interact in such scripted environments. The guy who couldn't hand-edit the HTML couldn't even use DW effectively; claiming that he could was like saying someone who can only drag and drop GUI elements knows Visual C++.
You're not even comparing cars, you're comparing the car with a tiptronic transmission, disablable traction control, and power-everything with manual overrides, with... a two-speed bicycle.
Your knowledge of HTML does not impress me. Any trained monkey can learn HTML. Skilled people churn out good HTML fast, and know more than one tool to do so.
Before anyone pipes up (seems unlikely, I must be one of the few that uses "show all articles"), yes the Artistic license allows this as long as it's compatible with the original version. Larry invented the AL (and popularized dual-licensing for free software projects) but these days he acknowledges that it's pretty vague and probably not any more enforceable than a BSD copyright. It's hard to say what would constitute a compatability test suite for perl though -- not even every platform can pass every test of builtins, let alone everything in CORE.
The redistribution notice is likely boilerplate stuff anyway.
Perhaps they could... but they'd be handing the microphone to Linus at that point, who would almost certainly savage Microsoft for twisting his words and get a few digs in, probably get ten times the attention on his words than MS, even with all their press channels.
Not wise to use your enemy as a spokesman, even when he says something you agree with.
> It was about as inevitable as Microsoft dropping SMB because samba was created, and blaiming samba.
In all fairness, how many CIFS vendors are there for unix now? Sun has Cascade, and that seems to be about it. Actually I rather wish Samba were ported to Windows as well -- there's features in it that are useful on any platform.
> There is no risk that [insert best hated DB vendor] holds you hostage with your data.
You DO have SQL dumps of your schema and SPs, right? You DO have documentation of the low-level format, right? It's unlikely that you could ever have your data held hostage by Oracle, Sybase, or IBM, since they provide tons of documentation on the specific on-disk formats. Microsoft I don't know about -- probably in MSDN Universal somewhere though.
Now an ASP (Application Service Provider) is a different matter entirely. They have your data, you don't. I get conflicting stories on whether BitMovers acts like an ASP for free projects. I was under the impression that they just monitored repositories under their free license, wanting to be something like a sourceforge (which was before SF got really big), but I'm not entirely certain.
> McVoy and wasn't even trying to produce anything functional to replace BK. "He just wanted to see what the protocols and data was, without actually producing any replacement for the (inevitable) problems he caused and knew about."
Yet McVoy pulled the license anyway, seeing this tinkering as a threat.
> Everybody seems to forget that McVoy contributed more than $500 000 worth of software to the osdl
Did this obligate OSDL to fire Tridge then?
None of this brouhaha is likely to hurt BK in the long run (yes this is a reversal of what I've said earlier): they're solid on Windows, and that's where they're likely to stay. For good.
> The initial set is a fully-functional game, with a winning condition and everything
Suber's initial rules are completely unsuited for any online play, because they are serial. If someone quits and doesn't tell anyone, the game hangs forever. Or just doesn't log in for a week. Nothing gets people bored like one "round" in the initial game taking a month. Suber's ruleset also refers to "the player to the left" at least once...
Rule 101 doesn't say you have to obey the rules -- that's inherent in the definition of "rule", and you simply can't make that a rule without infinite regress. Its purpose is that it's a highest-precedence rule that says you must obey all the rules in effect, thus pre-empting a whole class of rules that repeal provisions of other rules without specifically amending or editing those rules themselves. Of course some games do have strange and amusing definitions of "in effect" (Calvinball anyone?)
Is not more difficult than a current WIMP "point-and-click" interface is for novice users. Actually it's easier - more consistent, more simple, you don't have to think what you want to do in advance.
So let me get this straight: it requires special hardware to navigate properly and fails to follow conventions that have been around since electric typewriters themselves, and you're telling me that I am the one that doesn't get it?
Your arrogance makes me sad, because it will condemn this whole project to irrelevance, sinking whatever good it did have to offer along with it.
Ever play bar games like quarters where when you get a quarter in the shotglass (or five into the tumbler) you get to make a new rule? And eventually the rules start referencing other rules, and then the game itself becomes more of a complicated meta-game where the rules themselves are the game?
That's nomic. Except it does away with the shotglass, everyone just makes a rule every turn. It's a parliamentary game about rule-making, where the one who can game the system to their advantage is the winner. Still, it's usually a lot more fun as a drinking game, so in-person games often get rules passed to that effect. Order decays quickly a few rounds after that.
Slashdot Mirror
> They got caught with their pants down AGAIN in 1997 with the widespread acceptance of Java
Name one million+ hit site a day (other than Javasoft) that uses applets. For server stuff, the JVM ran just fine on windows from day 1.
Microsoft has never been a leader, but they pave the trail others blaze. The early bird gets the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.
Microsoft is copying, and in a really broad sense, Windows sucks.
See, thing is, I have a PC. I do have other options, but your OS isn't one of them. And no I don't have over a thousand extra just lying around to spend on your option.
So go away. You're annoying me.
> Most of the gotchas are non-existant when you run MySQL with a brain larger than that of a legume in your head as well.
This is the same tired old argument old-style MacOS zealots always pulled when called on the lack of memory protection: "properly written apps don't crash".
The whole fucking PURPOSE of integrity constraints is to protect your data from stupid mistakes. Databases are designed with improperly written apps in mind. That's why the database manages the data, and the apps don't.
Yes, if a schema is designed by morons, then you don't have much recourse. If a database ENGINE is designed by morons, then everyone downstream is screwed.
> Okay, mshaft (lower-casing/deprecation of mshaft's name intentional/perpetual with me...
Oh gosh you're so clever. No one's ever thought of mangling Microsoft's name before. Your argument just glows with erudition from this clever twist alone.
Dude, MySQL doesn't support foreign keys. At all. Though it's good at ignoring them. It doesn't even have VIEWS, mmkay?
There's reasons for the hate, and a lot of it has to do with MySQL AB flogging their mediocre system as the sine qua non of OSS databases, to the point of openly disparaging things like transactions at the time when MySQL didn't support those.
And you thought using a hex editor was acceptable. Wow.
> If you want to help, then help with code not commentary
Fact is, this is slashdot. It's the nee plus ultra of peanut galleries. Note well that Linus doesn't read or post to slashdot -- he's been busy working on git, which is not a great SCM itself, but it's turning out to be pretty hot as a library. Arch is adopting git as a backend, and darcs is talking about using libgit (once there is a libgit) for a performance boost.
Marriage IS PRECIOUS and I will defend it with the same vigor you are expressing. You would see marriage trampled for the sake of the convenience of those that want to live counter to accepted culture.
Trampled, eh? After reading that, I can confirm for myself and for you that I don't have a problem hearing you at all.
> Two men cannot get married (nor two women) because a marriage is between a man and a woman.
San Francisco said otherwise. Uh oh, cognitive dissonance time. It's like that robot from star trek. "ILLOGICAL! ILLOGICAL! DOES NOT COMPUTE!"
I wasn't going to get nearly this snarky until I saw that I was arguing against the same old soft-pedalled bigotry. Well I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to stand for hemming and hawing while injustice takes place. People are losing their homes because the inheritance goes to parents. People are losing their health because their partner can't insure them. And on and on, because people like YOU will gladly crush others so you can enjoy your precious definitions.
Well, since you're fine and dandy with legal equality, I trust you won't mind while others go out and seek legal remedy to their inequality problem by pursuing marriage rights, while you and the rest of the faithful go work on a new dictionary entry that that they can refer to later on.
Or do you really value syntax over equality and rights?
Now...if gays want to be civilly-united so they can have all the legal, state-created rights afforded to those that are married then I say go for it. I have no problem with that because that is just a legal concept.
I trust I can expect your signature expressing support for a federal constitutional amendment that gives exactly the same rights and protections to civil unions as to married couples then, and that you'll work to overturn the various laws that have actually pre-empted the possibility of even civil unions?
Nope, didn't think so. Deep down, you just say "civil unions are fine" and don't want actual equality to exist. Separate But Equal, and it's all true because you say it's equal.
> Have you never used commercial software? Most commercial applications have the same kind of restrictions
... even Linus doesn't have that power.
Show me just one. Even Oracle doesn't disallow you from using Oracle if one of your employees also uses Oracle and happens to work on database code that's compatible.
Know what? Call Tridge a bastard all you want, it =doesn't matter. If you want to say he blew everything up, go ahead. At least he did send the whole rickety edifice tumbling down. Unbelievable, that all Linux's code management depended on the good graces of one mercurial control freak
> Network transparency doesn't involve significant overhead, dammit!
Well actually, yes it does. You still have to marshal pixmaps (a wretched and primitive yet still bloated format) into a shared memory segment just so the server can pull them out of there and transfer them to the graphics driver. And X's implementation of network transparency doesn't give clients any way to tell the server to aggregate events or even tell it to "shut the hell up already" with all the mouseover events over regions where they're not listening to the events.
Network transparency is a good thing. X's implementation of it stinks.
Gee wiz, you're so bloody l33t with your vi.
... a two-speed bicycle.
I for one want someone who is capable of using all the power Dreamweaver has to offer, to prototype sites rapidly, then maintain reusable templates that be inserted with perl or php, and understand and document how the templates interact in such scripted environments. The guy who couldn't hand-edit the HTML couldn't even use DW effectively; claiming that he could was like saying someone who can only drag and drop GUI elements knows Visual C++.
You're not even comparing cars, you're comparing the car with a tiptronic transmission, disablable traction control, and power-everything with manual overrides, with
Your knowledge of HTML does not impress me. Any trained monkey can learn HTML. Skilled people churn out good HTML fast, and know more than one tool to do so.
Before anyone pipes up (seems unlikely, I must be one of the few that uses "show all articles"), yes the Artistic license allows this as long as it's compatible with the original version. Larry invented the AL (and popularized dual-licensing for free software projects) but these days he acknowledges that it's pretty vague and probably not any more enforceable than a BSD copyright. It's hard to say what would constitute a compatability test suite for perl though -- not even every platform can pass every test of builtins, let alone everything in CORE.
The redistribution notice is likely boilerplate stuff anyway.
Oh wow, that just gets so much more insightful every time someone says it.
Hey Philip Glass, find yourself a new note. If you don't like perl, why are you bothering to post?
Python has a backtick operator, which stringifies any expression you enter into it.
... in fact I believe it's deprecated (though it doesn't warn you)
>>> 1+2
3
>>> `1+2`
'3'
It's hardly ever used
Tilde is the unary two's-complement negation. You might use it with modules like struct, which gives you C datatypes.
Tridge seems more a Prometheus if you ask me...
Where the hell is our Aphrodite?
Perhaps they could ... but they'd be handing the microphone to Linus at that point, who would almost certainly savage Microsoft for twisting his words and get a few digs in, probably get ten times the attention on his words than MS, even with all their press channels.
Not wise to use your enemy as a spokesman, even when he says something you agree with.
> It was about as inevitable as Microsoft dropping SMB because samba was created, and blaiming samba.
In all fairness, how many CIFS vendors are there for unix now? Sun has Cascade, and that seems to be about it. Actually I rather wish Samba were ported to Windows as well -- there's features in it that are useful on any platform.
> There is no risk that [insert best hated DB vendor] holds you hostage with your data.
You DO have SQL dumps of your schema and SPs, right? You DO have documentation of the low-level format, right? It's unlikely that you could ever have your data held hostage by Oracle, Sybase, or IBM, since they provide tons of documentation on the specific on-disk formats. Microsoft I don't know about -- probably in MSDN Universal somewhere though.
Now an ASP (Application Service Provider) is a different matter entirely. They have your data, you don't. I get conflicting stories on whether BitMovers acts like an ASP for free projects. I was under the impression that they just monitored repositories under their free license, wanting to be something like a sourceforge (which was before SF got really big), but I'm not entirely certain.
> McVoy and wasn't even trying to produce anything functional to replace BK. "He just wanted to see what the protocols and data was, without actually producing any replacement for the (inevitable) problems he caused and knew about."
Yet McVoy pulled the license anyway, seeing this tinkering as a threat.
> Everybody seems to forget that McVoy contributed more than $500 000 worth of software to the osdl
Did this obligate OSDL to fire Tridge then?
None of this brouhaha is likely to hurt BK in the long run (yes this is a reversal of what I've said earlier): they're solid on Windows, and that's where they're likely to stay. For good.
> Herman Hesse's Magister Ludi
I believe this book is actually called The Glass Bead Game
> The initial set is a fully-functional game, with a winning condition and everything
Suber's initial rules are completely unsuited for any online play, because they are serial. If someone quits and doesn't tell anyone, the game hangs forever. Or just doesn't log in for a week. Nothing gets people bored like one "round" in the initial game taking a month. Suber's ruleset also refers to "the player to the left" at least once...
Rule 101 doesn't say you have to obey the rules -- that's inherent in the definition of "rule", and you simply can't make that a rule without infinite regress. Its purpose is that it's a highest-precedence rule that says you must obey all the rules in effect, thus pre-empting a whole class of rules that repeal provisions of other rules without specifically amending or editing those rules themselves. Of course some games do have strange and amusing definitions of "in effect" (Calvinball anyone?)
Is not more difficult than a current WIMP "point-and-click" interface is for novice users. Actually it's easier - more consistent, more simple, you don't have to think what you want to do in advance.
So let me get this straight: it requires special hardware to navigate properly and fails to follow conventions that have been around since electric typewriters themselves, and you're telling me that I am the one that doesn't get it?
Your arrogance makes me sad, because it will condemn this whole project to irrelevance, sinking whatever good it did have to offer along with it.
Ever play bar games like quarters where when you get a quarter in the shotglass (or five into the tumbler) you get to make a new rule? And eventually the rules start referencing other rules, and then the game itself becomes more of a complicated meta-game where the rules themselves are the game?
That's nomic. Except it does away with the shotglass, everyone just makes a rule every turn. It's a parliamentary game about rule-making, where the one who can game the system to their advantage is the winner. Still, it's usually a lot more fun as a drinking game, so in-person games often get rules passed to that effect. Order decays quickly a few rounds after that.