And in the places where C is substantially faster (say, complex math), Perl's XS layer gets utilized by programmers to create C bindings which are then published on CPAN, allowing Perl to continue to operate like lightning.
Personally, I go the Amazon.com route and use mod_perl for the environment, HTML::Mason for the templating, my own guruism for a layer in between the two, and CPAN to integrate with every known computer system and protocol under the sun.
And it's oh-so-nice after days of dealing with people's Java bullshit to see *my* pages render.1 seconds after the click.
Most of these languages borrowed heavily on Perl's ideas. Did you know PHP was once actually implemented in perl? It's not immediately obvious to the novice perl programmer, but the corners of the language that people often bitch about (like the OO syntax) actually allow tremendous flexibility, far surpassing the available alternatives (although, again, so-called 'competitors' have adopted a lot of Perl philosophy).
Perl's useful for a huge variety of things... used heavily by people from the Genome project to Amazon.com.
Looking over the Perl6 docs, I can tell the language is going to be a very vast step forward, well beyond Perl5 and all those still playing catch-up to Perl5.
Have you read up on Perl 6? I've done some very extensive reading, and I'd suggest you check out the wealth of new features and concepts before making such an outlandishly foolish claim.
Then again, this is Slashdot, and I suppose this level of ignorance is the norm rather than the exception.
Ugh. Thankfully, you're not making any important decisions. Personally, I'm more worried about having a kernel that doesn't perform like ass. Microkernels can lick my balls and fucking like it.
I would have figured that by now the lessons of Mach & friends would ring loud and clear... sure, it looks great on paper, but oh, what's that? System calls take 4 times as long? FUCK THAT!
There are more proper ways to handle system security than to try the Java idiom of "lets make everything a tiny little object and shoot XML all over the place!" which would be the equivalent "wrong" in user-land.
What are you smoking? We have thousands of years of history of geniuses sharing their work before patents were even a bad dream!
Some people might not be immediately revealing of how their inventions work, but others will be allowed to reverse engineer it and build either interoperability, advancements or both. Scientific progress will improve.
Personally, I believe in totally abolishing patents altogether. The idea that people will all the sudden stop innovating without patents is bullshit; look at open source for an example.
The damages patents have done and threaten to do to our society are numerous and vast. It's totally clear that it is impossible for us to staff the offices with competent patent clerks, and as it is patents are intentionally written to be as vague and all-encompassing as the author can slip by.
Technology sure is making things interesting. The rate of technological development is ever increasing, but strangely enough, so are the exclusive locks over so-called intellectual 'property'. If we're not allowed to stand on the shoulders of giants, then all we can do is work for a different kind of giant and do all of its evil bidding.
You're right about the substitutions, but it's a balancing act. If you do web development professionally, you cannot tell your customers that your solution is going to render incorrectly on visible percentages of their userbase's computers, because the competition doesn't care about standards or standard adherence at all and would quickly take your business and do a table based layout or whatever else they had to do to get by.
If a website has to customize itself for your browser, then it's your browser's fault for failing to adhere to specifications. My design philosophy is to target a particular spec (say, XHTML/1.0 Strict with CSS).
Granted, every browser seems to mess some things up, and you need a way to consistently render the same on all browsers. One option is old school ugly HTML with table based layouts. The other is hideous hacks in your CSS code (like the voice family hacks that confuse IE and make it think a block ended).
A third option is to detect the user agent and return settings that will make the page usable in that browser.
As long as you're using the user agent string to fix browser / standard incompatibilities, I think it is perfectly valid, the most viable option, and if you lie to my web server, don't expect it to be able to help you out.
Well, and keep in mind that the move to service-oriented systems in the home user sector means that you'll be asking those users to pay monthly fees for something they used to get for free (hey, Windows and Works came on the PC, didn't it?)
The idea that all apps except the browser will move off the desktop and centralize flies like an anvil... it has nowhere to go but down.
Fine, I don't remember the article well enough to confirm or deny, so point conceded. But the differences in lock granularity are still *substantial*. Linux locks data as a rule (granted it wasn't always this way), and OS X, even with the "great advances" in Tiger locks subsystems. Hence, lock contention is higher. Spinning pinwheel of death.
Oh yes, a microkernel that up until the very last release of the OS had the so called "funnel locking model" of having one big kernel lock, then one smaller one for a corner of the functionality is good.
Their increases in lock granularity in Tiger simply moved the locks to subsystems. "Oh, I've got IO now... it's MINEEE"
In fact, I remember Anandtech (I think it was Anand) benchmarking it against Linux and found Linux to be *substantially* faster at anything that invoked the kernel.
Yeah, I remember hearing years and years ago that in the next few years, all PCs will be nothing more than Java runtime environments, and you'll rent your applications over the Internet from providers.
Guess what? It didn't happen.
What you describe in your post would take a substantial amount of work from many companies (not to mention a very slow migration process of the end users to completely shift paradigms). Companies doing this will likely do it incrementally if they do it at all (because software comapnies can't afford to go in a cave for 10 years without making money). In any case, companies doing it incrementally are likely to leverage the excellent open source UNIX technology before them to make it happen, rather than reinvent computing from the ground up.
HURD still has pipe dream status. Yeah, you can download it and use it, but given the rate of development of Linux, plus the investment by all of the large firms, plus the rising deployment rate, no one has the momentum to keep up.
Linux gains new ground every day, and it seems particularly hard to lose it. I'd say that the only threat Linux faces that is "serious" is te fact that it is the only threat Microsoft faces that is "serious" (Microsoft has said as much themselves). Expect Microsoft's moves to restrain against Linux to become legal ones, from lawsuits to "campaign contributions".
You're on fucking crack to make that remark. I'm working at a VOIP company right now from where I'm posting this message, and I'm here to tell you that the Cisco Callmanager has a history of being riddled with security holes and interoperability issues.
And then you remember that they're using Windows NT to switch calls... (/me sticks out tounge)
Perhaps they should work on their 'advanced process scheduling features' in Symbian so that clicking a damn menu item doesn't require the end user to wait 1.5-2 seconds for response.
...the best fun and informative way to introduce Open Source is to order a bunch of free Ubuntu CDs, and use them to play a massive game of office frisbee.
Slashdot Mirror
And in the places where C is substantially faster (say, complex math), Perl's XS layer gets utilized by programmers to create C bindings which are then published on CPAN, allowing Perl to continue to operate like lightning.
Personally, I go the Amazon.com route and use mod_perl for the environment, HTML::Mason for the templating, my own guruism for a layer in between the two, and CPAN to integrate with every known computer system and protocol under the sun.
.1 seconds after the click.
And it's oh-so-nice after days of dealing with people's Java bullshit to see *my* pages render
Actually, mod_perl performance beats the pants off everything but raw C modules when doing Apache web applications.
Most of these languages borrowed heavily on Perl's ideas. Did you know PHP was once actually implemented in perl? It's not immediately obvious to the novice perl programmer, but the corners of the language that people often bitch about (like the OO syntax) actually allow tremendous flexibility, far surpassing the available alternatives (although, again, so-called 'competitors' have adopted a lot of Perl philosophy).
Perl's useful for a huge variety of things... used heavily by people from the Genome project to Amazon.com.
Looking over the Perl6 docs, I can tell the language is going to be a very vast step forward, well beyond Perl5 and all those still playing catch-up to Perl5.
Have you read up on Perl 6? I've done some very extensive reading, and I'd suggest you check out the wealth of new features and concepts before making such an outlandishly foolish claim.
Then again, this is Slashdot, and I suppose this level of ignorance is the norm rather than the exception.
Ugh. Thankfully, you're not making any important decisions. Personally, I'm more worried about having a kernel that doesn't perform like ass. Microkernels can lick my balls and fucking like it.
I would have figured that by now the lessons of Mach & friends would ring loud and clear... sure, it looks great on paper, but oh, what's that? System calls take 4 times as long? FUCK THAT!
There are more proper ways to handle system security than to try the Java idiom of "lets make everything a tiny little object and shoot XML all over the place!" which would be the equivalent "wrong" in user-land.
What are you smoking? We have thousands of years of history of geniuses sharing their work before patents were even a bad dream!
Some people might not be immediately revealing of how their inventions work, but others will be allowed to reverse engineer it and build either interoperability, advancements or both. Scientific progress will improve.
Personally, I believe in totally abolishing patents altogether. The idea that people will all the sudden stop innovating without patents is bullshit; look at open source for an example.
The damages patents have done and threaten to do to our society are numerous and vast. It's totally clear that it is impossible for us to staff the offices with competent patent clerks, and as it is patents are intentionally written to be as vague and all-encompassing as the author can slip by.
Technology sure is making things interesting. The rate of technological development is ever increasing, but strangely enough, so are the exclusive locks over so-called intellectual 'property'. If we're not allowed to stand on the shoulders of giants, then all we can do is work for a different kind of giant and do all of its evil bidding.
You're right about the substitutions, but it's a balancing act. If you do web development professionally, you cannot tell your customers that your solution is going to render incorrectly on visible percentages of their userbase's computers, because the competition doesn't care about standards or standard adherence at all and would quickly take your business and do a table based layout or whatever else they had to do to get by.
If a website has to customize itself for your browser, then it's your browser's fault for failing to adhere to specifications. My design philosophy is to target a particular spec (say, XHTML/1.0 Strict with CSS).
Granted, every browser seems to mess some things up, and you need a way to consistently render the same on all browsers. One option is old school ugly HTML with table based layouts. The other is hideous hacks in your CSS code (like the voice family hacks that confuse IE and make it think a block ended).
A third option is to detect the user agent and return settings that will make the page usable in that browser.
As long as you're using the user agent string to fix browser / standard incompatibilities, I think it is perfectly valid, the most viable option, and if you lie to my web server, don't expect it to be able to help you out.
Amazon.com has it right... mod_perl + HTML::Mason are a very, very potent combination.
Well, and keep in mind that the move to service-oriented systems in the home user sector means that you'll be asking those users to pay monthly fees for something they used to get for free (hey, Windows and Works came on the PC, didn't it?)
The idea that all apps except the browser will move off the desktop and centralize flies like an anvil... it has nowhere to go but down.
Fine, I don't remember the article well enough to confirm or deny, so point conceded. But the differences in lock granularity are still *substantial*. Linux locks data as a rule (granted it wasn't always this way), and OS X, even with the "great advances" in Tiger locks subsystems. Hence, lock contention is higher. Spinning pinwheel of death.
Oh yes, a microkernel that up until the very last release of the OS had the so called "funnel locking model" of having one big kernel lock, then one smaller one for a corner of the functionality is good.
Their increases in lock granularity in Tiger simply moved the locks to subsystems. "Oh, I've got IO now... it's MINEEE"
In fact, I remember Anandtech (I think it was Anand) benchmarking it against Linux and found Linux to be *substantially* faster at anything that invoked the kernel.
Yeah, I remember hearing years and years ago that in the next few years, all PCs will be nothing more than Java runtime environments, and you'll rent your applications over the Internet from providers.
Guess what? It didn't happen.
What you describe in your post would take a substantial amount of work from many companies (not to mention a very slow migration process of the end users to completely shift paradigms). Companies doing this will likely do it incrementally if they do it at all (because software comapnies can't afford to go in a cave for 10 years without making money). In any case, companies doing it incrementally are likely to leverage the excellent open source UNIX technology before them to make it happen, rather than reinvent computing from the ground up.
HURD still has pipe dream status. Yeah, you can download it and use it, but given the rate of development of Linux, plus the investment by all of the large firms, plus the rising deployment rate, no one has the momentum to keep up.
Linux gains new ground every day, and it seems particularly hard to lose it. I'd say that the only threat Linux faces that is "serious" is te fact that it is the only threat Microsoft faces that is "serious" (Microsoft has said as much themselves). Expect Microsoft's moves to restrain against Linux to become legal ones, from lawsuits to "campaign contributions".
OS X winning would be a huge step back for humanity. Mach is terrible and performs like ass.
You're on fucking crack to make that remark. I'm working at a VOIP company right now from where I'm posting this message, and I'm here to tell you that the Cisco Callmanager has a history of being riddled with security holes and interoperability issues.
And then you remember that they're using Windows NT to switch calls... (/me sticks out tounge)
Well, you're right. But I don't think the Mozilla project is a shining star in the security department.
I rather like Daniel Bernstein's policies on his software... publish a verifiable exploit against my software and I'll give you $500.
Same way tivo does it, but there won't be a nifty hard drive to pull and mount in your desktop to help you bypass the security.
Another microkernel to the rescue!
How about taking over home networking routers / wireless routers and set top boxes as well?
Perhaps they should work on their 'advanced process scheduling features' in Symbian so that clicking a damn menu item doesn't require the end user to wait 1.5-2 seconds for response.
...the best fun and informative way to introduce Open Source is to order a bunch of free Ubuntu CDs, and use them to play a massive game of office frisbee.
Nah nah nah, fuses are where it's at.