but you could define three orthornormal axes for the accelerometer and three orthornomal axes for the gyroscope, which would be... wait for it... sixaxis. We do this all the time in the aerospace world because you don't always mount the accelerometer and the gyroscope in the same manner. Each set of axes can be defined by a 3D vector and related by a 3x3 matrix.
If your employees don't understand the license (Here's a hint: both Eben Moglen and RMS can't find anything wrong with the deal) then there is something wrong with the employees, not the employer.
When you are serializing/deserializing an object with many properties, and properties with properties with properties, the ability of an XML file to recurse an arbitrary number of levels deep is nice, versus
[prop: [prop:val: [prop:val, prop,val]]
which is only two levels deep into the first prop... many times if you have structures and the like, it will go deeper and it is no longer really human-readable.
"I tell you one thing. I've been to a parallel universe, I've seen time running backwards, I've played pool with planets, and I've given birth to twins, but I never thought in my entire life I'd taste an edible Pot Noodle."
- Lister, Demons and Angels
Because the critical difference here is that the Wii controller involves gameplay motions that require a motion towards the TV... like bowling and pitching. The SNES gamepad did not require controller motion. Not that I agree with the lawsuit...
I bet the risk of meteor strike from just the exposed 180 degrees goes up by several order of magnitudes.
Unlikely, it is a shallower gravity well (1/6 * g on the moon vs. ~9.5/10 * g in LEO); the atmosphere is negligible in both cases. What other parameter makes you think the moon is more likely to experiance a micrometeroid strike? As you say, the moon is at least shielding (at least) half of the structure...
We have several sites that have been physically surveyed, plus the work done by Lunar Prospector. Please read up on Lunar Prospector before attempting to make an intelligent comment. Thanks.
When you are an engineer who spends 99% of his code writing mathematical routines using classes (tensors, for instance), "syntactic sugar" is the difference between real cooking oil and olestra.
(pulled directly from thesis work)
c++
dpdqdr = iframe.inv()*transframe*iframe*pqr + iframe.inv()*LMN;
In Java it would be something like:
... what 'great leap' is this? The only leap, really, is the change in vehicle. The moon is well-defined: we had the lunar prospector mission which gave us a detailed survey of the moons surface and we've been there several times in the Apollo era. Sticking around in LEO is just wasting time. Building satellites around the earth is completely different than building habitations on Mars or the Moon, structurally and in the complications faced ( micrometeoroids, gravity fields, dust and static charges, etc)
My wife and I play MMO's for this very reason. We only play when our son (soon-to-be 2 sons) are in bed. It's much cheaper than a bar/dinner and a movie and its a lot of fun playing together. And it is something progressive we can come back to again and again... but yea,I used to play (Everquest) hardcore in college, it was a transition once that kid comes along to playing less and just at night and naptime on the weekends...
Why can't I go Managed C++ or C++/CLI?
you can... didn't think I had to hand-hold you through every choice... theres like 50 other languages you can choose from as well.
Right now, I'm working on a project where the PC and Game Boy Advance versions of the same program share the same game logic source tree. Is this possible with an environment that requires the C# language? Or would I have to code the game logic twice and keep them in sync manually, which as far as I can tell would appear to have a huge potential for introducing bugs?
Game boy uses an ARM and Z80 processor right? doubtful (I mean yea you could compile Mono against an ARM but Linux is painful slow on a Gameboy to begin with). But you are probably programming in C/C++ right? You could write a wrapper (not re-code game logic, just write a wrapper to the interfaces) and BAM! a.NET module.
Compatibility with Microsoft Windows Mobile perhaps?
Uh, yea. From the press release: The XNA development platform will serve as the foundation for future game platforms from Microsoft, including Windows, Xbox and Windows Mobile-based devices. Link
Killing your company's productivity by not allowing the exchange of information? A big no-no. Plus it is all-to-easy to get around (rename the extention, zip the file, etc).
A better solution is to educate the users - send out a mass email explaining the vulnurability, that you shouldn't be opening and doc's you aren't expecting. If you do it is your own damn fault and the timeliness of the fixing of your machine can not be guaranteed. There is no reason to choke business as you have and quite frankly the users have every reason to be upset.
XNA may sound nice at first but it's actually pretty limiting. The worst thing of all is your forced to use C#.
Then go C++ and DirectX. It is very similar except for the re-write of DirectInput/some changes to Direct3D and DirectSound. C# really isn't that bad of a language once you get to know it. Its kinda like a lovechild of Java and C++ except without some of the boneheadedness of java (no operator overloading! bah, java!) and less ways to kill yourself in C++ (no pointers unless you explicitly call unsafe {})
It also sucks that they didn't make solutions for other platforms
Ok. It works on every microsoft platform. What more did you expect?
1) As far as I can tell, Player/Stage/Gazebo is limited to flat earth. (MSRS is not, arbitrary terrain)
2) Part of the.NET framework there is a wealth of functionality: mathematics functions, quaternions, etc.
3) Hooks into DirectX/D3D. Presentation quality graphics. The boss **does** care, even if we engineers don't.
4) programmatically - the difference between c-calls and a true object-oriented programming is NOT something to be overlooked. Especially when you are simulating discrete objects. The ability to have TableObject *table and Robot *robot, instead of a bunch of c-calls, is a blessing and speeds up your development time (I know, this is my day job). This is also why a lot of people choose DirectX over OpenGL.
But in all seriousness even the free package is pretty awesome. You can do time-domain rigid-body simulation at your computer, before building your robot to spec. This isn't just software to control a robot (it is that, too... but that's easy. People have been doing that for years. Parallax, MIT's BOTboard, etc.) This is a prototyping environment whose resulting code can be directly used in your robotic project. It's a step forward in integration, and quite slick in my humble opinion.
they use a universal driver.... one driver for **every** geforce card (that is, every nVidia card in existance except the RIVA/TNT cards from the days of yore)
Slashdot Mirror
nevermind zonk he's just doing to Nintendo what he does best ...
but you could define three orthornormal axes for the accelerometer and three orthornomal axes for the gyroscope, which would be ... wait for it... sixaxis. We do this all the time in the aerospace world because you don't always mount the accelerometer and the gyroscope in the same manner. Each set of axes can be defined by a 3D vector and related by a 3x3 matrix.
If your employees don't understand the license (Here's a hint: both Eben Moglen and RMS can't find anything wrong with the deal) then there is something wrong with the employees, not the employer.
When you are serializing/deserializing an object with many properties, and properties with properties with properties, the ability of an XML file to recurse an arbitrary number of levels deep is nice, versus
[prop: [prop:val: [prop:val, prop,val]]
which is only two levels deep into the first prop... many times if you have structures and the like, it will go deeper and it is no longer really human-readable.
added for completeness
"I tell you one thing. I've been to a parallel universe, I've seen time running backwards, I've played pool with planets, and I've given birth to twins, but I never thought in my entire life I'd taste an edible Pot Noodle."
- Lister, Demons and Angels
Because the critical difference here is that the Wii controller involves gameplay motions that require a motion towards the TV... like bowling and pitching. The SNES gamepad did not require controller motion. Not that I agree with the lawsuit...
I bet the risk of meteor strike from just the exposed 180 degrees goes up by several order of magnitudes.
...
Unlikely, it is a shallower gravity well (1/6 * g on the moon vs. ~9.5/10 * g in LEO); the atmosphere is negligible in both cases. What other parameter makes you think the moon is more likely to experiance a micrometeroid strike? As you say, the moon is at least shielding (at least) half of the structure
We have several sites that have been physically surveyed, plus the work done by Lunar Prospector. Please read up on Lunar Prospector before attempting to make an intelligent comment. Thanks.
end of comment.
joe: Where do you keep getting this stuff!!!
Operator overloading is syntactic sugar.
When you are an engineer who spends 99% of his code writing mathematical routines using classes (tensors, for instance), "syntactic sugar" is the difference between real cooking oil and olestra.
(pulled directly from thesis work)
c++
dpdqdr = iframe.inv()*transframe*iframe*pqr + iframe.inv()*LMN;
In Java it would be something like:
dpdqdr.Set( (iframe.inv()).mult( transframe.mult( iframe.mult( pqr ) ) ) + (iframe.inv()).mult( LMN));
And God help you if a parenthesis is moved. I'll take the real sugar, please.
... what 'great leap' is this? The only leap, really, is the change in vehicle. The moon is well-defined: we had the lunar prospector mission which gave us a detailed survey of the moons surface and we've been there several times in the Apollo era. Sticking around in LEO is just wasting time. Building satellites around the earth is completely different than building habitations on Mars or the Moon, structurally and in the complications faced ( micrometeoroids, gravity fields, dust and static charges, etc)
ok, sure, it reduces your freedom to steal software. It does not reduce the freedom of a legitimate individual. What is your point?
Thats what kills java for me ... I stick to C++ and c# for that reason alone.
My wife and I play MMO's for this very reason. We only play when our son (soon-to-be 2 sons) are in bed. It's much cheaper than a bar/dinner and a movie and its a lot of fun playing together. And it is something progressive we can come back to again and again ... but yea,I used to play (Everquest) hardcore in college, it was a transition once that kid comes along to playing less and just at night and naptime on the weekends ...
Why can't I go Managed C++ or C++/CLI?
.NET module.
you can... didn't think I had to hand-hold you through every choice... theres like 50 other languages you can choose from as well.
Right now, I'm working on a project where the PC and Game Boy Advance versions of the same program share the same game logic source tree. Is this possible with an environment that requires the C# language? Or would I have to code the game logic twice and keep them in sync manually, which as far as I can tell would appear to have a huge potential for introducing bugs?
Game boy uses an ARM and Z80 processor right? doubtful (I mean yea you could compile Mono against an ARM but Linux is painful slow on a Gameboy to begin with). But you are probably programming in C/C++ right? You could write a wrapper (not re-code game logic, just write a wrapper to the interfaces) and BAM! a
Compatibility with Microsoft Windows Mobile perhaps?
Uh, yea. From the press release: The XNA development platform will serve as the foundation for future game platforms from Microsoft, including Windows, Xbox and Windows Mobile-based devices. Link
Killing your company's productivity by not allowing the exchange of information? A big no-no. Plus it is all-to-easy to get around (rename the extention, zip the file, etc).
A better solution is to educate the users - send out a mass email explaining the vulnurability, that you shouldn't be opening and doc's you aren't expecting. If you do it is your own damn fault and the timeliness of the fixing of your machine can not be guaranteed. There is no reason to choke business as you have and quite frankly the users have every reason to be upset.
A wife who cooks + leftovers = Money in the bank, not the fast food restaurant.
XNA may sound nice at first but it's actually pretty limiting. The worst thing of all is your forced to use C#. Then go C++ and DirectX. It is very similar except for the re-write of DirectInput/some changes to Direct3D and DirectSound. C# really isn't that bad of a language once you get to know it. Its kinda like a lovechild of Java and C++ except without some of the boneheadedness of java (no operator overloading! bah, java!) and less ways to kill yourself in C++ (no pointers unless you explicitly call unsafe {})
It also sucks that they didn't make solutions for other platforms
Ok. It works on every microsoft platform. What more did you expect?
1) As far as I can tell, Player/Stage/Gazebo is limited to flat earth. (MSRS is not, arbitrary terrain)
.NET framework there is a wealth of functionality: mathematics functions, quaternions, etc.
2) Part of the
3) Hooks into DirectX/D3D. Presentation quality graphics. The boss **does** care, even if we engineers don't.
4) programmatically - the difference between c-calls and a true object-oriented programming is NOT something to be overlooked. Especially when you are simulating discrete objects. The ability to have TableObject *table and Robot *robot, instead of a bunch of c-calls, is a blessing and speeds up your development time (I know, this is my day job). This is also why a lot of people choose DirectX over OpenGL.
Looks like somebody woke up on the wrong side of the rock
... but that's easy. People have been doing that for years. Parallax, MIT's BOTboard, etc.) This is a prototyping environment whose resulting code can be directly used in your robotic project. It's a step forward in integration, and quite slick in my humble opinion.
But in all seriousness even the free package is pretty awesome. You can do time-domain rigid-body simulation at your computer, before building your robot to spec. This isn't just software to control a robot (it is that, too
They are gonna get bumped to GPLv3 when it hits. They may become irrelevant forever...
they use a universal driver .... one driver for **every** geforce card (that is, every nVidia card in existance except the RIVA/TNT cards from the days of yore)
Yes, it means you can use your 3D-accelerated nvidia/ati-card right now
That is 'proper' enough for me.