I need to figure out what's up with its PDF handling with Acrobat. Lately, it's been hanging (not "crashing", per se, but still dead) on 9 out of 10 PDF opens... Works beautifully on the Debian side with gpdf, though. Other than that, I haven't had any major problems with it.
Thanks, that *sort* of clears things up. I mean, I know what a switch statement does, I know about falling through cases, and I know about do loops. I was just confused about the opening of the do loop seemingly only applying to case 0... I mean, from what I know about switches, if let's say count = 1,
the switch(count % 8) takes you to case 1, so you do the *to = *from assignment, and then the next line is what confused me--you're either coming to the test condition for a loop you never started, or hitting some other weirdness... I guess the answer is that if you use switch to jump into a loop, the loop is still initialized? Does this have to do with how this translates to machine code? A do loop is just a conditional jump backwards, right? Would this still work with a loop where the test condition is at the beginning, so all you reach at the end is the end of the scope opened earlier (if the compiler hadn't started misbehaving due to some plugin issues, I'd check it out myself)? God, would an if be possible to mangle like this?
Okay, I'll play the n00b. I understand most of this, but my coding background is not that great, and mostly in C++, Java, and PHP, and I'm having problems with the switch from Duff's Device...
switch (count % 8)
{
case 0: do { *to = *from++;
case 7: *to = *from++;
case 6: *to = *from++;
case 5: *to = *from++;
case 4: *to = *from++;
case 3: *to = *from++;
case 2: *to = *from++;
case 1: *to = *from++;
} while (--n > 0);
}
What the hell is up with that do { applying only in case zero? It's in several places on the net just like that and Visual Studio compiles this just fine, so it's not an error. I checked K&R, and they don't even hint at what could be going on there... I'm lost. Help?
It never caught on. Okay, so maybe that wasn't exactly the same thing (the purpose was a simpler mechanism for the drive), but I don't see the idea taking off anyway. If there are cases, CD/DVD drives have to be redesigned. If CD/DVD drives have to be redesigned, writable CD and DVD media will have to be redesigned. And if there is an extra cost of a case on each CD-R and as a result they shoot up in price from a quarter each to two bucks a pop, consumers aren't gonna like that...
Does this count? Or this? Lisp is a very powerful language. Paren matching is rendered trivial with any decent editor. The syntax is actually quite nice and clean once you get used to it. I wouldn't use it for everything, and it does have some core ugliness (hey, so does C++), but it has an undeservedly bad reputation.
...kidding--happy Debian user who's never been told to RTFM, even though I'm far from an expert and have asked stupid questions. I'm just alluding to their alleged reputation... Actually, as stupid questions go, can someone tell me the difference between the kernel-headers-* and linux-headers-* packages? Confused the hell out of me last night when trying to upgrade to 2.6.12 and recompile a couple of kernel modules (though everything is working now)...
Parent was saying that they actually *are* going to make a fair amount of money. Parent's figures are reasonable: 1 CD buyer per 100 who hear it * 1 million who hear it * $10 per CD = $100,000. It's not a fortune, but it's not a bad take for a single album. Especially considering that some of these people are going to become big fans and buy other albums and merchandise, and go to shows.
1. No burden of proof comes into it. If you've got a patent, anyone who came up with the same idea is SOL, independently or not. Of course, your patent will not be granted (or may be deemed invalid, if it has already been granted) if there exists prior art--proof that someone did the same thing before you filed your application (date of original application is the key here--which is kind of dumb because it can take a year or two for a patent to be granted, which is plenty of time for someone to independently come up with the same idea in the software world. And since patent applications are secret until approved, the person coming up with this same idea independently has *no way* of knowing it's in the process of being patented, even if they check. But anyway...)
2. See (1), mostly. If you can prove something had already been implemented before the filing of the patent application, you're pretty much safe. Most of the weird cases come up from the timing issues in (1).
Of course. But that doesn't mean that people should disrespect the license, or pretend it doesn't exist... Although it'd be pretty funny if it got so bad that the FSF did require little hologram thingies and license keys and what not, and required users to present them on request.
Rashed acknowledged this but added, "Many vendors use it because it is free and they can use it without a license, so the number of users for remote access is quite large, but it does not provide very good SFTP or application connectivity usage."
No no no! You cannot use it without a license. It's released under the BSD license, and that license is just as important as a proprietary license. It just functions in a different way--to share the benefits of copyright rather than restrict them. Why do people keep saying that FOSS products don't have licenses?
Um, do you have any idea of the kinds of safety factors built into things bearing live loads (at least in the US, in structures up to code)? Sure, things still fall down sometimes, but it's because it was either poorly built or poorly designed in the first place, not because it exceeded a threshold by an epsilon...
In my classroom? No, I don't have a classroom. I guess you win.
Okay, how about this? As a student, I've been extremely turned off by this whole system. We always spent several minutes registering everybody's votes, tallying the whole thing, and there were constantly glitches with the system, and many questions were ambiguous. Not to mention that we had to buy the damn things. And get participation credit for using them. I was a working student at the time and wasn't thrilled about paying forty bucks or whatever for a glorified remote control and brownie points...
Taking a second look at this, I guess a lot of my problems with the system were technical--if it could be done well, and if the professor chose good questions and ran the system well, and if the gizmos could be rented or something instead of bought (yeah, I know there was automatically a resale market--I still don't like the purchase idea here), then yes, it could be useful. As it was, it disrupted the flow of one of the best classes I've ever taken, and didn't give back much (I know that's not my call to make--the tool is not directly for me--but the prof was one of those guys who could've done without this easily in a class three times the size of the one we had). I just felt like the professor was putting all this energy into something that was not working well, and just not worth it...
Informative, my ass. A show of hands would do the same thing cheaper, faster, and just about as accurately. I had an awesome teacher a couple of years ago in a lower division class who used this system. The only real advantage could be increased accuracy, but since professors only use these to get a general feel for how the class is doing, they don't need the accuracy. Sure, people are gonna be lazy/shy/whatever and not raise their hands, but the solution is not to use ridiculous electronics...
Sure, you can burn your own CD-Rs, but you can't press your own CDs, unless you've got a few grand burning a hole in your pocket. There is a difference. CD-Rs have a shorter lifespan and won't play in older CD players. If you can do a run of 1000 CDs, you can get them pressed for about a buck a pop, which really is pretty reasonable, hence worth it to a serious musician.
Also, while a modest investment will get you a surprisingly decent home recording setup, it takes skill to use all that well. Unless a musician is seriously interested in becoming an amateur producer, he or she is better off going to a real one.
Other than that, yeah... The whole online distribution thing should make music publishing much more interesting, where the big labels won't have that much more to offer to principled artists.
For those too lazy to RTFA their advice is "press shift when loading the CD", and "if that's too late, burn the music back to CD and rip it again".
For what it's worth, a lot of the newer copy protection is much nastier than this and in fact breaks the red book standard. The companies using it don't give a rat's ass 'cause they figure if it looks like a CD, people will buy it as a CD whether it has the little Compact Disc logo on it or not.... I was very unpleasantly surprised when I bought a CD while in France this summer that turned out to have this on it...
I would have returned it, but (a) it was in France and I didn't find out it was DRMed until recently, (b) it was used, so it might've sent a message to the store owner but not to the label, and (c) my mom happened to have the same thing non-DRMed (stfu! my mom happens to have very avant-garde taste in music. or something), so I just ripped that.
Meh... You power lighters with lighter fluid, right? I've yet to have a Zippo explode on me. And the entire *point* of a lighter is to produce an open flame...
Slashdot Mirror
Is that anything like Armagetiton?
I need to figure out what's up with its PDF handling with Acrobat. Lately, it's been hanging (not "crashing", per se, but still dead) on 9 out of 10 PDF opens... Works beautifully on the Debian side with gpdf, though. Other than that, I haven't had any major problems with it.
I don't think so...
Thanks, that *sort* of clears things up. I mean, I know what a switch statement does, I know about falling through cases, and I know about do loops. I was just confused about the opening of the do loop seemingly only applying to case 0... I mean, from what I know about switches, if let's say count = 1,
the switch(count % 8) takes you to case 1, so you do the *to = *from assignment, and then the next line is what confused me--you're either coming to the test condition for a loop you never started, or hitting some other weirdness... I guess the answer is that if you use switch to jump into a loop, the loop is still initialized? Does this have to do with how this translates to machine code? A do loop is just a conditional jump backwards, right? Would this still work with a loop where the test condition is at the beginning, so all you reach at the end is the end of the scope opened earlier (if the compiler hadn't started misbehaving due to some plugin issues, I'd check it out myself)? God, would an if be possible to mangle like this?
switch(x)
case 1: if (y)
case 2: --x;
Heh...
Okay, I'll play the n00b. I understand most of this, but my coding background is not that great, and mostly in C++, Java, and PHP, and I'm having problems with the switch from Duff's Device...
switch (count % 8)
{
case 0: do { *to = *from++;
case 7: *to = *from++;
case 6: *to = *from++;
case 5: *to = *from++;
case 4: *to = *from++;
case 3: *to = *from++;
case 2: *to = *from++;
case 1: *to = *from++;
} while (--n > 0);
}
What the hell is up with that do { applying only in case zero? It's in several places on the net just like that and Visual Studio compiles this just fine, so it's not an error. I checked K&R, and they don't even hint at what could be going on there... I'm lost. Help?
I think he meant tiger...
It never caught on. Okay, so maybe that wasn't exactly the same thing (the purpose was a simpler mechanism for the drive), but I don't see the idea taking off anyway. If there are cases, CD/DVD drives have to be redesigned. If CD/DVD drives have to be redesigned, writable CD and DVD media will have to be redesigned. And if there is an extra cost of a case on each CD-R and as a result they shoot up in price from a quarter each to two bucks a pop, consumers aren't gonna like that...
Does this count? Or this? Lisp is a very powerful language. Paren matching is rendered trivial with any decent editor. The syntax is actually quite nice and clean once you get used to it. I wouldn't use it for everything, and it does have some core ugliness (hey, so does C++), but it has an undeservedly bad reputation.
Nah, I think that's the Debian help system...
...kidding--happy Debian user who's never been told to RTFM, even though I'm far from an expert and have asked stupid questions. I'm just alluding to their alleged reputation... Actually, as stupid questions go, can someone tell me the difference between the kernel-headers-* and linux-headers-* packages? Confused the hell out of me last night when trying to upgrade to 2.6.12 and recompile a couple of kernel modules (though everything is working now)...
Parent was saying that they actually *are* going to make a fair amount of money. Parent's figures are reasonable: 1 CD buyer per 100 who hear it * 1 million who hear it * $10 per CD = $100,000. It's not a fortune, but it's not a bad take for a single album. Especially considering that some of these people are going to become big fans and buy other albums and merchandise, and go to shows.
1. No burden of proof comes into it. If you've got a patent, anyone who came up with the same idea is SOL, independently or not. Of course, your patent will not be granted (or may be deemed invalid, if it has already been granted) if there exists prior art--proof that someone did the same thing before you filed your application (date of original application is the key here--which is kind of dumb because it can take a year or two for a patent to be granted, which is plenty of time for someone to independently come up with the same idea in the software world. And since patent applications are secret until approved, the person coming up with this same idea independently has *no way* of knowing it's in the process of being patented, even if they check. But anyway...)
2. See (1), mostly. If you can prove something had already been implemented before the filing of the patent application, you're pretty much safe. Most of the weird cases come up from the timing issues in (1).
Ah. Right... Touche... Well, I feel dumb. Mod parent up. And mod my original post down. I need to go back to software license school.
Of course. But that doesn't mean that people should disrespect the license, or pretend it doesn't exist... Although it'd be pretty funny if it got so bad that the FSF did require little hologram thingies and license keys and what not, and required users to present them on request.
Um, do you have any idea of the kinds of safety factors built into things bearing live loads (at least in the US, in structures up to code)? Sure, things still fall down sometimes, but it's because it was either poorly built or poorly designed in the first place, not because it exceeded a threshold by an epsilon...
ASCII? That's too complicated. Let's go with a unary encoding: 'a' is 1, 'b' is 11, 'c' is 111, and so on...
In my classroom? No, I don't have a classroom. I guess you win.
Okay, how about this? As a student, I've been extremely turned off by this whole system. We always spent several minutes registering everybody's votes, tallying the whole thing, and there were constantly glitches with the system, and many questions were ambiguous. Not to mention that we had to buy the damn things. And get participation credit for using them. I was a working student at the time and wasn't thrilled about paying forty bucks or whatever for a glorified remote control and brownie points...
Taking a second look at this, I guess a lot of my problems with the system were technical--if it could be done well, and if the professor chose good questions and ran the system well, and if the gizmos could be rented or something instead of bought (yeah, I know there was automatically a resale market--I still don't like the purchase idea here), then yes, it could be useful. As it was, it disrupted the flow of one of the best classes I've ever taken, and didn't give back much (I know that's not my call to make--the tool is not directly for me--but the prof was one of those guys who could've done without this easily in a class three times the size of the one we had). I just felt like the professor was putting all this energy into something that was not working well, and just not worth it...
Informative, my ass. A show of hands would do the same thing cheaper, faster, and just about as accurately. I had an awesome teacher a couple of years ago in a lower division class who used this system. The only real advantage could be increased accuracy, but since professors only use these to get a general feel for how the class is doing, they don't need the accuracy. Sure, people are gonna be lazy/shy/whatever and not raise their hands, but the solution is not to use ridiculous electronics...
...when we have the slashdot editors to teach us about recursion?
Sure, you can burn your own CD-Rs, but you can't press your own CDs, unless you've got a few grand burning a hole in your pocket. There is a difference. CD-Rs have a shorter lifespan and won't play in older CD players. If you can do a run of 1000 CDs, you can get them pressed for about a buck a pop, which really is pretty reasonable, hence worth it to a serious musician.
Also, while a modest investment will get you a surprisingly decent home recording setup, it takes skill to use all that well. Unless a musician is seriously interested in becoming an amateur producer, he or she is better off going to a real one.
Other than that, yeah... The whole online distribution thing should make music publishing much more interesting, where the big labels won't have that much more to offer to principled artists.
For what it's worth, a lot of the newer copy protection is much nastier than this and in fact breaks the red book standard. The companies using it don't give a rat's ass 'cause they figure if it looks like a CD, people will buy it as a CD whether it has the little Compact Disc logo on it or not.... I was very unpleasantly surprised when I bought a CD while in France this summer that turned out to have this on it...
I would have returned it, but (a) it was in France and I didn't find out it was DRMed until recently, (b) it was used, so it might've sent a message to the store owner but not to the label, and (c) my mom happened to have the same thing non-DRMed (stfu! my mom happens to have very avant-garde taste in music. or something), so I just ripped that.
Meh... You power lighters with lighter fluid, right? I've yet to have a Zippo explode on me. And the entire *point* of a lighter is to produce an open flame...
Aren't you skipping a step?
Anyone got the torrent?
What is this? Add-Random-Caps-To-Phrases Day?