Not at all. After a long quarter with way too much work to do I finally pulled out my mindstorms last night. Mind you I'm a mere 20, I'll probably wonder why kids play with the toys they do when legos are so much cooler when I'm 90.
You'll have to RTFM for details (RFC-Editor or your local ipv6 man page) but there is an entire suite of methods for providing the necessary junction between the two. One of the nice things is you can implement ipv6 on your routers and big boxes and your dumb-as-a-rock MS boxes that run ipv4 won't know the difference. (knock on wood)
All I have to do is iterpret symbols on the screen as letters, the more you dull them out the less information can be packed into the screen. (Of course that would be one wacky font.)
Besides, this ClearType also requires a color display adding to the battery draw...
This algorithm decreases the amount of time used to multiply to matricies from O(N^3) to around O(N^2.72) (or less) by breaking the matrix up into little pieces that are multiplied by each other (or broken into smaller pieces with the same process) then added together to get the result.
The primary speedup in this algorithm is that additions are much faster for a computer to complete than multiplications, and a single multiplication can be replaced with several additions.
The other benefit of this algorithm is that it divides the work into subproblems that can be dispatched to alternate processors and then recombined centrally.
Unfortunately, due to the large overhead costs of this method it only works well on very large data sets, such as 1000x1000 or larger arrays. Once you get below this size it is best to use the standard matrix multiplication.
Here is a section of code from a matrix multiplication algorithm using this method I wrote for an algorithm analysis class: if (this.length == 2)/* 2x2 matrix */ { int x1, x2, x3, x4, x5, x6, x7; int x1a, x1b, x6a, x6b, x7a, x7b, x2a, x3b, x4b, x5a;
I can see how all of these got in here, but I would expect that the greatest algorithms of all time would last for a bit longer than that. Its not as if the fortran compiler reached its pinnacle of evolution in 1957 and has remained relatively unchanged since.
Other entries like the matrix computation methods, fast fourier transform, etc are still in wide use today because we haven't found (or there aren't) any better algorithms we can use.
Netscape 4.72+ are much stabler than any prior version provided you don't leave CSS on. (sometimes JavaScript crashes the browser, but I haven't seen this happen in 4.73)
-- Eric is chisled like a Greek Godess
Make Mozilla go fast, disable debug
on
IE For FreeBSD
·
· Score: 3
The best way to make mozilla move zippily is to compile it yourself. Just download a source tarball, run the build configurator and do it yourself. Strip out all of the debug crap because you don't need it.
I wonder if that is going to use either of the avian carrier RFCs (RFC1149 Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams on avian carriers or RFC2549 IP over Avian Carriers with Quality of Service) or if Microsoft has developed there own proprietary pigeon transmission protocol...
In 4.0+ you can set up boot0 to use packet mode rather than the CHS mode to boot beyond 1024 cyl. Of course this IS hardware dependent and not all machines will behave properly.
Windows Toaster: Given that God is infinite, and that the Universe is also infinite, would you like a toasted tea cake?
Me: We want no muffins, no toast, no tea cakes, no buns, baps, baggets or bagels. No croissants, no crumpets, no pancakes, no potato cakes, and no hot cross buns. And definitely no smegging flapjacks!
That's arrogant. Yep, but that appears to be the position of the mozilla project. They've decided not to support the ILAYER element, among other things.
If you really want something that is supposed to support a standard can you expect it to be 100% backwards compatible? There will be differences between how NS4 did this one thing and how IE4 did the same thing and how the HTML spec says its supposed to be. Who is the real authority here? Nobody, but the Mozilla project chose that the W3 would be the reference (yes it isn't the perfect choice, but there really isn't) and that is what they are sticking with.
In the C programming language there is a certain specified and exact syntax and grammar required to get a program to do X. In HTML there is no absolute requirement on how to do X. You can do it by the standard, you can do it the NS way, you can do it the IE way, you can do it via the standards, you can do it...
C requires the use of a compiler that will be expecting input in a certain specified manner. HTML does not (and if it did the web wouldn't be near as far as it is today) but this has brought all the problems and breakage you suffer from between using old broswers and using a new browser.
Before I begin: My original post contained the word official formatted like this: `official' meaning that not everybody recognizes this as the best way things should be done. It is a `standard' (note the quotes) that is designed to unify (sp?) the way document rendering is performed. (ie, not everybody agrees with it)
There are four bugs with a summary description containing TBODY, so those bugs are known and being worked on. (Mozilla will continue to run Milestones long after NS6 is released. Don't confuse Netscape and Mozilla.)
Blink has been around so long, but I too wish it would be removed... (It can have uses though.) Some things are no longer being supported, such as the NS4.x ILAYER and LAYER stuff.
17.7 The TEXTAREA element doesn't contain any mention of an "onscroll" event, and I haven't seen it anywhere else in the docs (Nor in DOM 1 or 2). Try talking to the W3 people, it isn't Mozilla's fault it isn't implemented.
The TBODY is a row grouping element, from the spec:
Table rows may be grouped into a table head, table foot, and one or more table body sections, using the THEAD, TFOOT and TBODY elements, respectively. This division enables user agents to support scrolling of table bodies independently of the table head and foot. When long tables are printed, the table head and foot information may be repeated on each page that contains table data.
Of course, there is no mention of how to indicate that the tbody should be scrolled or printed on each page because you are supposed to use style sheets for that. (same with all rendering details)
Remember, Mozilla didn't write the spec, they just want to implement the spec. There are places (too many) that are ambiguous and must be interpreted according to the letter and intent of the writers.
Opera (win32) doesn't support complete styling of the H1 element (as of one month ago), the size stays the same: segment7 - main page but it does do a hell of a lot better than MSIE* or NS4 at style sheet rendering.
Mozilla is going to be the first browser that doesn't (tries not to) violate the `official' specifications on how web pages should be formatted.
Unfortunately, this means that pages that were written for browsers that violated the specification will need to be rewritten. If you spot any bugs, or what you think are bugs then they should be reported at bugzilla.
I built from source on FreeBSD-current (even less bug reports/fixing there) and my only problem (with building) was that gcc2.95 outputted some poorly formed assembly that forced me to turn off optimizations for one source file.
I'm writing a heavily CSS'd and HTML4.0 strict web site that mozilla has yet to crash on when rendering. I've been writing a script for it using the DOM that adds and deletes elements including forms and input buttons that are attached to DOM to add more elements. I've probably seen one crash from a bonehead programming mistake and that's it.
If you want to check it out, http://segment7.net/php3/newpage.html but there is a bug that has been preventing me from extracting values from input elements, so not all of the input elements work.
Slashdot Mirror
Not at all. After a long quarter with way too much work to do I finally pulled out my mindstorms last night. Mind you I'm a mere 20, I'll probably wonder why kids play with the toys they do when legos are so much cooler when I'm 90.
--
Eric is chisled like a Greek Godess
Several FreeBSD drivers have been written from their Linux counterparts...
--
Eric is chisled like a Greek Godess
You'll have to RTFM for details (RFC-Editor or your local ipv6 man page) but there is an entire suite of methods for providing the necessary junction between the two. One of the nice things is you can implement ipv6 on your routers and big boxes and your dumb-as-a-rock MS boxes that run ipv4 won't know the difference. (knock on wood)
--
Eric is chisled like a Greek Godess
pppd is the kernel-land ppp interface, the user-land version is ppp, which uses the tun interface (and the /etc/ppp/* files)
ppp under FreeBSD has an excellent manual page and is very easy to configure.
--
Eric is chisled like a Greek Godess
QOS is a must! RFC 2459 - IP Over Avian Carriers with Quality of Service
--
Eric is chisled like a Greek Godess
Where the heck did all that karma come from? damn +1 bonus, I want to earn my place.
--
Eric is chisled like a Greek Godess
All I have to do is iterpret symbols on the screen as letters, the more you dull them out the less information can be packed into the screen. (Of course that would be one wacky font.)
Besides, this ClearType also requires a color display adding to the battery draw...
--
Eric is chisled like a Greek Godess
This algorithm decreases the amount of time used to multiply to matricies from O(N^3) to around O(N^2.72) (or less) by breaking the matrix up into little pieces that are multiplied by each other (or broken into smaller pieces with the same process) then added together to get the result.
The primary speedup in this algorithm is that additions are much faster for a computer to complete than multiplications, and a single multiplication can be replaced with several additions.
The other benefit of this algorithm is that it divides the work into subproblems that can be dispatched to alternate processors and then recombined centrally.
Unfortunately, due to the large overhead costs of this method it only works well on very large data sets, such as 1000x1000 or larger arrays. Once you get below this size it is best to use the standard matrix multiplication.
Here is a section of code from a matrix multiplication algorithm using this method I wrote for an algorithm analysis class: if (this.length == 2) /* 2x2 matrix */
{
int x1, x2, x3, x4, x5, x6, x7;
int x1a, x1b, x6a, x6b, x7a, x7b, x2a, x3b, x4b, x5a;
x1a = a11.add(a22).getElement(0,0);
x1b = b11.add(b22).getElement(0,0);
x1 = x1a * x1b;
x2a = a21.add(a22).getElement(0,0);
x2 = x2a * b11.getElement(0,0);
x3b = b12.sub(b22).getElement(0,0);
x3 = a11.getElement(0,0) * x3b;
x4b = b21.sub(b11).getElement(0,0);
x4 = a22.getElement(0,0) * x4b;
x5a = a11.add(a12).getElement(0,0);
x5 = x5a * b22.getElement(0,0);
x6a = a21.sub(a11).getElement(0,0);
x6b = b11.add(b12).getElement(0,0);
x6 = x6a * x6b;
x7a = a12.sub(a22).getElement(0,0);
x7b = b21.add(b22).getElement(0,0);
x7 = x7a * x7b;
c11 = new Matrix(1);
c12 = new Matrix(1);
c21 = new Matrix(1);
c22 = new Matrix(1);
c11.setElement(0, 0, x1 + x4 - x5 + x7);
c12.setElement(0, 0, x3 + x5);
c21.setElement(0, 0, x2 + x4);
c22.setElement(0, 0, x1 + x3 - x2 + x6);
}
--
Eric is chisled like a Greek Godess
I can see how all of these got in here, but I would expect that the greatest algorithms of all time would last for a bit longer than that. Its not as if the fortran compiler reached its pinnacle of evolution in 1957 and has remained relatively unchanged since.
Other entries like the matrix computation methods, fast fourier transform, etc are still in wide use today because we haven't found (or there aren't) any better algorithms we can use.
Maybe its just me...
--
Eric is chisled like a Greek Godess
Doesn't get much better than that!
--
Eric is chisled like a Greek Godess
Netscape 4.72+ are much stabler than any prior version provided you don't leave CSS on. (sometimes JavaScript crashes the browser, but I haven't seen this happen in 4.73)
--
Eric is chisled like a Greek Godess
The best way to make mozilla move zippily is to compile it yourself. Just download a source tarball, run the build configurator and do it yourself. Strip out all of the debug crap because you don't need it.
--
Eric is chisled like a Greek Godess
A big fat battery plunging through the roof of my house, along with aluminum I-beams and titanium bolts. Yippee.
These things aren't THAT accurate you know...
--
Eric is chisled like a Greek Godess
It must be freebsd ducks
I wonder if that is going to use either of the avian carrier RFCs (RFC1149 Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams on avian carriers or RFC2549 IP over Avian Carriers with Quality of Service) or if Microsoft has developed there own proprietary pigeon transmission protocol...
There was a message on enabling packet mode by default in the -current list, and most of this stuff will be MFC'd for 4-stable
In 4.0+ you can set up boot0 to use packet mode rather than the CHS mode to boot beyond 1024 cyl. Of course this IS hardware dependent and not all machines will behave properly.
I don't see how I could get an image of that quality out of my SD TV, the pixels are just to damn big.
A blatant rip of Talkie Toaster:
Windows Toaster: Given that God is infinite, and that the Universe is also infinite, would you like a toasted tea cake?
Me: We want no muffins, no toast, no tea cakes, no buns, baps, baggets or bagels. No croissants, no crumpets, no pancakes, no potato cakes, and no hot cross buns. And definitely no smegging flapjacks!
Toaster: Ah! So you're a waffle man!
That's arrogant. Yep, but that appears to be the position of the mozilla project. They've decided not to support the ILAYER element, among other things.
If you really want something that is supposed to support a standard can you expect it to be 100% backwards compatible? There will be differences between how NS4 did this one thing and how IE4 did the same thing and how the HTML spec says its supposed to be. Who is the real authority here? Nobody, but the Mozilla project chose that the W3 would be the reference (yes it isn't the perfect choice, but there really isn't) and that is what they are sticking with.
In the C programming language there is a certain specified and exact syntax and grammar required to get a program to do X. In HTML there is no absolute requirement on how to do X. You can do it by the standard, you can do it the NS way, you can do it the IE way, you can do it via the standards, you can do it...
C requires the use of a compiler that will be expecting input in a certain specified manner. HTML does not (and if it did the web wouldn't be near as far as it is today) but this has brought all the problems and breakage you suffer from between using old broswers and using a new browser.
Before I begin: My original post contained the word official formatted like this: `official' meaning that not everybody recognizes this as the best way things should be done. It is a `standard' (note the quotes) that is designed to unify (sp?) the way document rendering is performed. (ie, not everybody agrees with it)
There are four bugs with a summary description containing TBODY, so those bugs are known and being worked on. (Mozilla will continue to run Milestones long after NS6 is released. Don't confuse Netscape and Mozilla.)
Blink has been around so long, but I too wish it would be removed... (It can have uses though.) Some things are no longer being supported, such as the NS4.x ILAYER and LAYER stuff.
17 .7 The TEXTAREA element doesn't contain any mention of an "onscroll" event, and I haven't seen it anywhere else in the docs (Nor in DOM 1 or 2). Try talking to the W3 people, it isn't Mozilla's fault it isn't implemented.
TBODY align support isn't in the spec either: 11.2.3 Row groups: the THEAD, TFOOT, and TBODY elements Sorry, gotta talk to the W3 about this too.
The TBODY is a row grouping element, from the spec:
Of course, there is no mention of how to indicate that the tbody should be scrolled or printed on each page because you are supposed to use style sheets for that. (same with all rendering details)
Remember, Mozilla didn't write the spec, they just want to implement the spec. There are places (too many) that are ambiguous and must be interpreted according to the letter and intent of the writers.
And I live here...
I'll just blame finals week.
Opera (win32) doesn't support complete styling of the H1 element (as of one month ago), the size stays the same: segment7 - main page but it does do a hell of a lot better than MSIE* or NS4 at style sheet rendering.
Mozilla is going to be the first browser that doesn't (tries not to) violate the `official' specifications on how web pages should be formatted.
Unfortunately, this means that pages that were written for browsers that violated the specification will need to be rewritten. If you spot any bugs, or what you think are bugs then they should be reported at bugzilla.
I built from source on FreeBSD-current (even less bug reports/fixing there) and my only problem (with building) was that gcc2.95 outputted some poorly formed assembly that forced me to turn off optimizations for one source file.
I'm writing a heavily CSS'd and HTML4.0 strict web site that mozilla has yet to crash on when rendering. I've been writing a script for it using the DOM that adds and deletes elements including forms and input buttons that are attached to DOM to add more elements. I've probably seen one crash from a bonehead programming mistake and that's it.
If you want to check it out, http://segment7.net/php3/newpage.html but there is a bug that has been preventing me from extracting values from input elements, so not all of the input elements work.