What I find amazing is how fast those drivers react when shit happens. Seeing someone lose control of their car and getting it back in a fraction of a second is well worth watching all the boring parts as well.
Whatever the case may be, the idea certainly didn't spread into neither (cross-platform?) APIs, nor application design. Qt, for example, offers no asynchronous file operations, and most applications I've seen do disk I/O in the GUI thread.
It's easy to notice because everything grinds to a halt when the disk is thrashing. One would think we can do better in the age of supercomputers.
OK, so they run memory allocation in a separate thread. What exactly does the other thread do while the mm thread is running, and if it blocks like I think, how does that speed anything up?
The idea sounds fun, but this approach requires a rewrite to make it usable, like most everything else out there.
The most noticeable speedup I found with threading was to separate disk I/O out in its own thread.
There's only been 44 P's OTUS, and 2 of them have now been indicated as having "corrupted and subverted existing [wiretapping] laws", so it's not surprising at all that they are both affiliated with the same party.
It's exactly as surprising as two heads when flipping a coin twice.
Btw as long as they get to choose the candidate, it doesn't matter whether you vote D or R, they still win.
I agree but I don't think it's a good thing. I'm afraid that Google has such a lead in the search engine technology as well as the market share, and the brain power behind it all, that it is almost impossible to beat.
Competition is always a good thing. Think about it: if Google stops indexing the website of a business that makes most of their sales online, they go bankrupt.
No, they said it's completely unchanged across platforms. Wanna guess how it looks on Windows?
In other words, the exact same code base is used to build versions for five different environments. There's no other platform in the world that can boast this level of flexibility -- not even close.
This is rather important in my opinion, and I find myself recommending these kinds of programs (Firefox, Open Office, VLC, Gimp, Pidgin, etc), because when a computer illiterate friend learns a program like this, they are less locked into their OS.
Excuse me, but what does that mean? Switching between Winamp and Amarok is trivial for the average house plant. People who can't do that are not only locked into their OS, they're locked into the same exact UI theme with the same exact settings. What happens when they have to use other computers?
If you want your friends to be cross-platform, show them this, and don't let them get comfortable with any specific settings, until they can handle any UI.
The server and the databases are all developed separately, and it's up to you to host it. In fact,
MaNGOS is an educational project. This means, our primary interest is to learn and teach us and our users more about C++ project development in a large scale. Our software is not intended for running public servers, and we do not support that.
And to give you a hint about the complexity: MaNGOS is 12 MB of C++ (mostly uncommented), and my full database took 110 MB of SQL.
as nobody has a direct access to their server-side assets
But anyone can write a new server, and Blizzard is not doing anything to force you on theirs. That's how I started playing WoW, then got fed up with the quality, and moved to retail. In fact, most Hungarians start out with WoW this way (at least I've never met anyone who didn't).
Now, imagine people saying "Man, fuck this pirated Assassin's Creed, I want mine with DRM!".
Let me rephrase it: Blizzard found a way to turn the freeloaders into very effective marketing precisely because they concentrated on the product and not how it was protected. Ubisoft is actively scaring their costumers away.
In fact, this is something that Ubisoft would take as a pro thing for their DRM - start keeping even more on server-side and it will never be breakable.
See, that's the difference. Blizzard stays ahead of the private servers by making a superior product. Ubisoft thinks they can require an internet connection for a single-player game.
The message is already out there: the World of Warcraft client doesn't contain anything that would resemble DRM, copy protection, registration, whatever. You just copy it over from your friend, and run it. Changing from the retail server to a private one is accomplished by changing one line in a plain text file with Notepad.
Here's the trick: the game you pay for is better than the one you get for free. The maintainers of the private servers simply cannot keep up with Blizzard's development speed. They're not threatening Blizzard's profit, they're basically marketing for them.
Let me say it again, in case someone from Ubisoft reads this. The WoW you pay for is better than the one you get for free.
Just because people can't get rid of it doesn't mean it shouldn't die.
In 1997, the Gartner Group reported that 80% of the world's business ran on COBOL with over 200 billion lines of code in existence and with an estimated 5 billion lines of new code annually.
It's evolving, too:
Work is progressing on the next full revision of the COBOL Standard. It is expected to be approved and available in the early 2010s.
And if you still think it's unfair to compare Java to COBOL, I got news for you.
Slashdot Mirror
What I find amazing is how fast those drivers react when shit happens. Seeing someone lose control of their car and getting it back in a fraction of a second is well worth watching all the boring parts as well.
It's a shame. Or, maybe it's a pancake. Doesn't make any difference to most people.
I'm very apancaked that Slashdot has editors who can't read.
just keep a certain amount reserved, or don't free stuff instantly (in case it's about to be reallocated).
I imagine that wouldn't work well with some security features.
You don't want to be labeled "less secure than Vista", do you?
Whatever the case may be, the idea certainly didn't spread into neither (cross-platform?) APIs, nor application design. Qt, for example, offers no asynchronous file operations, and most applications I've seen do disk I/O in the GUI thread.
It's easy to notice because everything grinds to a halt when the disk is thrashing. One would think we can do better in the age of supercomputers.
(dependent on a very good compiler)
Did anyone manage to write one of those? Last I heard it was extremely hard to write even a decent one for 128 registers.
OK, so they run memory allocation in a separate thread. What exactly does the other thread do while the mm thread is running, and if it blocks like I think, how does that speed anything up?
The idea sounds fun, but this approach requires a rewrite to make it usable, like most everything else out there.
The most noticeable speedup I found with threading was to separate disk I/O out in its own thread.
All the people who don't fit into your generalizations.
You're the one arguing automatics can't be controlled properly. I want to know in what ways.
For one, manuals have a pedal that allows you to physically disconnect a runaway engine from the tires. Also read this.
Like you need a better resumé than "I worked at NASA".
There's only been 44 P's OTUS, and 2 of them have now been indicated as having "corrupted and subverted existing [wiretapping] laws", so it's not surprising at all that they are both affiliated with the same party.
It's exactly as surprising as two heads when flipping a coin twice.
Btw as long as they get to choose the candidate, it doesn't matter whether you vote D or R, they still win.
I agree but I don't think it's a good thing. I'm afraid that Google has such a lead in the search engine technology as well as the market share, and the brain power behind it all, that it is almost impossible to beat.
Competition is always a good thing. Think about it: if Google stops indexing the website of a business that makes most of their sales online, they go bankrupt.
Posted by kdawson
'Nuff said.
No, they said it's completely unchanged across platforms. Wanna guess how it looks on Windows?
In other words, the exact same code base is used to build versions for five different environments. There's no other platform in the world that can boast this level of flexibility -- not even close.
These guys obviously never heard of Unix before.
This is rather important in my opinion, and I find myself recommending these kinds of programs (Firefox, Open Office, VLC, Gimp, Pidgin, etc), because when a computer illiterate friend learns a program like this, they are less locked into their OS.
Excuse me, but what does that mean? Switching between Winamp and Amarok is trivial for the average house plant. People who can't do that are not only locked into their OS, they're locked into the same exact UI theme with the same exact settings. What happens when they have to use other computers?
If you want your friends to be cross-platform, show them this, and don't let them get comfortable with any specific settings, until they can handle any UI.
The US is no longer the only place that is a land flowing with opportunity and people willing to take a risk to make something new.
Yeah, Microsoft stopped buying out their competitors in bulk.
If you tax them, they move to India. Shareholders don't care.
Maybe the goverment should try spending less for a change.
I assembled my own recently.
The server and the databases are all developed separately, and it's up to you to host it. In fact,
MaNGOS is an educational project. This means, our primary interest is to learn and teach us and our users more about C++ project development in a large scale. Our software is not intended for running public servers, and we do not support that.
And to give you a hint about the complexity: MaNGOS is 12 MB of C++ (mostly uncommented), and my full database took 110 MB of SQL.
as nobody has a direct access to their server-side assets
But anyone can write a new server, and Blizzard is not doing anything to force you on theirs. That's how I started playing WoW, then got fed up with the quality, and moved to retail. In fact, most Hungarians start out with WoW this way (at least I've never met anyone who didn't).
Now, imagine people saying "Man, fuck this pirated Assassin's Creed, I want mine with DRM!".
Let me rephrase it: Blizzard found a way to turn the freeloaders into very effective marketing precisely because they concentrated on the product and not how it was protected. Ubisoft is actively scaring their costumers away.
In fact, this is something that Ubisoft would take as a pro thing for their DRM - start keeping even more on server-side and it will never be breakable.
See, that's the difference. Blizzard stays ahead of the private servers by making a superior product. Ubisoft thinks they can require an internet connection for a single-player game.
DRM doesn't affect pirates
Everyone repeat this until it sinks in. It only takes one DRM-free copy from some ubercracker.
The message is already out there: the World of Warcraft client doesn't contain anything that would resemble DRM, copy protection, registration, whatever. You just copy it over from your friend, and run it. Changing from the retail server to a private one is accomplished by changing one line in a plain text file with Notepad.
Here's the trick: the game you pay for is better than the one you get for free. The maintainers of the private servers simply cannot keep up with Blizzard's development speed. They're not threatening Blizzard's profit, they're basically marketing for them.
Let me say it again, in case someone from Ubisoft reads this. The WoW you pay for is better than the one you get for free.
Just because people can't get rid of it doesn't mean it shouldn't die.
In 1997, the Gartner Group reported that 80% of the world's business ran on COBOL with over 200 billion lines of code in existence and with an estimated 5 billion lines of new code annually.
It's evolving, too:
Work is progressing on the next full revision of the COBOL Standard. It is expected to be approved and available in the early 2010s.
And if you still think it's unfair to compare Java to COBOL, I got news for you.
Do you want explosions or test AIs? Computer games can provide the perfect measuring environment: you control exactly what data they have, etc.
All those "COBOL is going to die" people are silly and not grounded in reality. Plenty of talented developers see its power and use it.
Java got drowned in four letter acronyms on top of yet another layer of XML. I say let it die.