I remember reading an article by a company which developed a racing game for XBox360 (i don't remember the company, nor the title of the game). They said that Microsoft pressured them to release the game 6 weeks early and finish it later via patches
The best programmers can make mistakes, shure, but when you start deliberately selling betas and turning them into final versions later, just so you can cash up earlier, at the expense of the customers satisfaction, that goes too far, imho.
returns a pointer to a static, but per-thread thread-local, errno variable
oh my god! this information just opened my eyes! seriously! I was wrong all the time about the "crappy" socket interface, I can't believe it! everything makes sense now! thank you!
this is simple. Error handling basically works like this
try {
command1
command2
command3
}
catch(DiskFullError E) {
messagebox("not enough free disk space\n"+E.ExtendedInformations());// this is an expected error
}
catch(NoWritePermissionError E) {
messagebox("you don\'t have write permission in that directory\n"+E.ExtendedInformations());// this is an expected error
}
catch(DirDoesntExistError E) {
messagebox("the directory you chose doesn\'t exist\n"+E.ExtendedInfo());// this is an expected error
}
catch(...) {
messagebox("an unexpected error occured");// this is where the unexpected errors are handled
}
you try to do some stuff and if something goes bad, the codes throw an exception, which can be caught by the error-handlers. and if there is no error handler for the error, then this is an unexpected error. this would crash the program, unless you do catch(...), which can also catch unknown exception types
well, in redmond it goes more like this (see MSDN)
if(!command1) {
switch(ERRNO) {
case 1: messagebox("Error code 1, contact your vendor"); break;
case 2: messagebox("Error code 2"); break;
default: messagebox("unexpected error");
}
}else {
if(!command2) {
switch(ERRNO) {
case 2: messagebox("Error code 2"); break;
case 3: messagebox("Error code 3, press F1 to see some useless hexadecimal bytes"); break;
default: messagebox("unexpected error");
}
} else {
if(!command3) {
switch(ERRNO){
case 1: messagebox("Error code 1, contact your vendor"); break;
case 4: messagebox("Error code 4, why don\'t you switch to linux?"); break;
default: messagebox("unexpected error");
}
} else { // wohoo, nothing went bad!
}
}
}
if something goes bad, a global variable (ERRNO) is set to some error code and the functions return false. the default case takes all the values of ERRNO, that are not handled explicitly
Yes, this is prehistoric and non-thread-safe error handling, but what do you expect from the masters of disaster?
Okay then - I'll start selling cars (car analogy FTW!)... I don't know anything about cars, but OTOH Microsoft doesn't know shit about Operating Systems, so aparently that's okay... I'll just sell cardboard cutouts and my government will pay for the fixes...
didn't know that... but i guess that won't help all that much if you don't already know what you're looking for... I'll keep it in mind though. thank you
you actually want to cheer for Microsoft this time as Implicit is nothing more than a patent licensing company (troll) and has done battle with Sun, AMD, Intel and NVIDIA.
I'm neither cheering for Microsoft nor for Implicit... I'm just watching with a bowl of popcorn...
although I like manpages and do consult them, I prefer googling stuff, because three problems you often have are
no examples
the parameters are sorted alphabetically - so you might have to scroll through 50 screenpages of obscure parameters that you most certainly never need until you find the one you're looking for (IF you are still reading at that point)
bad descriptions like --fluxcompensator activates fluxcompensation
just put some real-world examples at the beginning of the manpage and you're good...
so you can write malware for linux - no big deal - connecting to IRC and waiting for instructions like DDOS'ing some server and sending mails, shure that's possible. The reason why linux is so secure is not that malware was magically "impossible" (which would contradict Rice's Theorem btw)
if you have access to a machine, then OF COURSE you can install malicious binaries, only an idiot would claim the opposite! GETTING that access is the problem! and default-users don't have access to system directories, so they can only infect their own account (plus: since binaries by default don't get the execute-bit, it's quite hard to make someone execute your binary by accident e.g. by making it look like a word-document or a video or something... you have to get him to chmod +x your binary, and THAT is no accident anymore)
have you actually TRIED chrome-os? that's not an operating system, its a fullscreen browser... that might be enough for some netbooks or smartphones or maybe extremely undemanding PC users, but I doubt that it will have a serious impact on windows' sales...
brainfuck: an extremely limited assembler that only has 8 instructions or so
whitespace: like programming in 1's and 0's, just that it's spaces and tabstops instead
shakespeare: your program is a theatrical play, the variables are the actors, to declare them, you say they "enter the stage" etc
piet: your programs are images (it's like a 2D turing machine) and having "pretty" sourcecodes is the main goal - there is a program that writes "Piet" and looks like a painting by Piet Mondrian...
so if SUCH programming languages exist, I don't think interpretative dance programming languages won't be made...
developers will soon have to use Natal to "write programs through interpretative dance.
that's a funny image, but after I've seen programming languages like brainfuck, whitespace, shakespeare or piet, I'm pretty sure that some day there really will be a programming language like that...
heise (german) reported this, too, but they had some more details about the numbers:
basically what wikipedia says is, that if someone just removes a typo and then never edits anything again, you shouldn't count him as leaving editor... wikipedia's own statistic counts people who stop contributing after making at least 5 changes.
I just wrote a mail to TPB and told them, they should promote anonymous P2P... a suggestion by them should skyrocket the transfer-rates (which is the major problem with anonymous P2P so far)
I disagree... because I'm not a racist like you...
I want discrimination to end, you are one of the people who keep it alive, because you just can't stop classifying people based on their skincolor...
IF the intention WAS to be racist (to insult blacks in general and not michelle obama in particular), then WHY would the creator have used a picture of her and not of any other non-famous black person?
saying "this is different from bush/chimpanzee" just because michelle obama is black, implies that black and white people are not equal. YOU are telling us to make differences based on skincolor, which is the exact definition of discrimination. YOU are telling us to discriminate!
If that picture was made to insult black people in general (not michelle obama in particular), then why did the creator use a picture of her and not any other (non-famous) black person?
I shrugged my shoulders when I saw that picture, just like I shrugged my shoulders when I saw the bush/chimpanzee pictures and you know why? because I deeply believe that we should get rid of discrimination. The meaning of that word is "making differences between races/genders/etc" in any way, but I think many people believe that "putting an end to discrimination" meant something like "taking revenge for what happened"
When you tell me I should go nuts about that picture, but not about the bush/chimpanzee pictures, you are telling me to discriminate (agains white people). Its people like you, who just can't stop using the skincolor to classify a human being, that keep discrimination alive, so go and f... yourself!
why is that picture "racially offensive"?
because the portrayed person is black?
what if it was made by a black person?
do we know it wasn't made by a black person?
would it be racially offensive it it portrayed a white person and was made by a black person?
if we want to reach REAL equality between all races, this also means we mustn't go nuts about an insult to a person from one race while not caring about the same insult to a person from another race (remember the bush/chimpanzee pictures?)
Slashdot Mirror
I'd bet comparing them is NP-Complete and even W[1] Hard or W[2] Hard (looks like an instance of Max-Clique or Dominating-Set)
you misunderstood me. I didn't mean that ironic, I'm serious, You taught me something I didn't know and I thanked you for that.
I remember reading an article by a company which developed a racing game for XBox360 (i don't remember the company, nor the title of the game). They said that Microsoft pressured them to release the game 6 weeks early and finish it later via patches
The best programmers can make mistakes, shure, but when you start deliberately selling betas and turning them into final versions later, just so you can cash up earlier, at the expense of the customers satisfaction, that goes too far, imho.
oh my god! this information just opened my eyes! seriously! I was wrong all the time about the "crappy" socket interface, I can't believe it! everything makes sense now! thank you!
you try to do some stuff and if something goes bad, the codes throw an exception, which can be caught by the error-handlers. and if there is no error handler for the error, then this is an unexpected error. this would crash the program, unless you do catch(...), which can also catch unknown exception types
well, in redmond it goes more like this (see MSDN)
if something goes bad, a global variable (ERRNO) is set to some error code and the functions return false. the default case takes all the values of ERRNO, that are not handled explicitly Yes, this is prehistoric and non-thread-safe error handling, but what do you expect from the masters of disaster?
Isn't that some sort of pyramid scheme?
What the summary didn't mention: the screensaver has been there less than 24 hours.
see pro-linux.de (german)
Okay then - I'll start selling cars (car analogy FTW!)... I don't know anything about cars, but OTOH Microsoft doesn't know shit about Operating Systems, so aparently that's okay... I'll just sell cardboard cutouts and my government will pay for the fixes...
PROFIT!
didn't know that... but i guess that won't help all that much if you don't already know what you're looking for... I'll keep it in mind though. thank you
IF you still remember what it was, you wanted to do at that point... ;-)
I'm neither cheering for Microsoft nor for Implicit... I'm just watching with a bowl of popcorn...
just put some real-world examples at the beginning of the manpage and you're good...
it's not april 1...
so you can write malware for linux - no big deal - connecting to IRC and waiting for instructions like DDOS'ing some server and sending mails, shure that's possible. The reason why linux is so secure is not that malware was magically "impossible" (which would contradict Rice's Theorem btw)
if you have access to a machine, then OF COURSE you can install malicious binaries, only an idiot would claim the opposite! GETTING that access is the problem! and default-users don't have access to system directories, so they can only infect their own account (plus: since binaries by default don't get the execute-bit, it's quite hard to make someone execute your binary by accident e.g. by making it look like a word-document or a video or something... you have to get him to chmod +x your binary, and THAT is no accident anymore)
have you actually TRIED chrome-os? that's not an operating system, its a fullscreen browser... that might be enough for some netbooks or smartphones or maybe extremely undemanding PC users, but I doubt that it will have a serious impact on windows' sales...
so if SUCH programming languages exist, I don't think interpretative dance programming languages won't be made...
that's a funny image, but after I've seen programming languages like brainfuck, whitespace, shakespeare or piet, I'm pretty sure that some day there really will be a programming language like that...
heise (german) reported this, too, but they had some more details about the numbers:
basically what wikipedia says is, that if someone just removes a typo and then never edits anything again, you shouldn't count him as leaving editor... wikipedia's own statistic counts people who stop contributing after making at least 5 changes.
I just wrote a mail to TPB and told them, they should promote anonymous P2P... a suggestion by them should skyrocket the transfer-rates (which is the major problem with anonymous P2P so far)
I disagree... because I'm not a racist like you...
I want discrimination to end, you are one of the people who keep it alive, because you just can't stop classifying people based on their skincolor...
IF the intention WAS to be racist (to insult blacks in general and not michelle obama in particular), then WHY would the creator have used a picture of her and not of any other non-famous black person?
saying "this is different from bush/chimpanzee" just because michelle obama is black, implies that black and white people are not equal. YOU are telling us to make differences based on skincolor, which is the exact definition of discrimination. YOU are telling us to discriminate!
my response to a different reply applies to you as well...
If that picture was made to insult black people in general (not michelle obama in particular), then why did the creator use a picture of her and not any other (non-famous) black person?
I shrugged my shoulders when I saw that picture, just like I shrugged my shoulders when I saw the bush/chimpanzee pictures and you know why? because I deeply believe that we should get rid of discrimination. The meaning of that word is "making differences between races/genders/etc" in any way, but I think many people believe that "putting an end to discrimination" meant something like "taking revenge for what happened"
When you tell me I should go nuts about that picture, but not about the bush/chimpanzee pictures, you are telling me to discriminate (agains white people). Its people like you, who just can't stop using the skincolor to classify a human being, that keep discrimination alive, so go and f... yourself!
so what you are saying is that you don't believe, that black and white people are equal?
why is that picture "racially offensive"?
because the portrayed person is black?
what if it was made by a black person?
do we know it wasn't made by a black person?
would it be racially offensive it it portrayed a white person and was made by a black person?
if we want to reach REAL equality between all races, this also means we mustn't go nuts about an insult to a person from one race while not caring about the same insult to a person from another race (remember the bush/chimpanzee pictures?)