Yes I am suggesting C++ is a lot better. What the fuck does Microsoft and cross platform have to do with anything?
A lot better than what? A kick in the teeth? Yeah, probably; but only just...
C++ ain't all that. Actually it was INTENTIONALLY DESIGNED AS A PRANK. In fact, according to the Father of C++ Bjarne Stroustrup, the joke's on YOU...
So, enjoy your PRANK of a Language, Suckas!!!!
Ok, so I'll "out" myself before anyone else does...
The "IEEE" interview linked-to above is (well, duh!) a FAKE!
OSX is "available to the masses" in the same way that business class air travel is.
The next time I have $3k lying around to try OSX and decide if I want a really expensive Windows laptop, I guess I can see if it's really improved that much since Leopard..
You know that's a lie.
You can dip your toe into the modern OS X world for a LOT less than $3k.
I said "dip". You're "evaluating" whether OS X works for YOU, right? So you don't necessarily need a brand-new, maxed-out machine right off the bat, just to kick the tires a bit. Almost ANY Mac that will run 10.6.8 Snow Leopard, will also run the latest OS X version, 10.11.4 El Capitan, AFAIK.
And if you're game to be a little adventurous, you can build a non-Apple "Evaluation" machine, install OS X on it (with perhaps other OSes, e.g. Linux), and if you decide that OS X still isn't your cup of tea, well then you still have yourself a machine that can be repurposed.
BUT... If you decide after a FAIR trial, that you DO kinda like OS X afterall, like so many other Linux and Windows-oriented people; you can start thinking about a decent Mac laptop. Now, I don't know your "application envelope", but I would bet that you could come up with a Mac Laptop that would suit your needs, but I agree that it would likely trend toward the $3k mark. But by that time, you would have decided to at least have OS X in the mix in a fairly major way, if not already your "Daily Driver".
I guess the fact that 18 years >> 4 months is lost on you. Oh well, enjoy Swift until Apple gets bored with it and discontinues it and replaces it with something "better".
Apple isn't Google. In oh, so many ways (thank Diety).
Apple told developers that Swift 2.2 would be obsolete in 4 months? Wow, and people still used it? How stupid.
So, when some random FOSS project by some neckbeards releases a bunch of updates in short order they're "in active development"; bug when Apple does it, they're The Great Satan?!?
You are conflating compilers with language stability. The fact is that Apple could discontinue Swift tomorrow and you would by out of luck. Avoid corporate controlled languages.
Different people define "obsolete" in different ways. I might feel justified in calling my 6502 assembly language knowledge not obsolete because just last year I found work as lead programmer for a project using it [3dcartstores.com].
LDA year ; offset from 1900
CMP #115
BGE 75
Or something.
BGE was actually NOT a 6502 mnemonic. It was a 6809 instruction (and maybe 6800). But some 6502 assemblers had a BGE macro, IIRC. It translates to BCS (Branch on Carry Set).
PPC wasn't tabbed by Apple. It was in the best interest of Motorola to have 68K instructions handled in hardware.
Did they help make the case? Sure.
the 68k emulation wasn't in hardware. It was in Firmware.
When the Segment Loader detected that the segment is 68k code, it would invoke a wickedly-cool JIT COMPLIER to TRANSLATE that block of code into PPC. Then it would continue on.
The genius of the whole thing relied on a few things:
1. Apple's JIT compiler was FAST and produced EXCELLENT PPC code, plus it was only translating a relatively small amount of code at a time.
2. CPUs and entire systems were getting faster. This always helps...
3. IIRC, the PPC architecture had massive numbers of Registers. This also helps.
4. The PPC architecture is more cycle efficient in most cases than 68k. Again, this helps.
And so, that system worked SO well that Apple was able to leave whole chunks of MacOS in 68k code until (I believe) MacOS 8.5, and most users never even noticed!
Oh believe you me, I was thinking that the entire time I was dealing with this mess (rushing to create and burn these movies for my wife's project).
Truly sorry you had to suffer THAT particular brand of brain-damage! Nothing like watching the hours (and DVD coasters) pile up, with no end (but an ever-looming deadline) in sight...
Not your fault that your Wife picked a class of Project for which Linux (actually, the "tools" available. Not actually Linux' fault!) REALLY sucks. And you have the stack of coasters in case anyone says different, right?!?
Assuming you didn't have your/sarcasm tag set to "stealth mode" (one can never tell on Slashdot, especially when topics Apple are involved...), I REALLY urge you as a Developer who I assume is Linux-oriented, to take a serious look at OS X.
Don't let the Haters hate. It's REALLY a fantastic OS, especially UNDER the hood... Nothing's perfect, of course; but I honestly can't think of a more overall "refined" (and I mean that NOT in an eye-candy way, but rather, architecturally) OS available to the masses.
I love Linux, and for a developer it is great -- but the quality of the end-user software in Ubuntu is abysmal. It seems like Ubuntu wants to pull in the new shiny with no regard to quality. BTW, using Ubuntu 14.04 LTS.
I'm REALLY not trolling here; but there are about 3 different out-of-the-box ways that your Wife's project could have been accomplished on OS X.
And to you, I say as a Developer, there's plenty of "Developer" Goodness available in OS X. In some ways, even more than in Linux.
One could argue that M6800 is a nicer arcitecture to code for, but 6800 is a dead architecture. M6809 is better than 6502, too, but another dead architecture.
Wow! FINALLY something we can agree on, LOL!!! Mark this date on your calendar!!!
I LOVE the 6809. It's more like a miniature 68k in some respects than a beefed-up 6800. I just wish it had caught on as a core for Mot.'s MCUs, rather than the pissant 6801 core they used in the 6805 and HC11 series.
I have written tens and tens of thousands of lines of Assembly code for all of those cores, and even modified a popular Apple ][ 6502 assembler to cross-assemble 6809 (and later, even 8085) code.
True, but relatively speaking, the change overs weren't completely horrific. The 68K and Mac OS 9 emulation stuck around for quite a while before being dropped. The "Universal apps" were also quite a clever use of NeXT's tech with multi-arch binaries.
I think you can STILL run Carbon Apps (as long as they are at least universal binary), even though Carbon has been deprecated for SEVERAL years now.
Apple developers are probably used to the abuse by this point considering that the Mac itself has undergone three architecture changes as they moved from the Motorola 68000 to IBM PowerPC and then to x86. I wouldn't be surprised if in another five years they've completed abandoned x86 and move to using their own ARM SoC designs for all of their products.
It's not abuse; it's evolution, and Apple, it's development community (assisted in no small measure by some VERY clever tools and APIs by Apple), and it's OSes have done a FANTASTIC job of making those transitions nearly painless for the average Mac user.
Can you imagine the clusterfuck that would ensue if MS tried to do that with Windows? Hell, they couldn't even do a transition from 32 bit to 64 bit ON THE SAME CPU without a bunch of bullshit THAT AFFECTS THE USER (separate 32 and 64 bit OSes, APIs, Drivers, Apps, etc). WHAT a CLUSTER!!!
To my knowledge, The only time that kind of BS affects a Mac user is with AU plugins. And there are "wrappers" that in most cases can handle even that without involving a recompile or redesign of the plugin.
Different people define "obsolete" in different ways. I might feel justified in calling my 6502 assembly language knowledge not obsolete because just last year I found work as lead programmer for a project using it [3dcartstores.com].
Hey! I read somewhere a few years ago that the 6502 is/was the most popular CPU core in application-specific ICs. Might not be true anymore, but you don't exactly need a 32 bit ARM for a LOT of things even now, and PICs are too pricey for a lot of applications.
Plus, there isn't a more "accessible" ML than the 650x instruction set.
Too bad if you put time into learning Swift 2.0. That knowledge is now obsolete. And when Swift 4.0 comes out, your Swift 3.0 knowledge will be obsolete. My advice to young programmers: avoid languages owned by corporations. They have time and money to waste. You don't.
You must be some kind of piss-poor excuse for a developer if you can't handle a little bit of syntactic growing pains in a brand new language.
My feeling is that you simply saw "Apple" and warmed up your flamethrower.
You have never written a single byte of code in your life.
Make no mistake: this isn't Swift version 3 - it is the language Swift 3. I guess Swift 4 will not be (completely) backwards compatible either. Because the idea of a programming language evolving from a stable, thoroughly tested base specification is old - not fit for the Apple(TM) generation...
You conveniently missed the part in TFS where Apple said they are going to try not to make sweeping syntactic changes from here on out.
but rust is a far more "safe" language than Swift is.
Rust has been infected with cancer of SJW's and a stupidly crazy code of conduct.
All the good developers will leave soon, driven away by the anti-meritocracists.
I'm no SJW; far from it. But Slashdot could do worse than to adopt at least some of those "Stupidly Crazy" Code of Conduct rules.
A number of people are selling flash drives with the latest version of OS X on Amazon. If you're putting together a Hackintosh, it's worth grabbing one for a few bucks.
Technically, Amazon shouldn't be selling those, but Apple has never enforced copyright against individuals (or really anyone that I've ever heard).
Having said that, I would agree, unless you know someone with a Mac that can snag an installer from the Mac App Store.;-) there are also images floating about; but for obvious reasons, I don't recommend that if at all possible (even though the Installer is checked for integrity before installation). And quite frankly, a USB stick from some random Amazon seller is potentially as dangerous. Having said that, I have never heard of someone getting an "infected" Installer from anywhere.
Then use the most-excellent utility, DiskMaker X (Donationware) on an OS X machine to create a bootable USB stick (8 GB or bigger) with the Installer App and various Utilities loaded on it.
Pro tip: Just remember to set your system Date to the same as the CREATION Date of the Installer APP before Installing, or you will get an error.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes I am suggesting C++ is a lot better. What the fuck does Microsoft and cross platform have to do with anything?
A lot better than what? A kick in the teeth? Yeah, probably; but only just... C++ ain't all that. Actually it was INTENTIONALLY DESIGNED AS A PRANK. In fact, according to the Father of C++ Bjarne Stroustrup, the joke's on YOU... So, enjoy your PRANK of a Language, Suckas!!!!
Ok, so I'll "out" myself before anyone else does...
The "IEEE" interview linked-to above is (well, duh!) a FAKE!
Gas Music From Jupiter, INDEED!!!
But according to the "horse's" website, HERE IS THE REAL INTERVIEW.
Or is it...? (Sorry, couldn't resist)
OSX is "available to the masses" in the same way that business class air travel is.
The next time I have $3k lying around to try OSX and decide if I want a really expensive Windows laptop, I guess I can see if it's really improved that much since Leopard..
You know that's a lie.
You can dip your toe into the modern OS X world for a LOT less than $3k.
I said "dip". You're "evaluating" whether OS X works for YOU, right? So you don't necessarily need a brand-new, maxed-out machine right off the bat, just to kick the tires a bit. Almost ANY Mac that will run 10.6.8 Snow Leopard, will also run the latest OS X version, 10.11.4 El Capitan, AFAIK.
And if you're game to be a little adventurous, you can build a non-Apple "Evaluation" machine, install OS X on it (with perhaps other OSes, e.g. Linux), and if you decide that OS X still isn't your cup of tea, well then you still have yourself a machine that can be repurposed.
BUT... If you decide after a FAIR trial, that you DO kinda like OS X afterall, like so many other Linux and Windows-oriented people; you can start thinking about a decent Mac laptop. Now, I don't know your "application envelope", but I would bet that you could come up with a Mac Laptop that would suit your needs, but I agree that it would likely trend toward the $3k mark. But by that time, you would have decided to at least have OS X in the mix in a fairly major way, if not already your "Daily Driver".
See what I'm sayin'?
Yes I am suggesting C++ is a lot better. What the fuck does Microsoft and cross platform have to do with anything?
A lot better than what? A kick in the teeth? Yeah, probably; but only just...
C++ ain't all that. Actually it was INTENTIONALLY DESIGNED AS A PRANK. In fact, according to the Father of C++ Bjarne Stroustrup, the joke's on YOU...
So, enjoy your PRANK of a Language, Suckas!!!!
I guess the fact that 18 years >> 4 months is lost on you. Oh well, enjoy Swift until Apple gets bored with it and discontinues it and replaces it with something "better".
Apple isn't Google. In oh, so many ways (thank Diety).
Apple told developers that Swift 2.2 would be obsolete in 4 months? Wow, and people still used it? How stupid.
So, when some random FOSS project by some neckbeards releases a bunch of updates in short order they're "in active development"; bug when Apple does it, they're The Great Satan?!?
You are conflating compilers with language stability. The fact is that Apple could discontinue Swift tomorrow and you would by out of luck. Avoid corporate controlled languages.
FFS, what "Corporate Control"???
Did you miss the part where Apple OPEN SOURCED Swift, and basically dumped the ENTIRE Project on GitHub???
JEEZUS, you're stupid.
LDA year ; offset from 1900
CMP #115
BGE 75
Or something.
BGE was actually NOT a 6502 mnemonic. It was a 6809 instruction (and maybe 6800). But some 6502 assemblers had a BGE macro, IIRC. It translates to BCS (Branch on Carry Set).
PPC wasn't tabbed by Apple. It was in the best interest of Motorola to have 68K instructions handled in hardware.
Did they help make the case? Sure.
the 68k emulation wasn't in hardware. It was in Firmware.
When the Segment Loader detected that the segment is 68k code, it would invoke a wickedly-cool JIT COMPLIER to TRANSLATE that block of code into PPC. Then it would continue on.
The genius of the whole thing relied on a few things:
1. Apple's JIT compiler was FAST and produced EXCELLENT PPC code, plus it was only translating a relatively small amount of code at a time.
2. CPUs and entire systems were getting faster. This always helps...
3. IIRC, the PPC architecture had massive numbers of Registers. This also helps.
4. The PPC architecture is more cycle efficient in most cases than 68k. Again, this helps.
And so, that system worked SO well that Apple was able to leave whole chunks of MacOS in 68k code until (I believe) MacOS 8.5, and most users never even noticed!
But it still wasn't in Hardware.
Oh believe you me, I was thinking that the entire time I was dealing with this mess (rushing to create and burn these movies for my wife's project).
Truly sorry you had to suffer THAT particular brand of brain-damage! Nothing like watching the hours (and DVD coasters) pile up, with no end (but an ever-looming deadline) in sight...
/sarcasm tag set to "stealth mode" (one can never tell on Slashdot, especially when topics Apple are involved...), I REALLY urge you as a Developer who I assume is Linux-oriented, to take a serious look at OS X.
Not your fault that your Wife picked a class of Project for which Linux (actually, the "tools" available. Not actually Linux' fault!) REALLY sucks. And you have the stack of coasters in case anyone says different, right?!?
Assuming you didn't have your
Don't let the Haters hate. It's REALLY a fantastic OS, especially UNDER the hood... Nothing's perfect, of course; but I honestly can't think of a more overall "refined" (and I mean that NOT in an eye-candy way, but rather, architecturally) OS available to the masses.
I love Linux, and for a developer it is great -- but the quality of the end-user software in Ubuntu is abysmal. It seems like Ubuntu wants to pull in the new shiny with no regard to quality. BTW, using Ubuntu 14.04 LTS.
I'm REALLY not trolling here; but there are about 3 different out-of-the-box ways that your Wife's project could have been accomplished on OS X.
And to you, I say as a Developer, there's plenty of "Developer" Goodness available in OS X. In some ways, even more than in Linux.
One could argue that M6800 is a nicer arcitecture to code for, but 6800 is a dead architecture. M6809 is better than 6502, too, but another dead architecture.
Wow! FINALLY something we can agree on, LOL!!! Mark this date on your calendar!!!
I LOVE the 6809. It's more like a miniature 68k in some respects than a beefed-up 6800. I just wish it had caught on as a core for Mot.'s MCUs, rather than the pissant 6801 core they used in the 6805 and HC11 series.
I have written tens and tens of thousands of lines of Assembly code for all of those cores, and even modified a popular Apple ][ 6502 assembler to cross-assemble 6809 (and later, even 8085) code.
Good times, good times...
C++ is 30+ years old. Swift 2.2 is 4 MONTHS old and is obsolete. I hope you see the difference here.
Yes, C++ is mature (God help it). Swift is still evolving.
In 5 years Swift won't even be around. Apple will have moved on to something else. But enjoy chasing them around.
HOW long has it been since Apple moved from Pascal as the preferred language to Objective-C?
Apple does NOT have a history of creating and abandoning Languages willy-nilly (Dylan notwithstanding).
True, but relatively speaking, the change overs weren't completely horrific. The 68K and Mac OS 9 emulation stuck around for quite a while before being dropped. The "Universal apps" were also quite a clever use of NeXT's tech with multi-arch binaries.
I think you can STILL run Carbon Apps (as long as they are at least universal binary), even though Carbon has been deprecated for SEVERAL years now.
Apple developers are probably used to the abuse by this point considering that the Mac itself has undergone three architecture changes as they moved from the Motorola 68000 to IBM PowerPC and then to x86. I wouldn't be surprised if in another five years they've completed abandoned x86 and move to using their own ARM SoC designs for all of their products.
It's not abuse; it's evolution, and Apple, it's development community (assisted in no small measure by some VERY clever tools and APIs by Apple), and it's OSes have done a FANTASTIC job of making those transitions nearly painless for the average Mac user.
Can you imagine the clusterfuck that would ensue if MS tried to do that with Windows? Hell, they couldn't even do a transition from 32 bit to 64 bit ON THE SAME CPU without a bunch of bullshit THAT AFFECTS THE USER (separate 32 and 64 bit OSes, APIs, Drivers, Apps, etc). WHAT a CLUSTER!!!
To my knowledge, The only time that kind of BS affects a Mac user is with AU plugins. And there are "wrappers" that in most cases can handle even that without involving a recompile or redesign of the plugin.
Different people define "obsolete" in different ways. I might feel justified in calling my 6502 assembly language knowledge not obsolete because just last year I found work as lead programmer for a project using it [3dcartstores.com].
Hey! I read somewhere a few years ago that the 6502 is/was the most popular CPU core in application-specific ICs. Might not be true anymore, but you don't exactly need a 32 bit ARM for a LOT of things even now, and PICs are too pricey for a lot of applications.
Plus, there isn't a more "accessible" ML than the 650x instruction set.
Too bad if you put time into learning Swift 2.0. That knowledge is now obsolete. And when Swift 4.0 comes out, your Swift 3.0 knowledge will be obsolete. My advice to young programmers: avoid languages owned by corporations. They have time and money to waste. You don't.
You must be some kind of piss-poor excuse for a developer if you can't handle a little bit of syntactic growing pains in a brand new language.
My feeling is that you simply saw "Apple" and warmed up your flamethrower.
You have never written a single byte of code in your life.
Apple has always done this with everything they do. They don't treat backwards-compatibility as ultra important like Microsoft does.
No! instead! MS just obsoletes and renames entire technologies and APIs on a regular basis.
Make no mistake: this isn't Swift version 3 - it is the language Swift 3. I guess Swift 4 will not be (completely) backwards compatible either. Because the idea of a programming language evolving from a stable, thoroughly tested base specification is old - not fit for the Apple(TM) generation...
You conveniently missed the part in TFS where Apple said they are going to try not to make sweeping syntactic changes from here on out.
None of their products work well. They're all hopelessly out of date. Why would anyone ever use Swift? Java is far superior.
God DAMN!!!
Some people will even bitch when somebody GIVES them something!!!
Now go crawl back under your slime-encrusted rock and DIE MOTHERFUCKER DIE!!!!
You are not worth wasting the planet's oxygen.
but rust is a far more "safe" language than Swift is.
Rust has been infected with cancer of SJW's and a stupidly crazy code of conduct. All the good developers will leave soon, driven away by the anti-meritocracists.
I'm no SJW; far from it. But Slashdot could do worse than to adopt at least some of those "Stupidly Crazy" Code of Conduct rules.
A number of people are selling flash drives with the latest version of OS X on Amazon. If you're putting together a Hackintosh, it's worth grabbing one for a few bucks.
Technically, Amazon shouldn't be selling those, but Apple has never enforced copyright against individuals (or really anyone that I've ever heard).
;-) there are also images floating about; but for obvious reasons, I don't recommend that if at all possible (even though the Installer is checked for integrity before installation). And quite frankly, a USB stick from some random Amazon seller is potentially as dangerous. Having said that, I have never heard of someone getting an "infected" Installer from anywhere.
Having said that, I would agree, unless you know someone with a Mac that can snag an installer from the Mac App Store.
Then use the most-excellent utility, DiskMaker X (Donationware) on an OS X machine to create a bootable USB stick (8 GB or bigger) with the Installer App and various Utilities loaded on it.
Pro tip: Just remember to set your system Date to the same as the CREATION Date of the Installer APP before Installing, or you will get an error.
What the fuck does OS X have to do with Linux?
Nothing at all, fortunately.
Ha. You need that in person too? :P
No; but I've learned that people often need it with me! ;-)
Dude, it's called a joke/sarcasm.
Sorry, I guess I didn't notice the sarcasm tag.
Oh, wait...