We Duh! I have read many science fiction novels, and infecting people with a virus intended to cure them always works! I have no idea what your concerns are.. do you know anything? Moral issues - feh.
Actually, parent is wrong. 64Bit definitely does not mean that each instruction is 64 bits long (/fact+digression: each instruction on PowerPC is exactly 4 bytes).
64 bit means: data being operated upon is 64 bits. If all you did was work with 64 bit data (ie. longs), you would more than twice as fast as you would normally be on 32 bit platforms with 64 bit data. But if all you do is 32 bit work, then sure, no gain.
GDB is an excellent debugger, but I believe a graphical interface just makes the debugging session more productive. Debugging low level code with gdb is not fun. Has any one tried multithreaded apps?
Some people may like DDD, but if I wanted to inflict torture to myself, I much prefer banging ze head againt ze wall.
Kdevelop and others have their niche. But just aren't robust enough yet.
Yes MsDev keeps me tied to Windows.
Maybe a new, improved microkernel? [tu-dresden.de] Not MACH.
Read the articly first. There is much talk and work in progress on porting the hurd to L4 (the link you point to). (Look at the the archives for l4-hurd@_SPAM_gnu_NOT_.org mailing list).
Hurd is really a wholly different way of writing an OS. Note that I am not saying that it is better or worse, it is just different. Enough reason for the project to exist? You point to several different places where interesting technologies used in the hurd are mentioned. Why not integrate them into a specific OS?
I don't know what you gathered from the interview, but if y'd ask me, I think I was might impressed by the ideas in the interview. Hurd, to me, seems like an excellent idea.
As far as GNU's ability to deliver is concered, what about that editor you use (emacs). What about tools like make, flex, yacc, et all? Get real, GNU has done delivered too much to the computing community; and for free.
Honestly, getting the hurd up 'n running has been not as important since we already have Linux. After Linux, there was no urgent need for a Free OS (what GNU was really all about at that time).
As far as having a robust OS is concerned, we already have Linux. Whatever Hurd is going to be, it is going to be well thought out and based on good and new ideas that markedly better than conventional UNIX. Hurd is not there to replace Linux, but the project exist solely to get a new kind of OS out.
C++'s virtual functions are slow. Quite slow. But faster then C calling through a pointer.
I am not sure if this is true. To figure out
the correct type for a virtual function, the compiler must performa a variable type analysis. The liklihood that your vta analysis will figure out the correct type is no better than the probability that a points-to analysis will figure out the points-to relationship for the function pointer in C.
Therefore, when you are lucky (ie. vta succeeds), you are (on average) as fast as C. When you are unlucky, you are way slower
than C (think about table lookups for the appropriate virtual functions).
I am waiting for WarCraft III to come out. I have heard that its supposed to be a Role Playing Strategy!?! That's a new genre for you. Anybody have anymore details?
> Linux networking programs are conservatively constructed, without the high-level macro facilities that have enabled the recent Windows viruses to propagate so famously.
I don't think this is exactly true. Even if you allow macro-facilities in Linux applications, the virus still cannot do much, unless you run as root. As far as I know, elisp is a macro facility. The shells are programming languages. You can embedd macros/code in your HTML files and make your web server run them. Linux (actually all unices, to be fair) is not void of high level facilities; quite the opposite infact.
So the question now is, why don't we have shitload of viruses being written for Linux? My opinion is, its just not time yet. Linux is more protected by its security model, but as it becomes more and more popular, there would be a greater number of non technically savvy people using it... and THEN we would have an epidemic.
Well, like you I have been good at college till now, but unlike you I was also good at school. Like you I did not like cramming did not like the bunch of nerds who crammed for college.
Yet I disagree; just because a Prof. is hard does not make him good; and just because I am doing good in univesity does not mean that my Profs are all saints.
Not every one can be above average; some teachers do suck. And if they do suck, I always make sure that my friends never take a course with them. I dont see anything wrong with that, and am sure that you neither. I don't think this is any different either. Respecting teachers is cool, but they have to earn it.
Most of us have windows. Even if we use Linux for our daily routines, most of us have Windoze available. Personally, I keep windows for games. Not all game manufacturers are enlightened as yet to release games for linux too.
Before I say anything, note that Hurd is in C. Hurd is based on a Mach microkernel and several server "objects" that perform your routinely tasks. An "object" is an independant entity - that has a given task and a way of talking the environment. This is not Object Oriented Programming, this is Object Oriented Philosophy - A way of thinking about the kernel. You could write an object oriented application in assembler - the OO with the "philosophy" shade! It is different, thus it definitely has merits. Not surprisingly, all the merits are the same as those for Object Oriented Programming - your program is extensible (add more objects), flexible, uniform interface, dependable (smaller code unit/lesser bugs), etc.
This is a good thing to hear; both for SCO and the computing community as a whole. SCO has been selling and supporting some nice enterprise unices/unix-novell hybrids. But it was about time they changed directoin.
I have had most experience with SCO OpenServer 5. Its a nice enterprise solution. Its sort of a unix that you dont really want to work on, probably set it up for a company requiring an e-commerce solution but too scared to run a Linux box. It does not come with the development package by default (gcc/libraries/header file) - so its not targeted at developers at all. Being a descendant of Xenix, it has a lot of superfluous anomalies. It does not like talking to other operating systems too much either. The technical support by SCO was good, however. SCO OpenServer has pretty good security too. SCO Unixware 7 is also a nice OS, but face it, you can't cross UNIX and Novell and expect something nice to come out. It's a great thing for novell entusiasts, i'd say, but UNIX guys probably wont like it. Even still, UW7 is WAAAAY better than UW2 and earlier!
These are limited application OS's.
SCO unfortunately did not see the direction the community was going, and targeted too much on servers to please the Managers, not the techs. Their OS's are too hermitic to compete with the versatility of Linux and BSDs and Sun. Its better now to target their attention on thing that would be beneficial to both the community and to themselves.
I think @Home is just trying to brush off the issue by passing the bucket to the users. Apparently @home does not you allow you to run servers; proxies may be an exception given that you have several computers in your home and want internet on all of 'em.
The whole idea of "scanning the users - finding insecure servers" seems like a lame excuse to me. The users should not be allowing outside connections in the first place - so why cannot they filter it at their OWN end.
It just seems that they dont want to stop spam in the first place. Otherwise they wouldn't have come up with such a lame excuse.
Slashdot Mirror
Check the website. It does run on Linux, Windows, Mac and PocketPC. There are debian and rpm packages available from the website.
Are you sure? How about female CowboyNeal?
We Duh! I have read many science fiction novels, and infecting people with a virus intended to cure them always works! I have no idea what your concerns are.. do you know anything? Moral issues - feh.
you ARE missing something.
64 bit means: data being operated upon is 64 bits. If all you did was work with 64 bit data (ie. longs), you would more than twice as fast as you would normally be on 32 bit platforms with 64 bit data. But if all you do is 32 bit work, then sure, no gain.
Am I the only one to first read this as MAOist?
The brain they used as baseline was Jennifer Love Hewitts. Bah!
GDB is an excellent debugger, but I believe a graphical interface just makes the debugging session more productive. Debugging low level code with gdb is not fun. Has any one tried multithreaded apps?
Some people may like DDD, but if I wanted to inflict torture to myself, I much prefer banging ze head againt ze wall.
Kdevelop and others have their niche. But just aren't robust enough yet.
Yes MsDev keeps me tied to Windows.
Read the articly first. There is much talk and work in progress on porting the hurd to L4 (the link you point to). (Look at the the archives for l4-hurd@_SPAM_gnu_NOT_.org mailing list).
Hurd is really a wholly different way of writing an OS. Note that I am not saying that it is better or worse, it is just different. Enough reason for the project to exist? You point to several different places where interesting technologies used in the hurd are mentioned. Why not integrate them into a specific OS?
I don't know what you gathered from the interview, but if y'd ask me, I think I was might impressed by the ideas in the interview. Hurd, to me, seems like an excellent idea.
As far as GNU's ability to deliver is concered, what about that editor you use (emacs). What about tools like make, flex, yacc, et all? Get real, GNU has done delivered too much to the computing community; and for free.
Honestly, getting the hurd up 'n running has been not as important since we already have Linux. After Linux, there was no urgent need for a Free OS (what GNU was really all about at that time).
As far as having a robust OS is concerned, we already have Linux. Whatever Hurd is going to be, it is going to be well thought out and based on good and new ideas that markedly better than conventional UNIX. Hurd is not there to replace Linux, but the project exist solely to get a new kind of OS out.
Read the interview. It's good.
I am not sure if this is true. To figure out the correct type for a virtual function, the compiler must performa a variable type analysis. The liklihood that your vta analysis will figure out the correct type is no better than the probability that a points-to analysis will figure out the points-to relationship for the function pointer in C.
Therefore, when you are lucky (ie. vta succeeds), you are (on average) as fast as C. When you are unlucky, you are way slower than C (think about table lookups for the appropriate virtual functions).
Must resist temptation... Must not read such articles... must not buy huge lcd screen.. must buy clothes... arrrrrrrrgh!
(Can slashdot have a "disable-temptation-and-bankrupcy-causing-articles " button?
I am waiting for WarCraft III to come out. I have heard that its supposed to be a Role Playing Strategy!?! That's a new genre for you. Anybody have anymore details?
Lookup the upgrade notes on thiswebpage.
> Linux networking programs are conservatively constructed, without the high-level macro facilities that have enabled the recent Windows viruses to propagate so famously.
I don't think this is exactly true. Even if you allow macro-facilities in Linux applications, the virus still cannot do much, unless you run as root. As far as I know, elisp is a macro facility. The shells are programming languages. You can embedd macros/code in your HTML files and make your web server run them. Linux (actually all unices, to be fair) is not void of high level facilities; quite the opposite infact.
So the question now is, why don't we have shitload of viruses being written for Linux? My opinion is, its just not time yet. Linux is more protected by its security model, but as it becomes more and more popular, there would be a greater number of non technically savvy people using it... and THEN we would have an epidemic.
Well, like you I have been good at college till now, but unlike you I was also good at school. Like you I did not like cramming did not like the bunch of nerds who crammed for college.
Yet I disagree; just because a Prof. is hard does not make him good; and just because I am doing good in univesity does not mean that my Profs are all saints.
Not every one can be above average; some teachers do suck. And if they do suck, I always make sure that my friends never take a course with them. I dont see anything wrong with that, and am sure that you neither. I don't think this is any different either. Respecting teachers is cool, but they have to earn it.
I have been backing up regularly on TOILET PAPER!
Most of us have windows. Even if we use Linux for our daily routines, most of us have Windoze available. Personally, I keep windows for games. Not all game manufacturers are enlightened as yet to release games for linux too.
Before I say anything, note that Hurd is in C. Hurd is based on a Mach microkernel and several server "objects" that perform your routinely tasks. An "object" is an independant entity - that has a given task and a way of talking the environment. This is not Object Oriented Programming, this is Object Oriented Philosophy - A way of thinking about the kernel. You could write an object oriented application in assembler - the OO with the "philosophy" shade! It is different, thus it definitely has merits. Not surprisingly, all the merits are the same as those for Object Oriented Programming - your program is extensible (add more objects), flexible, uniform interface, dependable (smaller code unit/lesser bugs), etc.
This is a good thing to hear; both for SCO and the computing community as a whole. SCO has been selling and supporting some nice enterprise unices/unix-novell hybrids. But it was about time they changed directoin.
I have had most experience with SCO OpenServer 5. Its a nice enterprise solution. Its sort of a unix that you dont really want to work on, probably set it up for a company requiring an e-commerce solution but too scared to run a Linux box. It does not come with the development package by default (gcc/libraries/header file) - so its not targeted at developers at all. Being a descendant of Xenix, it has a lot of superfluous anomalies. It does not like talking to other operating systems too much either. The technical support by SCO was good, however. SCO OpenServer has pretty good security too. SCO Unixware 7 is also a nice OS, but face it, you can't cross UNIX and Novell and expect something nice to come out. It's a great thing for novell entusiasts, i'd say, but UNIX guys probably wont like it. Even still, UW7 is WAAAAY better than UW2 and earlier!
These are limited application OS's.
SCO unfortunately did not see the direction the community was going, and targeted too much on servers to please the Managers, not the techs. Their OS's are too hermitic to compete with the versatility of Linux and BSDs and Sun. Its better now to target their attention on thing that would be beneficial to both the community and to themselves.
I think @Home is just trying to brush off the issue by passing the bucket to the users. Apparently @home does not you allow you to run servers; proxies may be an exception given that you have several computers in your home and want internet on all of 'em.
The whole idea of "scanning the users - finding insecure servers" seems like a lame excuse to me. The users should not be allowing outside connections in the first place - so why cannot they filter it at their OWN end.
It just seems that they dont want to stop spam in the first place. Otherwise they wouldn't have come up with such a lame excuse.