It's because programmers love their dangerous and primitive dinosaur language (least common denominator). As a consequence, we still have to deal with buffer overflows and other stupid problems that should have been fixed decades ago.
You could not be more wrong on both counts. As to the rest of your post, there is nothing elegant about Java and Python is just a bit of stupidity that someone wrote and passed it off as a scripting language.
No Programmers love the simple elegance of C. C is a masterwork, it is subtle, it is sublime.
Buffer overflows are caused by lazy and stupid programmers abusing a simple an elegant language that has all the power you need to prevent buffer overflows by simply taking the small step to bounds check your buffer as you proceed to willy-nilly stuff data into it.
Java is a crutch for those that cannot find the time to write something correctly. There are major works written in C that will compile on ANY platform with a C compiler and the standard libraries. If you write your code to the ansi C standard it will compile anywhere. That is the design of a portable language and you end up will small, efficient and fast executables.
That's a good comparison. Like the queens english, C is becoming outdated - people want to do more by using the 100,000 lines of someone else's library routines. I think it's the equivalent of the evolution of smileys and lolz:)
There, fixed that for ya.
Read your insurance policy sometime. No I mean really read it. The reason for all that arcane language is because for the last 500 years it has been picked over, argued about, refined and re-worked until everyone agreed what the definition of "is" really is.
The problems with most of the "quote" modern languages is that know one agrees on one object model. Everyone does theirs differently, but guess what, they are all written in two languages and those are C and Assembler.
Pick just about ANY language out there, go ahead pick any one of them. It was written in C or C and Assembler. Even the ones that now can compile themselves the main language used to build the compiler that can compile itself was, wait for it... C.
While C may indeed be the "Queens English" it is still the Queens English and is the root of all other dialects and will remain so.
Microsoft no longer has it's intellectual property protected by US laws.
My guess is that the vast majority of the sale of Windows and Office are in the US. Buy one copy of each from wherever, crack it and put it up for download on a.gov website.
That comes straight from the Groovy home page. I kinda figured they would know what they were doing.
isAM is not a method it is a property and thus it would more properly me expressed as:
if( calendar.isAM ){ ...
}
Confusing methods with properties is a bad thing. Anything that requires a () after it should properly be a method, not a property and a property that requires a () after it is horrible as it implies it will take a parameter. I do like C but I have never particularly liked the fact that even if you declare a function that takes no parameters you must still have the () after it in declaration and in calling.
The problem with schema's that are created by anyone and I do mean anyone is that at the time we design it, no matter how far thinking we are, no matter how much we believe that we have thought through every eventuality, unless the schema is trivial, we will miss something and we will have to go back and start modifying things and this is always a problem due to the side effects of the changes we make.
This is the reason that DB engines and things like SQL were invented. Yes some or more efficient then others, some are faster, some scale better, so do most things very well, some do a few things insanely well, but overall most of them manipulate data very well, within the scope of their design.
Can I or you design in code a single purpose database and have it run faster and more efficiently then the same schema in Oracle, MySQL, MS-SQL, SQLite or even dBase for that matter, yes we can. The problem comes into existance when we are no longer there at the company and someone else is there and the data "query" changes and then someone has to change real code and rebuild it and that is when things typically go straight down the shitter.
The problem with most databases is the lack of data analysis before a single table is created. You must understand the nature of your data long before you create a table. If you don't, you will fail no matter what system you use to store the data.
Also, some the biggest general ledger applications deployed are running on MS SQL, that includes Great Plains and Navision.
I don;t know about navision since I have never heard of it, but as for Great Plains, the only reason people use MS-SQL is because the have no choice since MS bought the company.
This is not the same as using it because they choose to do so.
The problem is the same with DNS as it is with most software projects, especially those governed by committee. They are a very old Christmas tree that keeps getting just one more ornament hung on it until it collapses.
DNS should be one of the simplest and most bullet proof bits of software out there. It accepts a request that is a name of a particular machine and returns an IP address if it has one based on the requested record type, nothing more nothing less. The back channel where the updates come from should be locked down HARD and they will only communicate with known DNS servers to receive or provide updates based on a cypher key that is delivered to the DNS server administrator by separate means.
Domain and host names should have hard length limits, so that a DNS server's input buffer can be fixed and it will ONLY accept n chars as a query.
IPv6 is an abortion and hence since the world insists on using it a DNS server should be built to service ONLY IPv6 instead trying to shoehorn that idiocy into an IPv4 server.
Yes writing a DNS server is work that must be accomplished thoughtfully and the overriding priority should be security.
The innocent age of the internet is over. It is no longer a collegiate atmosphere where it was a bunch of science guys who trusted each other. It is an overtly hostile landscape where every packet should be considered an attack and dealt with appropriately.
The WC3 is the problem. Constantly changing specs, incomplete specs, open ended structures, nothing particularly well defined. The whole "We want it to be able to anything, no matter how hideously deigned it is." attitude has to be defeated at all costs. Hmmmm havent seen the tag yet? Don't worry it will come along any minute now as memory gets consumed at insane rates and the stack overflows or a buffer does.
Failure to do so will simply keep the cycle going.
As another poster vamman put it the very nature of what a browser tries to do is a time bomb.
The very nature of a web server is the same thing.
Until the web gets itself under control and the people who write browsers and the people who write web servers tell the wc3 to shove their wildly horrible specs straight up their ass ( yes a lot of it will be recursive ) we will continue to see this sort of thing.
Computers were never designed to be infinitely flexible which is to say dealing with things like xml and html that are not well formed, defined and encapsulated in a rigid structure. both xml and html are completely open ended structures with no real boundaries to bump up against, so the machine simply has to keep allocating and allocating until it finds something the closes a section. If their was ever a recipe for a buffer overrun or a stack overflow this is certainly it.
Web servers still seem to have trouble caging the requests, again part of the indefinitely flexible nature of what has been built. Why of course you will accept a request that is 90kb long, uhmmm oops wait I just exploded.
There are parts of the web mechanism that must be tightly controlled, they must be highly defined and yes they must be highly restrictive. They must be designed with security as the over riding priority and to hell with convenience . Buffer overflows must simply cease to exist. ANY portion of the code that deals with requests coming in must have hard limits built into it as this the only way to get a handle on this.
The same thing with browsers. There must be hard limits, the rules have to be made and maintained. No more slipping in some code to be able to say, "Hey look at this cool thing I just did!"
We all demand huge bandwidth, huge amounts of storage and we want it for 19.95 a month.
Do you wonder why everything is over sold? I mean, really do you?
How much does a really sharp *nix admin.engineer cost annually?
Even with really good tools how many physical boxes can on guy keep watch over? How about when each box is hosting 300 accounts, or running 10 VM's? What would anyone guesstimate? Maybe each box is only hosting 30 accounts? I mean the numbers start to add up.
Lets say just for sake of argument that a really good admin can handle the care and feeding of 100 servers. That guy costs you 60K a year benefits and all. You need three shifts because you run 24/7 so that is 180K right there. Lets say you have 10,000 servers do now we are taking 100 guys * 3 shifts so 300 admins * 60,000.00 per year. So payroll just for the admins is 18 million a year and we have not given anyone the weekend off, so that number is a bit low.
You have not yet paid for all the hardware or your bandwidth bill. So right now at 19.95 a month you need about 900,000 customers.
Uhmmm for some reason those numbers just don't pencil. So thats why ISP's have to oversell everything AND turn a blind eye to a lot of things.
And yet you still expect them to sell you hosting for 19.95 a month, provide you with basically unlimited bandwidth, unlimited storage,do not even THINK about deep packet inspection or traffic shaping and let you do most anything you want to do!
Sorry but your comment is laughable man. The old saying of, "Speed, Quality, Price" Choose 2 still applies.
Ever use ADP? It requires IE for the time card entry.
You have to import a certificate into IE and for some reason which I have not bothered to dig that far into, FF can't handle this.
Lots and lots of companies require this.
But it is not just that. Like it or not, the ActiveX model allows you to do things that your just cannot do with the JS/HTML/CSS mashup and no one has yet to duplicate that in any serious way. Java Applets, to slow, to clumsy. ActiveX has all the facilities of the OS at its disposal.
I am not saying that is a good or bad thing. But when you want that level of control and interoperability with the OS, thats where you go.
Yes using i is a common idiom in C when using a throw away integer for loop control, its intent is clear,
In this code ( please go read the rest of it ) the variable c referes to s all over the place and these is nothing really explaining it. While being terse does have its merits as the example you showed indicates ( the scope is limited to a simple 5 line function, that kind of terseness does not belong spread over 50 lines of code.
As an initializer you really have no idea what you are initializing with unless you are intimately familiar with the code, and yes I have done such in many instances but with a variable name that gives some hint ( at least ) as to what it does. This is just plain bad coding.
First of all I agree, building a webserver for something as critically important as a DNS resolver is completely asshat if that is what they are doing.
But I disagree with you. Any dns resolver should be as complete an island as possible, depending on as little as possible, the fewer other subsystems it has to rely on the less points of failure there are.
This should be a very straight forward hash table, loaded from into ram, all entries mapped to either upper or lower case and then the queries hashed and they are either in memory or not return the corresponding IP address or return null. This is not rocket science, it is a simple lookup.
155// should we refactor this code using, e.g, the state pattern? Probably
156// not at this point, as this is based on proved code (derived from BIND9)
157// and it's less likely that we'll have more variations in the domain name
158// syntax. If this ever happens next time, we should consider refactor
159// the code, rather than adding more states and cases below.
160 while (ndata.size()
161 unsigned char c = *s++;
162
163 switch (state) {
164 case ft_init:
165//
166// Is this the root name?
167//
168 if (c == '.') {
169 if (s != send) {
170 isc_throw(EmptyLabel, "non terminating empty label");
171 }
You have variables name like "s" and "c" and you declare and init a variable inside a while loop, and assign it the incremented value of a dereferenced pointer!?
I know you inherited this code from the comments, but unless someone is physically preventing you from changing it you have no business writing any code that is critical to the functioning of the internet.
Are you kidding? It is software written by committee which always sucks. What other examples, try http, css, xhtml, xml, etc. etc. the list is endless.
Additionally the entire DNS system is one pile of legacy crap with a on of kludges to support this or that interest group.
Just be glad there are alternatives.
And you are correct, it should just be a database that responds to a very simple query, here is the domain name, here is the record type, return the IP address.
But it is far more then that. Depending on the query you send the things has to tie itself in knots dealing with CNAMES, ptr records, txt records, Rdns and all kids of other twisted cruft.
Go ahead and mod me into oblivion, I don't care, but XML is the biggest piece of crap to come down the pike since CSS.
Nobody, and I mean, nobody uses XML as it was intended. I have seen so many fucked up XML files that it is just beyond belief.
And even when XML is used as it was designed you are moving 1000 bytes of descriptions and greater than and Less than symbols to move 100 bytes of data. Sorry that is just plain stupid.
How fucking hard is it to use 1000 bytes of a header record that describes the data and then shove a terabyte of data behind it. You pick it, fixed length, variable length, comma delimited, quote delimited you just get data after you get a brief description of it and load it on up.
EVERY single line of an XML file MUST be parsed, context saved and an entire global structure created to make sure that no one slips in and extra definition.
Ah but the answer is a remote far off on some other server someplace the glorious DTD file, which is almost always out of date our out of version with the very very abbreviated XML file you just got because everyone was to lazy to include every definition tag and bloat the xml file to proportions only envisioned by astronauts.
And THIS is the guy that Goolgle wants the rest of the world to believe when it comes to doing a smack-down of the iPhone and or iPad? Yeah right, I want some of whatever they have been smoking over in google land.
And hand full of crybaby geeks can jsut keep crying while apple sells iPhones and iPads by the fucking container load. Yeah apple controls the platform, and the apps that get designed for it all work, what a fucking concept! The UI is consistent, god that so sucks!! App behavior is consistent, again massive suckage!
As far as Apple pulling a Microsoft? Yeah right. Microsoft in their wildest dreams could not come up with a product this good. Apple wants a consistent, quality software experience for their customers, GOD they are such ASSHOLES for that.
News Flash! The crybaby geeks comprise about 0.01% of the iPhone customer base. The rest of us just want a PDA that works, does not go bugshit very often and don't have to figure out some bizaro world interface that some script-kiddle came up with because he thought it was "cool man!".
This is not to dis the Android phone OS, it has merit, but it is entirely a different mindset and feature set from the iPhone. I have looked at a few different implementations on various phones and none of them come close to the consistency of look, feel and functionality of the iPhone, they just don't.
Call Apple what you will but the iPhone and the iPad are quality products, with great well thought out SDK's and development environments and tools.
And Oh BTW before anyone accuses me of being a Apple fan-boy, the iPhone is the only apple product I own and I am not 100% satisfied with it more like about 97% satisfied with it.
The elements of good foundation in programming do not require a computer.
It requires that someone understand that programming is nothing more then looping and branching.
Teach them to wite their 1st program on 3x5 cards and stay away from the any language that has a runtime that prvides more then the most basics functionality.
Even if they end up using a garbage collected language they need to understand memory allocation and manipulation.
3x5 cards can emulate memory perfectly and can teach them the fundamentals of a stack ( no pun intended ).
.
One of the biggest problems I see today are "programmers" who do not have a clue as to hat the machine is doing, all they know is you go out and google for a library that will to "stuff" for them without ever knowing what the stuff IS or how it works.
Slashdot Mirror
It's because programmers love their dangerous and primitive dinosaur language (least common denominator). As a consequence, we still have to deal with buffer overflows and other stupid problems that should have been fixed decades ago.
You could not be more wrong on both counts. As to the rest of your post, there is nothing elegant about Java and Python is just a bit of stupidity that someone wrote and passed it off as a scripting language.
No Programmers love the simple elegance of C. C is a masterwork, it is subtle, it is sublime.
Buffer overflows are caused by lazy and stupid programmers abusing a simple an elegant language that has all the power you need to prevent buffer overflows by simply taking the small step to bounds check your buffer as you proceed to willy-nilly stuff data into it.
Java is a crutch for those that cannot find the time to write something correctly. There are major works written in C that will compile on ANY platform with a C compiler and the standard libraries. If you write your code to the ansi C standard it will compile anywhere. That is the design of a portable language and you end up will small, efficient and fast executables.
That's a good comparison. Like the queens english, C is becoming outdated - people want to do more by using the 100,000 lines of someone else's library routines. I think it's the equivalent of the evolution of smileys and lolz :)
There, fixed that for ya.
Read your insurance policy sometime. No I mean really read it. The reason for all that arcane language is because for the last 500 years it has been picked over, argued about, refined and re-worked until everyone agreed what the definition of "is" really is.
The problems with most of the "quote" modern languages is that know one agrees on one object model. Everyone does theirs differently, but guess what, they are all written in two languages and those are C and Assembler.
Pick just about ANY language out there, go ahead pick any one of them. It was written in C or C and Assembler. Even the ones that now can compile themselves the main language used to build the compiler that can compile itself was, wait for it... C.
While C may indeed be the "Queens English" it is still the Queens English and is the root of all other dialects and will remain so.
This quite easy to solve.
Microsoft no longer has it's intellectual property protected by US laws.
My guess is that the vast majority of the sale of Windows and Office are in the US. Buy one copy of each from wherever, crack it and put it up for download on a .gov website.
Gads I am not sure which is worse!
That comes straight from the Groovy home page. I kinda figured they would know what they were doing.
isAM is not a method it is a property and thus it would more properly me expressed as:
if( calendar.isAM ){
...
}
Confusing methods with properties is a bad thing. Anything that requires a () after it should properly be a method, not a property and a property that requires a () after it is horrible as it implies it will take a parameter. I do like C but I have never particularly liked the fact that even if you declare a function that takes no parameters you must still have the () after it in declaration and in calling.
With syntax like this:
amPM = Calendar.getInstance().get(Calendar.AM_PM)
No thanks.
I agree with your first paragraph completely.
Your second paragraph though...
The problem with schema's that are created by anyone and I do mean anyone is that at the time we design it, no matter how far thinking we are, no matter how much we believe that we have thought through every eventuality, unless the schema is trivial, we will miss something and we will have to go back and start modifying things and this is always a problem due to the side effects of the changes we make.
This is the reason that DB engines and things like SQL were invented. Yes some or more efficient then others, some are faster, some scale better, so do most things very well, some do a few things insanely well, but overall most of them manipulate data very well, within the scope of their design.
Can I or you design in code a single purpose database and have it run faster and more efficiently then the same schema in Oracle, MySQL, MS-SQL, SQLite or even dBase for that matter, yes we can. The problem comes into existance when we are no longer there at the company and someone else is there and the data "query" changes and then someone has to change real code and rebuild it and that is when things typically go straight down the shitter.
The same model as what language?
The problem with most databases is the lack of data analysis before a single table is created. You must understand the nature of your data long before you create a table. If you don't, you will fail no matter what system you use to store the data.
Also, some the biggest general ledger applications deployed are running on MS SQL, that includes Great Plains and Navision.
I don;t know about navision since I have never heard of it, but as for Great Plains, the only reason people use MS-SQL is because the have no choice since MS bought the company.
This is not the same as using it because they choose to do so.
You were not being trolled.
The problem is the same with DNS as it is with most software projects, especially those governed by committee. They are a very old Christmas tree that keeps getting just one more ornament hung on it until it collapses.
DNS should be one of the simplest and most bullet proof bits of software out there. It accepts a request that is a name of a particular machine and returns an IP address if it has one based on the requested record type, nothing more nothing less. The back channel where the updates come from should be locked down HARD and they will only communicate with known DNS servers to receive or provide updates based on a cypher key that is delivered to the DNS server administrator by separate means.
Domain and host names should have hard length limits, so that a DNS server's input buffer can be fixed and it will ONLY accept n chars as a query.
IPv6 is an abortion and hence since the world insists on using it a DNS server should be built to service ONLY IPv6 instead trying to shoehorn that idiocy into an IPv4 server.
Yes writing a DNS server is work that must be accomplished thoughtfully and the overriding priority should be security.
The innocent age of the internet is over. It is no longer a collegiate atmosphere where it was a bunch of science guys who trusted each other. It is an overtly hostile landscape where every packet should be considered an attack and dealt with appropriately.
The WC3 is the problem. Constantly changing specs, incomplete specs, open ended structures, nothing particularly well defined. The whole "We want it to be able to anything, no matter how hideously deigned it is." attitude has to be defeated at all costs. Hmmmm havent seen the tag yet? Don't worry it will come along any minute now as memory gets consumed at insane rates and the stack overflows or a buffer does.
Failure to do so will simply keep the cycle going.
As another poster vamman put it the very nature of what a browser tries to do is a time bomb.
The very nature of a web server is the same thing.
Until the web gets itself under control and the people who write browsers and the people who write web servers tell the wc3 to shove their wildly horrible specs straight up their ass ( yes a lot of it will be recursive ) we will continue to see this sort of thing.
Computers were never designed to be infinitely flexible which is to say dealing with things like xml and html that are not well formed, defined and encapsulated in a rigid structure. both xml and html are completely open ended structures with no real boundaries to bump up against, so the machine simply has to keep allocating and allocating until it finds something the closes a section. If their was ever a recipe for a buffer overrun or a stack overflow this is certainly it.
Web servers still seem to have trouble caging the requests, again part of the indefinitely flexible nature of what has been built. Why of course you will accept a request that is 90kb long, uhmmm oops wait I just exploded.
There are parts of the web mechanism that must be tightly controlled, they must be highly defined and yes they must be highly restrictive. They must be designed with security as the over riding priority and to hell with convenience . Buffer overflows must simply cease to exist. ANY portion of the code that deals with requests coming in must have hard limits built into it as this the only way to get a handle on this.
The same thing with browsers. There must be hard limits, the rules have to be made and maintained. No more slipping in some code to be able to say, "Hey look at this cool thing I just did!"
There is an ASCII screen saver and it is hella cool! Get it hear for Mac and KDE and maybe windows, I didn't look that hard.
We all demand huge bandwidth, huge amounts of storage and we want it for 19.95 a month.
Do you wonder why everything is over sold? I mean, really do you?
How much does a really sharp *nix admin.engineer cost annually?
Even with really good tools how many physical boxes can on guy keep watch over? How about when each box is hosting 300 accounts, or running 10 VM's? What would anyone guesstimate? Maybe each box is only hosting 30 accounts? I mean the numbers start to add up.
Lets say just for sake of argument that a really good admin can handle the care and feeding of 100 servers. That guy costs you 60K a year benefits and all. You need three shifts because you run 24/7 so that is 180K right there. Lets say you have 10,000 servers do now we are taking 100 guys * 3 shifts so 300 admins * 60,000.00 per year. So payroll just for the admins is 18 million a year and we have not given anyone the weekend off, so that number is a bit low.
You have not yet paid for all the hardware or your bandwidth bill. So right now at 19.95 a month you need about 900,000 customers.
Uhmmm for some reason those numbers just don't pencil. So thats why ISP's have to oversell everything AND turn a blind eye to a lot of things.
And yet you still expect them to sell you hosting for 19.95 a month, provide you with basically unlimited bandwidth, unlimited storage,do not even THINK about deep packet inspection or traffic shaping and let you do most anything you want to do!
Sorry but your comment is laughable man. The old saying of, "Speed, Quality, Price" Choose 2 still applies.
Ever use ADP? It requires IE for the time card entry.
You have to import a certificate into IE and for some reason which I have not bothered to dig that far into, FF can't handle this.
Lots and lots of companies require this.
But it is not just that. Like it or not, the ActiveX model allows you to do things that your just cannot do with the JS/HTML/CSS mashup and no one has yet to duplicate that in any serious way. Java Applets, to slow, to clumsy. ActiveX has all the facilities of the OS at its disposal.
I am not saying that is a good or bad thing. But when you want that level of control and interoperability with the OS, thats where you go.
Yes using i is a common idiom in C when using a throw away integer for loop control, its intent is clear,
In this code ( please go read the rest of it ) the variable c referes to s all over the place and these is nothing really explaining it. While being terse does have its merits as the example you showed indicates ( the scope is limited to a simple 5 line function, that kind of terseness does not belong spread over 50 lines of code.
As an initializer you really have no idea what you are initializing with unless you are intimately familiar with the code, and yes I have done such in many instances but with a variable name that gives some hint ( at least ) as to what it does. This is just plain bad coding.
First of all I agree, building a webserver for something as critically important as a DNS resolver is completely asshat if that is what they are doing.
But I disagree with you. Any dns resolver should be as complete an island as possible, depending on as little as possible, the fewer other subsystems it has to rely on the less points of failure there are.
This should be a very straight forward hash table, loaded from into ram, all entries mapped to either upper or lower case and then the queries hashed and they are either in memory or not return the corresponding IP address or return null. This is not rocket science, it is a simple lookup.
Dude, you have fucking got to be joking!
155 // should we refactor this code using, e.g, the state pattern? Probably // not at this point, as this is based on proved code (derived from BIND9) // and it's less likely that we'll have more variations in the domain name // syntax. If this ever happens next time, we should consider refactor // the code, rather than adding more states and cases below. // // Is this the root name? //
156
157
158
159
160 while (ndata.size() 161 unsigned char c = *s++;
162
163 switch (state) {
164 case ft_init:
165
166
167
168 if (c == '.') {
169 if (s != send) {
170 isc_throw(EmptyLabel, "non terminating empty label");
171 }
You have variables name like "s" and "c" and you declare and init a variable inside a while loop, and assign it the incremented value of a dereferenced pointer!?
I know you inherited this code from the comments, but unless someone is physically preventing you from changing it you have no business writing any code that is critical to the functioning of the internet.
Are you kidding? It is software written by committee which always sucks. What other examples, try http, css, xhtml, xml, etc. etc. the list is endless.
Additionally the entire DNS system is one pile of legacy crap with a on of kludges to support this or that interest group.
Just be glad there are alternatives.
And you are correct, it should just be a database that responds to a very simple query, here is the domain name, here is the record type, return the IP address.
But it is far more then that. Depending on the query you send the things has to tie itself in knots dealing with CNAMES, ptr records, txt records, Rdns and all kids of other twisted cruft.
Actually, he is a moron because he invented XML.
Go ahead and mod me into oblivion, I don't care, but XML is the biggest piece of crap to come down the pike since CSS.
Nobody, and I mean, nobody uses XML as it was intended. I have seen so many fucked up XML files that it is just beyond belief.
And even when XML is used as it was designed you are moving 1000 bytes of descriptions and greater than and Less than symbols to move 100 bytes of data. Sorry that is just plain stupid.
How fucking hard is it to use 1000 bytes of a header record that describes the data and then shove a terabyte of data behind it. You pick it, fixed length, variable length, comma delimited, quote delimited you just get data after you get a brief description of it and load it on up.
EVERY single line of an XML file MUST be parsed, context saved and an entire global structure created to make sure that no one slips in and extra definition.
Ah but the answer is a remote far off on some other server someplace the glorious DTD file, which is almost always out of date our out of version with the very very abbreviated XML file you just got because everyone was to lazy to include every definition tag and bloat the xml file to proportions only envisioned by astronauts.
And THIS is the guy that Goolgle wants the rest of the world to believe when it comes to doing a smack-down of the iPhone and or iPad? Yeah right, I want some of whatever they have been smoking over in google land.
And hand full of crybaby geeks can jsut keep crying while apple sells iPhones and iPads by the fucking container load. Yeah apple controls the platform, and the apps that get designed for it all work, what a fucking concept! The UI is consistent, god that so sucks!! App behavior is consistent, again massive suckage!
As far as Apple pulling a Microsoft? Yeah right. Microsoft in their wildest dreams could not come up with a product this good. Apple wants a consistent, quality software experience for their customers, GOD they are such ASSHOLES for that.
News Flash! The crybaby geeks comprise about 0.01% of the iPhone customer base. The rest of us just want a PDA that works, does not go bugshit very often and don't have to figure out some bizaro world interface that some script-kiddle came up with because he thought it was "cool man!".
This is not to dis the Android phone OS, it has merit, but it is entirely a different mindset and feature set from the iPhone. I have looked at a few different implementations on various phones and none of them come close to the consistency of look, feel and functionality of the iPhone, they just don't.
Call Apple what you will but the iPhone and the iPad are quality products, with great well thought out SDK's and development environments and tools.
And Oh BTW before anyone accuses me of being a Apple fan-boy, the iPhone is the only apple product I own and I am not 100% satisfied with it more like about 97% satisfied with it.
Game over, thanks for playing, no refund for you. It was an example of why the UA should return ALL the controls WITH their associated data.
Game over, thanks for playing, no refund for you.
It was an example of why the UA should return ALL the controls WITH their associated data.
The elements of good foundation in programming do not require a computer.
It requires that someone understand that programming is nothing more then looping and branching.
Teach them to wite their 1st program on 3x5 cards and stay away from the any language that has a runtime that prvides more then the most basics functionality.
Even if they end up using a garbage collected language they need to understand memory allocation and manipulation.
3x5 cards can emulate memory perfectly and can teach them the fundamentals of a stack ( no pun intended ).
.
One of the biggest problems I see today are "programmers" who do not have a clue as to hat the machine is doing, all they know is you go out and google for a library that will to "stuff" for them without ever knowing what the stuff IS or how it works.