Linux-Advocacy Digest #129, Volume #35 Mon, 11 Jun 01 10:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: What language are use to program Linux stuff? (Funky-Fresh Hacker D.)
Re: European arrogance and ignorance... (Thaddius Maximus)
Re: KDE and Gnome are totally 80s (Funky-Fresh Hacker D.)
Re: European arrogance and ignorance... (was Re: Just when Linux (Thaddius Maximus)
Re: More micro$oft "customer service" (macman)
Re: What language are use to program Linux stuff? (Terry Porter)
Re: More micro$oft "customer service" (macman)
Re: Laugh, it's hilarious. ("ne...")
Re: More micro$oft "customer service" ("Daniel Johnson")
Re: More micro$oft "customer service" ("Daniel Johnson")
Re: What language are use to program Linux stuff? (pip)
Re: What language are use to program Linux stuff? (pip)
Re: What language are use to program Linux stuff? (pip)
Re: MS at it again ("Donal K. Fellows")
Re: Laugh, it's hilarious. ("Donal K. Fellows")
Re: Laugh, it's hilarious. ("Donal K. Fellows")
Re: More funny stuff. ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Laugh, it's hilarious. ("Donal K. Fellows")
Re: MS at it again ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: What language are use to program Linux stuff? ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: What language are use to program Linux stuff? ("Ayende Rahien")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: What language are use to program Linux stuff?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Funky-Fresh Hacker D.)
Date: 11 Jun 2001 08:04:28 -0400
mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Why do people always assume that C++ can't do what C can do? It is
> absurd. Low level access has absolutely nothing to do with it. There
> is almost nothing you can do in C which can not also be done in C++.
Probably for the same reason people assume C++ is a true O-O language,
and it isn't. It's just C retrofitted with an O-O layer on top and
tighther type checking. Granted, C++ is great for doing stuff that is
high level, but if you're doing low-level stuff that doesn't require
modularization via C++ classes, why even bother? Plus, in the real
world implementations, (G++ vs. Gcc), C++ programs take slightly
longer to compile, and are linked against libstdc++. This is an
unnecessary library to link against if you're using only C features in
C++. So, it's an implentation vs. theory issue.
> <RANT>
> GNOME is written in C for some stupidly flawed logic. I have yet to see a
> reasonable explanation, with the possible exception that the original
> developers only knew C and decided that ignorance was a better strategy than
> actually learning about computers and computing languages.
Some C++ programmers are really terrible O-O programmers, but some C
programmers might be wonderful O-O programmers. You can still do O-O
with structs (and typedef structs) in C, and perhaps some C
programmers are able to make good use of whatever limited features C
has. It's already been demonstrated that you can do O-O in pure C.
> KDE, IMHO, is far more stable BECAUSE it uses C++. GNOME is a pitiful hack
> which attempts an object oriented paradigm who's design criteria directly
> adheres to the strengths of C++, yet they chose not to use C++.
What?! I don't understand what stability has to do with C vs. C++.
It's not what the language can do, it's the way that you use it that counts.
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: Thaddius Maximus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: European arrogance and ignorance...
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 12:23:43 +0100
drsquare wrote:
>
> On Sun, 10 Jun 2001 06:11:24 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> (T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>
> >Said drsquare in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sat, 09 Jun 2001 21:02:18
> >>On Sat, 09 Jun 2001 17:34:27 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
>
> >>>>While at the same time, with the other hand, murdering people at Kent State,
> >>>>Grant Park, The Bowery and Washington Square, etc. etc. etc.
> >>>
> >>>As always, you can tell when someone's position is shakey when they
> >>>start using metaphoric, rather than analytic, speech. People were
> >>>killed at Kent State and these other places, certainly. They were not,
> >>>however, murdered.
> >>
> >>Playing words games won't help you now.
> >
> >I'm just correcting your word games. Pretending otherwise won't help
> >you now, it won't help you later, it won't help you ever.
>
> Deary me, if you don't try and get back in the argument soon, instead
> of just spouting off irrelevancies, it might look like you've conceded
> defeat.
>
> >>>>Actually, the united states has one of the WORST records of human rights
> >>>>violations of any "civilized" country in the world.
> >>>
> >>>Compared to whom?
> >>
> >>Canada, Ireland, France, Germany, Spain, Holland, Denmark, Belgium,
> >>Italy, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Iceland, Mexico, Poland...
> >
> >Mexico? Sorry, no. They had indigenous populations wiped out, too, and
> >the USA has NEVER sunk to the level of political persecution as Mexico.
> >Most others, I'm sure, have equally sordid, if less commonly known,
> >histories. You obviously just want to hate the United States for some
> >reason. Mere bigotry, I would expect.
>
> OK then, I'll take out Mexico. Now you can try and show the US
> superiority to all the other countries. Good luck.
Are you kidding me! Germany - WWII, nuff said! Spain - raped and
pillaged latin america for centuries! Poland - they are just now
getting a semblance of human rights. Ireland - they are still bombing
each other and have for more than 500 years.
You need to bone up on your history, scooter.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: KDE and Gnome are totally 80s
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Funky-Fresh Hacker D.)
Date: 11 Jun 2001 08:13:31 -0400
GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hehehe.... nothing like ol senna cotte wouldn't cure! Nutscrape 6
> really is one slow program and a disk hog.
But it's 100% standards compliant, and that's the important thing.
Also, the core components of Mozilla aren't too bad, and Galeon, which
uses Mozilla-embedded, is proof of this. Galeon is Mozilla w/out all
that XML stuff slowing it down. But the downside of Galeon is that it
takes up a lot of disk space, so it's not that simple, light, fast
open source browser we've all been dreaming of. It's good, though.
Also, anyone ever try the HotJava browser? It didn't seem too bad,
but the last time I tried it, it didn't run Java applets too well.
Isn't that ironic -- a browser written in 100% Java that has problems
with Java applets?
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: Thaddius Maximus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: European arrogance and ignorance... (was Re: Just when Linux
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 13:00:16 +0100
drsquare wrote:
>
> On Sun, 10 Jun 2001 03:39:00 +0800, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> ("Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>
> >"Nick Condon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> >> Why? It's just where you born. It's not like you achieved anything. Your
> >> parents fucked, and out you popped. It could have been anywhere. So just
> >> keep that image in mind, next time you feel patriotic, just visualise your
> >> father hunched over your mother. Which is all it comes down to, really.
> >
> >Well, I'm proud to be American.
>
> What is their to be proud of.
>
The first thing that Americans are proud of is their proper
use of the word 'there'. The second thing that we Americans
are proud of is both our level of education and the fact that
we pay for our own education. Americans learn a sense of
accomplishment and independence at an early age.
Unlike your country, we Americans do not feel the need to have
our government take the majority of our income and then dole
it back out to us as seen fit.
Most all medical programs in Eurpoe are a complete disaster.
The NHS in the UK should be disbanded immediately.
Nowhere in the world does an individual have a greater chance
of success building a small business than in the USA. No other
nation on Earth puts more money into research and development than
the USA.
Without the USA, mother Russia would have gobbled up most all of
Europe long ago.
....
------------------------------
From: macman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: More micro$oft "customer service"
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 12:27:23 GMT
In article <9g276l$btn$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Woofbert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <9g1olv$qvo$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Ayende Rahien"
>
>
> > > They have a *very* distinct look, I posted a screen shot, did you saw
> > > it?
> >
> > They look different, but does the user know why? There is no standard
> > for the colors of links, and IE and NS have between them pretty much
> > destroyed any other useful standards ... why shoudl this be anything
> > different?
>
> It's not just another color for a hyper link.
> It's a totally different mecanism.
> You *can't* get confused between them.
> http://www10.ewebcity.com/ayende/SmartTags.png
> Here is a screen shot.
> news:9fua39$1ek$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
So what if you can't get confused?
I'll add my own hyperlinks, thank you. I don't need or want Microsoft to
do it to my web pages -- no matter what color they make them.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: What language are use to program Linux stuff?
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 11 Jun 2001 12:28:24 GMT
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001 10:40:40 +0100,
pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I use Gnome. I am sorry, but I don't see how it is a failure ? It's now
> fast and stable and I like it very much. Just because you have a some
> beef with their implementation and language choice - it is far to harsh
> to say this. As far as I (a user) am concerned it is great - and as a
> programmer they have added some wonderful things! All the better.
Hey Pip, which version of Gnome are you reffering to ?
I really like Gnome, tho the version that came with Mandrake7.1 was
too unstable for me, suffering the odd WM freeze :(
Any advice re production suitability for Gnome ?
--
Kind Regards from Terry
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
Free Micro burner: http://jsno.downunder.net.au/terry/
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: macman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: More micro$oft "customer service"
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 12:34:58 GMT
In article <9g1mta$pbp$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Woofbert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article
> > <ZULU6.71646$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Daniel
> > Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > "Woofbert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dan
> > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > [snip]
> > > > Yes, it does. It adds new hyperlinks to the user's representation of
> the
> > > > web page. Who controls what hyperlinks are added? Microsoft and
> whoever
> > > > pays them enough money.
> > >
> > > Actualy, this part isn't so. As is typical for MS, SmartTags
> > > are a plug-in architecture. Anyone who wants to can write
> > > new ones.
> > >
> > > Paying MS is not required.
> > >
> > > Though MS can and no doubt will provide
> > > their own, included as standard.
> >
> > My main question was "Who controls what hyperlinks are added?"
> >
> > The answer is "Microsoft and whoever else has enough money to develop
> > and distribute their own plugins."
>
> No, the SmartTags SDK is available for free at MS' site.
> You can download and roll your own.
>
> > This answer is not "the web page author."
>
> If he feels like investing its time, yes it is.
>
>
OK. Try this.
Create a SmartTags plug in that every time the word "Microsoft" appears
on a web page, it links to Apple or RedHat. Now, distribute that widely.
Heck, Windows is such a security mess, you can probably create an e-mail
virus so everyone on the planet has it in a few weeks.
Do you really expect that Microsoft would allow this? Or that they
_should_ allow this?
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: alt.aol-sucks,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: "ne..." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Laugh, it's hilarious.
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 12:42:09 GMT
On Jun 11, 2001 at 16:26, Matthew Gardiner eloquently wrote:
>> >>
>> >> How about televised golf?
>>
>> >quite true.
>>
>> What about chess? On the radio?
>
>Syncronised swimming?
Bowls (not 10 pin bowling)?
--
Registered Linux User # 125653 (http://counter.li.org)
Question: Is it better to abide by the rules until they're changed or
help speed the change by breaking them?
8:41am up 10:06, 7 users, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
------------------------------
From: "Daniel Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: More micro$oft "customer service"
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 12:57:57 GMT
"Woofbert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article
> <tXUU6.72704$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Daniel
> Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
> > > Sure, I can. When I create a web site, part of the final represenation
I
> > > can determine is the hyperlink structure. MS's new browser changes the
> > > hyperlink structure.
> >
> > No, not really. Your structure is still there,
> > same as it ever was.
>
> No, not really. There are new hyperlinks to places outside my web site.
There are, but they are not in your page. They are
in a pop-up window.
> > MS provides other links, but they so do
> > all browsers. Internet Explorer historically
> > has always provided the *same* set of
> > canned links, no matter what you are viewing;
> > SmartTags are, well, smarter than that.
>
> Show me these links in my archived NS 3.0, please.
Hmmm. If I recall correctly, NetScape 3 did do it.
Start it up and look immediately above the
"Netsite" box. The links look like buttons,
but they behave exactly like links- always links
to NetScape pages, in that version.
The UI is a little different from ordinary
links, but then that is certainly true of
SmartTags as well.
[snip]
> > > Freedom of the press means the freedom to print what you want to and
the
> > > freedom to not print what you do not want to.
> >
> > The Freedom of the Press belongs to those who own one.
> >
> > You cannot demand that Time print this or that- it's
> > their press, they print what *they* want to.
> >
> > And you cannot demand that I display this or
> > that- it's my computer, it displays what *I*
> > want to. Even if you do not approve.
>
> Freedom of the press belongs to those who own a web site. And Microsoft
> cannot demand to display this or that link on MY web site, even if you
> approve.
No. You have *no right* to tell me what links
I can and can't have on my screen.
[snip]
> > > > I dion't see what the freedom of the press has
> > > > to do with it. Time can publish copies without
> > > > sticky-notes no matter what you do, after all.
> > >
> > > If I hijack a truckful of Time Magazines on their way to Safeway...
>
> What did you snip here? Oh, nothing. Just some bit about changing the
> text of those issues of Time and *putting them back*. Kudos on your
> skilful snippage to ignore the key points.
I didn't snip anything there; I snipped
some bits afterwards, but they were just
weaselwording about technological differences
beween the Web and a truck.
> > > Yes, some copies of Time Magazine remain that are unaltered, but that
> > > truckful is changed.
> >
> > Sure. But it is the hijacking that it wrong, and the
> > stealing of the magazines- what you do with them
> > after that is not particularly vile, if we ignore
> > the theft itself.
> >
> > MS does not seem to be doing anything analagous
> > to stealing magazines or hijacking trucks. I think
> > this analogy does not work.
>
> It is analogous to the extent that the web page is still there, but
> altered by Microsoft.
No, the web pages remain unualtered. Only the
browser's user interface is altered.
You wish to dictate what I can do with me
computer by abusing your copyright on
your web-page; but as a practical matter,
it will never work.
You can't sue all of us.
------------------------------
From: "Daniel Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: More micro$oft "customer service"
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 12:59:30 GMT
"drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Mon, 11 Jun 2001 00:42:57 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> ("Daniel Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
> >> What would you use then? A giant .gif?
> >
> >How about PDF?
>
> PDF? Hardly the sort of thing suitable for a web site.
Lots of webs sites do use them, and quite
successfully. What's the problem with them?
They do provide the control that HTML patently
does not.
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What language are use to program Linux stuff?
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 14:09:46 +0100
Terry Porter wrote:
>
> On Mon, 11 Jun 2001 10:40:40 +0100,
> pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I use Gnome. I am sorry, but I don't see how it is a failure ? It's now
> > fast and stable and I like it very much. Just because you have a some
> > beef with their implementation and language choice - it is far to harsh
> > to say this. As far as I (a user) am concerned it is great - and as a
> > programmer they have added some wonderful things! All the better.
>
> Hey Pip, which version of Gnome are you reffering to ?
>
> I really like Gnome, tho the version that came with Mandrake7.1 was
> too unstable for me, suffering the odd WM freeze :(
>
> Any advice re production suitability for Gnome ?
Which ever version came with RH7 and RH7.1.
Anyway, by your tone I can tell you disagree - and I am not saying that
you are not correct - just that in my experience it is fine for me (RH
6.2 Gnome version was crap). Anyway there is KDE for you, so everyone is
happy.
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What language are use to program Linux stuff?
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 14:14:29 +0100
Ayende Rahien wrote:
> C is certainly not easier, C is one of the hardest languages in existance.
> It's popular, I'll give you that, but it's not easy.
>
> Pointers is a hard cocept to grasp, manual memory management, no array
> boundy checking, no *real* arrays, no strings.
> All of those make C to a hard language.
...and error prone. Which is why UI components should be kept OUT of
kernel space unless you can ensure that there are no programming errors.
People equate the "hardess" of a programming language with the
"cleverness" of the programmer. I tend to think of things the other way
round.
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What language are use to program Linux stuff?
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 14:17:36 +0100
"Funky-Fresh Hacker D." wrote:
> > KDE, IMHO, is far more stable BECAUSE it uses C++. GNOME is a pitiful hack
> > which attempts an object oriented paradigm who's design criteria directly
> > adheres to the strengths of C++, yet they chose not to use C++.
>
> What?! I don't understand what stability has to do with C vs. C++.
> It's not what the language can do, it's the way that you use it that counts.
That is VERY true - but the choice of language does help :
a) Design
b) Conceptual understanding
c) Language features
But your point remains so very true!
------------------------------
From: "Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: MS at it again
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 14:05:18 +0100
Shane Phelps wrote:
> Patents are issued for ideas, copyright is issued for a particular published
> expression of an idea.
> For example, if the Dyson Sphere and derivitive concepts had been patended
> (which is probably no more unlikely than some of the software patents around)
> I could still infringe that patent without stealing large chunks of
> Larry
> Niven's "Ringworld" and infringing his copyright.
SF is not generally taken as being prior art when it comes to patents...
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
make: *** No rule to make target `war'. Stop.
------------------------------
From: "Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.aol-sucks,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Laugh, it's hilarious.
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 14:13:55 +0100
drsquare wrote:
> "Matthew Gardiner" wrote:
>>> What about chess? On the radio?
>> Syncronised swimming?
> Not if it's NAKED syncronised swimming.
What's being (not) worn doesn't matter too much on the radio. Unless
you've got one of these fancy new digital radios...
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
make: *** No rule to make target `war'. Stop.
------------------------------
From: "Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.aol-sucks,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Laugh, it's hilarious.
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 14:24:07 +0100
Pinocchio Poppins wrote:
> In a way, yes. My computer has a 40 GB hard disk, and if I wanted,
> I could turn on the swap file and get 40 GB of virtual memory with a
> 128 MB cache.
You need a 64-bit processor (or some horrible tricks that were both developed
and forgotten again in the '80s) to do that. And I can assure you that you
don't want to swap/page a 1GB process between disk and 128MB of memory. Not
unless you've got a bizarre addiction to disk noises and slow software...
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
make: *** No rule to make target `war'. Stop.
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: More funny stuff.
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 15:33:58 +0100
In article <9fvdtv$2pt$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Ayende Rahien"
<don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://www.geocities.com/CollegePark/6174/com_lite.htm
>
> Just to note, I did 8 myself. The keyboard is just as good as ever. But
> *damn* was it dirty.
>
> 6 & 9 & 11 are even more hilarious than the rest.
Might I reccomend the "Computer stupidities" page. It has many more liek
this. I can't remember the link, but I think google picks up on it pretty
easily.
-Ed
--
(You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.) (u98ejr)(@)(ecs.ox)(.ac.uk)
/d{def}def/f{/Times-Roman findfont s scalefont setfont}d/s{10}d/r{roll}d f 5 -1
r 230 350 moveto 0 1 179{2 1 r dup show 2 1 r 88 rotate 4 mul 0 rmoveto}for/s 15
d f pop 240 420 moveto 0 1 3 {4 2 1 r sub -1 r show}for showpage
------------------------------
From: "Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Laugh, it's hilarious.
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 14:40:14 +0100
Michael Vester wrote:
> In the tech support business, finding a user's misplaced data files is
> one of the most common type of help call.
Windows applications do not make this easy for people, of course. Too
many apps default to locations in their own install hierarchy rather
than somewhere dedicated to user files. When apps scatter files all
over the disk, is it any wonder that people cannot find what they are
looking for? At least on Unix you can be pretty sure it'll be somewhere
below your home directory[*]...
Splitting OS from apps from user files saves *everyone's* hair.
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
make: *** No rule to make target `war'. Stop.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: MS at it again
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 16:29:07 +0200
"Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Shane Phelps wrote:
> > Patents are issued for ideas, copyright is issued for a particular
published
> > expression of an idea.
> > For example, if the Dyson Sphere and derivitive concepts had been
patended
> > (which is probably no more unlikely than some of the software patents
around)
> > I could still infringe that patent without stealing large chunks of
> > Larry
> > Niven's "Ringworld" and infringing his copyright.
>
> SF is not generally taken as being prior art when it comes to patents...
Considerring how wide patents are, I don't see a reason not to.
Of course, you may need an implementation to actually get a patent.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What language are use to program Linux stuff?
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 16:36:39 +0200
"Funky-Fresh Hacker D." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> What?! I don't understand what stability has to do with C vs. C++.
> It's not what the language can do, it's the way that you use it that
counts.
The choice of language has a lot to do with the stability of the final
product.
You can't find a C/C++ program that didn't overflow the buffer, or tried to
write to a NULL pointer.
C++'s advantage is that you can mask all of it.
A good C++ programmer should use very few new and even fewer delete.
Hell, just having std::string eliminate roughly 25% of the reasons for
buffer overflows.
That is not to say that you can't get a stable product with C, but it's
easier with other language.
If I built something that is mission *critical*, I would go for Ada.
This is a very good language for building stable applications, because it
catch so many errors before it will agree to compile.
Java is good for this too, because it has about as many checks.
To sum it up, choice of language is just as important as the choice of the
programmer.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 16:38:06 +0200
"drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sun, 10 Jun 2001 21:02:08 +0200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> ("Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>
> >"drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> >> >> >earth (except yours I guess).
> >> >>
> >> >> Where have you got the statistics for that statement from?
> >> >
> >> >Starthing from 1996, 90% of HD sold were > 1GB.
> >>
> >> And a 1GB hard disk is big enough for Windows XP and all the software?
> >
> >For XP, yes.
> >For all the software, depend on the software.
>
> Well, I don't think there's much use in XP on its own.
Yes, it can.
You can browse, email, read news, word processing, video editing, etc.
> >Note that I said *greater than*, I think that in 96 it was 2.5 & 3 GB,
> >escalating quickly afterward.
> >
> >You *are* aware that most games install about that much into the HD.
> >Diablo2, frex, installed 1.5GB on my HD.
> >
> >MS designed their OS to be compatible to about five years old standard
> >computers.
>
> This computer's about three years old, and XP wouldn't stand a chance
> on it. Linux on the other hand runs perfectly. Looks like Windows
> loses again.
What is the spec?
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU!
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 16:39:14 +0200
"drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Mon, 11 Jun 2001 00:51:12 +0200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> (Peter Köhlmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>
> >T. Max Devlin wrote:
>
> >> Got any numbers? I'm glad to see you think that DVDs are common, but
it
> >> seems odd that this isn't the case. Maybe you aren't the ruler of all
> >> reality after all?
> >>
> >Well, I can only speak for germany, but here it is quite rare to find a
> >preconfigured computer without a DVD-drive (Not that I ever would buy
> >such a thingy) . I should guess the same holds true for the US.
> >But maybe in some backwater over there they just discovered that
> >3!/2"" Floppies are even better than 5!/4" ones? And music is (surprise)
> >now also available on strange looking small disks, which won´t play at
all
> >on a real good turntable?
>
> Got any statistics on how many computers have DVD drives to back up
> your points?
80-90%, I would say.
> Or are you too busy invading Poland and burning Jews?
You are getting very close to be the person who got the fastest to my
killfile.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What language are use to program Linux stuff?
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 16:46:13 +0200
"mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> All the things you say C lacks, we could debate, but C does have arrays, C
does
> have strings, just not they way you want them.
It does them in a way that in a way that is very easy to get wrong.
char *createCopy(const char * str){
char *newStr = (char*)malloc(sizeof(char)*strlen(str));
strcpy(newStr,str);
return newStr;
}
Spot the flaw in the function above.
I'm not arguing that C isn't a good language, I'm arguing that it's not an
easy language.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
