3 1/4 floppy

Sherlock Holmes: "Once you have discounted the impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth"
Dirk Gently: "The impossible often has a kind of integrity to it which the merely improbable lacks."

I'm not ready to give up on a plausible answer based on physics we understand, it may be that it is doing something we understand and we are simply not realizing it.

Obviously there is no way to respond to this as "syntax" is a mater of taste. I can say this, though. Java and C type languages clearly delineate "punctuation" and special characters in to well known uses. Secondly, logical flow is wrong in perl, as in, "do_something unless foo" It is a brain dead way of expressing: if( ! foo) do_something. Most languages do not support this type of expression, and switching from java, to c, to python, to (yuck) perl it makes perl especially onerous to read.

Why is the syntax of perl so bad? It lends itself to scripts that even the authors can't understand after a week or two.

There needs to be a law, if one can not be found that already can already cover this, but "faithful" generation of object code from source code is, by definition, what a compiler does. There MUST be *some* product law that covers intentionally inserting functionality without the user's knowledge.

Obviously I wish no ill will on anyone, but let's be honest, there are a number of "successful" people who's loss would improve the economy.

I'll have to listen to talk radio for a week or two until they stop playing Prince songs constantly. Prince is OK, but if I hear "Purple Rain" one more time I'll lose it.

There is no sole, that's hogwash. There is the nature vs nurture argument. DNA vs how you treat it. Then there are viruses that alter brain chemistry and operation, random mutation. Cloning won't bring back a pet because cloning only focuses on DNA.

This guy should be cloned and duplicated so more of his type get into the gene pool. Normally when you hear about people doing this stuff, it is through the darwin awards.

Was it near a volcano?

Unics, Unix, UNIX, unix, posix, bsd, linux, minix, plan9, etc. They all come from the same basic design philosophy, and it is a very good starting point, simple, clean, wonderful.

Then you want applications to run on it. Then you get performance issues. Then you get security issues. Then you get new types of peripherals. Then you get new types of processors and memory architectures. Then it shrinks to be a raspberry PI, then it grows to be massively parallel and fill a room.

After all that, tell me again about what mistakes you are not going to make.

The chemical process for producing Polaroid film, or any film for that matter, is an ecological chemical nightmare. Digital image sensors are currently better than *any* polaroid film and don't spew acids and solvents into theearth for each picture taken. Oh, and yes, digital is practically free on a per picture basis.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

http://yarchive.net/comp/linux...

ZFS was clearly developed for a different operating system, and I don't think Linus would care. If he does, I'd like to see something he has written on the subject.

Unless there is a copyright holder with reason and "standing" to sue, there is no violation.

Of course that have "real" preprocessors. I think what you are referring to are CASE tools that can be useful for any boiler-plate code construction. No matter what language you think is "real," I guarantee it is probably implemented in C or C++ or based on them.