Does Windows support running Linux apps? No.

Windows does not acively support it (that's not the issue), but it certainly does not BLOCK it either:

http://www.colinux.org/
Cygwin
MingW

And then there's various VMs and so on.

Also, 3-D printed titanium? Have we skipped ahead a century or so?

No. If you have a cool million or so to drop on a 3 printer, you can print with a variety of metals in very high precision, including titanium and hardened steel.

For example, here is a 3D printed gun:

https://www.solidconcepts.com/...

You can print all sorts of stuff.

Not to mention, the creative types who are prototyping new and interesting inventions that weren't cost effective if sent to milling houses.

This is the use I'm most interested in. I have a couple of dual head Printrbot 2.1's. personally I rather like dual head printers since I'm no contsrained to print shapes where support material can easily be picked off. I favour ABS and HIPS as the latter dissolves easily.

I'm part of a startup. We're going through a rapid ieration phase for a wearable medical device. We can get a small batch of circuit boards done, then do a bunch of iterations on the case, print out the "final" cases and get that round of devices out and tested.

Works amazingly well.

Um... would you like a beer, perchance?

yes, but I would also like a better T key without the junk stuck under it :(

. And it's all on the cop to make sure he is polite, doesn't use excessive force

Yeah you're right. It should be up to that guy in the middle of being choked to death to ensure the cop isn't in fact choking him to death. The cop shouldn't have to make sure he isn't murdering someone for a misdemenour.

Silly me.

TIFF has excellent compression, the best in fact. It even supports BPG. All you need to do is encode the image and mark it with TIFFTAG_COMPRESSION_BPG (defined as 0xdeadbeef) :)

For those who don't know, TIFF is basically a miniture filesystem inside a file. So, generally TIFF decoding is about as hard as being handed an ISO image with arbirary files in it and told to get the images.

Funny you should say that...

EPS can already support this in principle.

PS decodes things in a chain, where an element of the chain consumes data, processes it and emits data. You can insert arbitrary PostScript code into the decoding chain. This has been used in the past to implement everything from better compressors to an entire raytracing engine.

If they have to be told what the image is from to get upset

Everyone knows now.

Trying to play language laywer: "oh without being *told* you can't tell it's from playboy so you're no allowed to get offended at the single mos popular image in compure vision being a Playboy centrefold" just makes you seem silly, to be honest.

Everyone knows already. I's really sodding tastless, neer mind that the image has been so far used to death and beyond that i's not even funny.

to paraphrase Steve Jobs,

Ah yes, wisdom from the man who believed he inventd rounded corners.

The image as it is now does not objectify women any more than images that run in modern newspapers.

Nope, because everyone knows it came from Playboy. It's like a nudge nudge wink wink know what I mean say no more say no more kind of image.

If you can tell them instead it's from some old ladies fashion magazine and they're suddenly okay with it, I'd have to say you proved my point.

Except it isn't. And everyone can prove that.

Anyway the source of things DOES matter. It's why blood diamonds and trade in endangered species is illegal. Without digging further, you can't tell if they're really blood diamonds, or no bred in captivity. It becomes bad when the source is known.

This is because people have ethics.

In order for something to be sexist doesn't it in some way have to discriminate between sexes?

It's always totally neutral images or a picure cropped from a playboy centerfold, with the later dominating about 2:1. Don't see how this is just a little biased?

You can either even it up by having some fine male specimines too, or just retire that image.

OK, this is going to really get my goat.

Except that this test image has just a face and part of a shoulder, without any naughty bits. Not even erotic at all.

Except that everybody KNOWS that it's a cutout of some porn. You know what? That's tasteless and tacky. Years ago when I was a PhD student in computer vision (more later) I used to help supervise an image processing practical. It used Lena of course. Sooner or later someone found out and everyone had a good laugh.

Well the guys in the practical (90% of the people). The other 10% didn't seem to think i's so funny. I can't imagine why. So yes having a PlayBoy centrefold, even cropped sets completely the wrong tone. It sets the tone that it's no just male dominated but a total boy's club too.

For some reason all the other images are bland and neutral. You never see someone pointing out how good the reproduction of high frequencies on Baywach era David Hasslehof's manly chest or anything.

It's always Lena, peppers, and a few others.

It's a good test image because it catches both distortions of detail and color damage to areas with a gentle gradient.

No, it was good perhaps 15 years ago. It has a little high frequencies and a bit fo gradient. There are far beer trickier images now. There are far beer images it's easy to get hold of that are much harsher in those regards. All the massive overuse of Lena does is lead to ad-hoc reverse engineering of tha picture. Or as some wag in the field pointed out, the Lena compression algorithm: If the first bit is 0 then emit Lena, otherwise decode any remaining data as a JPEG.

If I have to see yet another buchered version of a Lena picture again in a compuer vision paper that I read or review, I seriously think I will murderize someone.

That pretty much summarises it. An ol dprof of mine used to quote:

Make it run,
Make it right,
Make it fast,
Make it small.

Compared to C, C++ makes the first two steps much easier. For low leel optimizaions there's not much in it, but C++ gives you more time for the third step (due to the first two being easier) and also the expressiveness helps for restructuring or choosing different algorithms.

For the last step it's a wash again, but given the same amoun of time overall, C++ again wins due to makeng the earlier steps easier.

Shove DosBOX running Windows 3.11 on top of that and you're golden!

So much bullshit.

In C if you see code written as:

assign(i, multiply(j, 5));

you have equally fuck all idea what it does. In C++,

i=j*5 means this:

i.operator=(operator*(j, 5));

If you don't read i=j*5 as the above then you're incompetent at C++ and just crying because it's not identical to C.

I think the danger of that happening for low level, frequent-running, system code outweighs the flexibility that C++ gives you, and vice versa for app code.

Premaure optimization is the root of all evil.

slower executables;

Nope. std:sort is frequently faster than qsort.

less comprehensible code

Nope.

std:vector a;
a.push_back(1);

so much more comprehensible than a cluserfuck of manual memory management.

Anything you want to do in c++, you could have done in c, the primary difference being that as a c programmer, you would have -- had to have, in fact -- actually understood what it was you were doing.

Now change C++ to C and C to ASM. Now change C to ASM and ASM to machine code. All it is is a lolz newbZ suck argument and it's crap.

c++ is building kits from nasty little pre-molded pieces. c is carving your own pieces, where, if you like, every one can be a work of art and YOU control how they all fit together. You even get to make your own glue. :)

You truly do not understand C++. You can do all that with C++, but there's no need to manage a variable length array AGAIN.

Basically, C is a compiler. C++ is a programmable C compiler. I have never understood why C programmers have a phobia about programming the compiler. It's like you guys just love typing out the same stuff over and over again.

Me? I like automation.

Oh certainly.

My implementation has a matrix being a linear array of vectors.

operator[] on a matrix returns a vector object which has a pointer to the data.

operator[] on the vector indexes the pointer.

It means I can use proper C/C++ style multidimensional array like syntax (yay one of the few correct uses of the C/C++ term!), i.e.

some_matrix[row][col]

The optimizer squashes away the intermediate Vector object and the resulting code is identical to raw access of a multidimensional array, or by-hand multidimensional access of a linear array.