Can't really think of a time where I had to "delete the next N lines" - but "expanding selection to next enclosing scope" or "word boundary", and either deleting or copying or cutting that? Or moving the current line, or currently selected lines up and down? That happens a lot... and my IDEs have shortcuts for that.

And then there's the neat stuff that's hard to do in a non-IDE, like efficient navigation (including jumping to one of multiple possible concrete implementations of an interface).

Sure, vim is neat for editing dumb config files over a SSH connection, but I don't get why people don't want to use the best tools for the job when it comes to programming... simple manipulation of text is probably what I spend the least amount of time on while doing development stuff.

Hack mainframes and exfiltrate police data, as well as hack back mainframes and attempt to grab get hold of other people's money, and you will very likely be charges.

Of course Warg aka anakata claims he had nothing to do with it, that it's traced back to him because he had an "open lab computer", but that's the oldest excuse in the book... and with the kind of boasting anakata used to do online, well, I think there's a pretty good chance he did play an active part. If it was because the USAnians wanted to get hold of him, Sweden is really already their little bitch and would gladly roll over.

PHP has actual rules of grammar? I thought it was one big kludge :)

Windows 8 might be a LSD trip - but how on earth would you see that as a bad thing? ;)

On a more serious note, I ended up with Win8 on my work laptop, since nobody at the workplace could point me a a working win7 image - I don't really see any of the FORmetRo crap on a day-to-day basis, so it mostly just feels like a win7 that's slightly faster and smoother. YMMV.

EFS? :)

Not that I use it myself (much prefer TrueCrypt), but it sure is convenient and drop-dead transparent.

I don't believe they should - and I hope I'm not giving off that impression. But I'm trying to deal with the actual facts of this whole miserable situation - which is bad enough without resorting to FUD. Better to stick with the facts, so we can cry (even more) foul if Microsoft violates their own guidelines...

Also, I don't find the idea of a "secure boot" in itself to be such a terribly bad idea... but the way it's being dropped upon us, with ARM being locked out from the beginning, and the level of uncertainty for the x86 future? Not good.

For Windows 8 certification, on x86 hardware, the user must have the option of disabling Secure Boot. See the official requiements (Windows 8 System Requirements PDF), page 121. A couple of select quotes:

Obviously, this is the requirements for Windows 8, and there's no guarantee Microsoft won't remove that for the next iteration - and it's only for x86, whereas ARM must be locked down. We should definitely be wary & weary, but let's still stick to the facts, right?

Start by asking the why/what-basis questions, politely, without explicitly declining their request. While waiting for reply, check out which lawyers are available in your area. Depending on Piriform's reply to your inquiry, go and talk to one of those lawyers - even if you're in .eu where IANALs believe you're allowed to do the importing based on laws around interoperability.

There, FTFY.

Well, sure, nobody in their right mind would make a blocking server that only supported a single client at a time (and I'd argue that nobody in their right mind would use non-async for high-performance work, thread-per-client is ouch). And apparently the class he derived from is known for bad performance.

Still, comparing the time taken to process a single request is as valid a benchmark as measuring what performance is like under heavy concurrent load. I do agree that on a whole the test is rubbish, and doesn't in any way show what the author believes it does.

...and even when the Java version has a level of abstraction removed and returns a hardcoded header string, the C# version (keeping it's higher abstraction level) still beats it.

Yup, what he times here is overhead of two very different frameworks, without actually using any of the framework functionality. No reason for that test to be skewed in any way, right? :-)

Also: profile-guided optimization

.

...presuming the compiler doesn't convert the if/else-if chain to a jump table.

If you need this kind of optimization, you're going to be doing such compiler (and version!) dependent programming that you might as well break out your trusty assembler. And when working at assembly code level, you can combine the two - heck, it might even make sense to have a few "cmp/je" for the most used cases, perhaps a binary-search-logic series of branching, and finally some jump tables of the rest. Or perhaps jump tables in the binary-search-logic branches, if your ranges are sparse.

Hint: profile your code and know what you're doing before you even consider such a thing. And write tools so you don't have to hand-code it.

Because it would be quite a lot of effort to retro-fit to the existing game? It would require a fair amount of scripting, as well as (possibly) new cinematics, and definitely some extra voice-acting. There's an expansion coming, that expansion has a new planet and new NPCs, and they've taken the time and effort to add gay stuff there. Move along, people, there's no bigotry to be seen here, only time and budget constraints.