Comment Re:You evidently don't have any idea what you're s (Score 1) 302
you are joking, right? I can't tell for sure.
Or are you really complaining from a problem in year 2001?
you are joking, right? I can't tell for sure.
Or are you really complaining from a problem in year 2001?
I know, right!
They should remove the armour plating from all the tanks too. People aren't that important.
Count how many tanks there are and how many people in the world.
Which one is the scarcest resource?
4dos in does era was great. Had better completion than current shells, for Linux or windows.
Welcome to Communism. Totalitarian leader. Oppressive regime. Total economic collapse. Continuous propaganda internal and external.
My country only had have capitalists non democratic governments with those characteristics until now but YMMV.
join the club!
at this point in the US's history, I can't tell the diff between capitalism and corruption.
Oh, but there is a difference. As much difference as you are willing to pay for.
You mean that there are scientists publishing papers out there that don't understand basic concepts of statistics? Like, the rest of the world?
I'm truly 99.9999% e+/-0.5 shocked!
Truly. There was real need for a portable, high level and safer (really) language. YMMV but I remember doing C with embedded SQL that was a pain, non-portable between platforms, compilers nor databases, debugger-less, etc. Lots of pain. The same program in Java would be a breeze. No pointers, no hand memory allocation, portable binaries, even the database drivers are portable.
There are lots of applications that are better suited for Java than C or even C++.
If you download the installer from the developers site it doesn't. Or use the tar.gz version for just uncompress in a directory with no installer at all.
Is was that in the past, but is that true today?
According to the latest benchmarks in Phoronix http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=llvm34_gcc49_compilers&num=5:
Clang 3.4 offered faster performance of compiled C/C++ code in several areas but GCC 4.9 also brings some performance improvements of its own over the current stable release. Clang still certainly outperforms GCC when it comes to compile times, but aside from that the compiler performance competition is rather mixed depending upon the particular code-base, workload, and processor.
For being a much younger project than GCC, LLVM/Clang is certainly running nicely and now building with almost all C/C++ code-bases tossed its way, and with the 3.4 release it's one step closer to having performance parity (or superiority) to the GNU Compiler Collection on modern x86 CPUs.
That's cool for Red Hat but how applies to CentOS?
I actually live in Buenos Aires and right now there's nothing to wor%&/.....................
CONNECTION ENDED
It's funny in some universe and not funny in another.
Let me check... oh no...
No, no, It's a bug in Intel codecs. They are going to fix it for their next gen CPUs.
Recent Java updates, for around the past year or so, have been increasingly draconian in their security measures.
Well, considering that Oracle has been consistently bashed here in Slashdot and other sites because of the security problems with applets and client side Java I would think that is very reasonable for them to increased greatly security.
I tell them to turn to the study of mathematics, for it is only there that they might escape the lusts of the flesh. -- Thomas Mann, "The Magic Mountain"
