Yeah, all the CSS lovers will pile on. Have a party. I still think CSS is a stupid idea.

1) Cascading. What the F? In order to figure out what is going on I have to work back through all the cascaded sheets to figure out what's going on
2) "Separation of content and presentation" Yeah, that's a great idea, but not in HTML. HTML *is* a presentation layer. Who writes content in plain jane HTML? Idiots, that's who. Everyone else writes in something else (Markdown, XML) and compiles to HTML.. CSS is a negative there.
3) CSS syntax is completely unrelated to HTML syntax. Thanks a lot

It still sucks.

I hear Zuckerberg wired his whole house with those.

The problem is usually routers. Build up one on a PC and use PFSense or another software router package.

Let's try this again...

That's the key part of modular. If you can't use something different it's just spaghetti code in multiple processes.

What I find most annoying is the government, which is supposed to enforce and obey the law, spends so much time figuring out ways to get around the law.

When I said "If you were doing the same thing in C/C++" I meant hanging onto a pointer after freeing the memory. Which you can do in both languages and which will cause you no end of problems later on.

Whoosh - he was talking about how you could allocate objects on the stack and have them be released automatically as you exit the scope. Java always allocates objects from the heap, but the reference can be on the stack and when you exit the scope the reference disappears and the object is now eligible for garbage collection.

Greyfox doesn't understand how garbage collection works in Java is what it comes down to.

Yeah, it only took him 20 years to figure out that he needed source code management.

You mean like this in Java?

public void myfunc()
{
      MyObject localObj = new MyObject();
}

When you exit the scope it's eligible for garbage collection. Unless you hang onto a reference it's not going to hang around. If you're leaking memory or resources in Java you're hanging on to them somewhere. If you were doing the same thing in C/C++ and you free the object while keeping the pointer around you're just creating a Heisenbug.

The fact that *EVERY* line of kernel code has to deal with those kind of issues is a byproduct of the monolithic kernel design, not what the code itself is doing.

I started off as a Unix kernel programmer in the late-80's, did a lot of stuff on supercomputers and went to Apple to work on Copland (micro-kernel). I/O subsystems can make good use of OO abstractions. OS X's IO subsystem is written in C++.

It's really time to look at microkernels again. There are some performance issues, but many of those will get smoothed out as they're hit and engineered around.

You know, if he can't use Google he's really bad off.

Back in 1990 if you were an experienced C developer and hadn't looked seriously at OO languages it was understandable. In 2014, if you haven't at least dabbled with C++, Java or C# I think it shows a definite unwillingness to learn. So that's why the OP is getting "condescending" answers like "just hire someone"

Oh really? Drink some more koolaid. Remember how long it took to lay Carbon to rest. And the Cocoa APIs are still incomplete in many areas. Then take a look back at all the new programming languages and frameworks Apple has introduced over the years and then shot in the head. Dylan? OpenDoc?

I'd say it's 50/50 whether or not Swift will get enough traction to continue on.

If you've spent this long avoiding modern languages why start now? If you're not interested in object oriented design you're just going to spend your whole time cussing at the frameworks. Just hire a contractor.

That's my question. I've wound up with it installed plenty of times because it's the default on too many distributions but use?