Well, Computer Programming has little to do with networking - that is until you start writing network oriented applications, but networking has everything to do with Computer Programming.

In the strict term of an "Interface class", that may be. However, the function declaration and definition are always mixed in Java. There is no way to separate them.

There is actually a big difference between the APIs from Java, and the System Calls; for Java you have to write an interface at the language level that matches up, for System Calls you do not - it's processor specifications that must match up, and those are covered by the processor vendor, not the system call creator. This is where the a language like Java fails.

In System Calls it doesn't matter what you call the function, it's parameters, etc - just that it matches the processor call stack sufficiently for the request to be transferred - which is typically an OS-level issue and a compiler issue, not your code.

So, you try to extend this to Linux vs Unix Sys7...and that's where it the fact that the function names and parameter names need not match makes it obvious that there is no issue here because they are not per se copyrighted, like they have to be with Java.

Suffice it to say, Linux out to be safe.

Coming to a different question: Does implementing a library sufficiently the same that the linker generates a matching symbol mean there is a copyright violation? Not likely. There is an extreme amount of precedent for those being fair-use, and "interoperability" is an explicitly called out exemption by law (IANAL, go talk to one). This also easily applies to network interfaces. The question comes down to: did you copy anything to make it work?

Again, a language like Java where the code structure and names must be sufficiently the same to make it work you'll have an issue, and it'll be harder to show "fair-use" even if "fair-use" applies; versus a language like C where you just need to tell the compiler how to match up the symbols to get it done - in some cases you can even specify to the compiler/linker that symbol A is really symbol B so if you have a list of the symbols you know, you can have other symbols of your own and let the linker take care of the mangling for you (no so in Java).

I expect Google will win in the end on "fair-use" since the language specifications so heavily require it to be the same for interoperability, and they have a strong case for interoperability which, as I said earlier, is explicitly called out under "fair-use" and "reverse engineering" exceptions to copyright law.

He may have a valid point regarding Java itself and its usage for Google on Android; however, that doesn't typically extend.

Also, there is sufficient legal precedent regarding C/C++ header files not being copyrightable such that nVidia need not concern themselves. This would really only affect languages like Java that mix interface declarations with their implementations.

Languages that normally separate them (like C, and C++) will not likely need to worry.

Lesson: Avoid Java

Well, the Java folk always wanted to distance themselves from the C/C++ folk.

And now we have another reason to avoid Java to boot. :D

Yes, that is how it is suppose to work. However, the big corporate property management firms are not adhering to that. If that was truly the case, then the local property managers would have more discretion in rates and the ability to negotiate, they do not.

This is one aspect of many in which our current economy is severely broken. Another is in which products are carried and who decides what the stores carry (hint: not typically the local retailers).

Yes, it is effectively the result, but it's not a purposeful result; more of a by-product or unintended consequence.

Loundon County is an odd place in many ways. It's not typical distribution. Many may be considered near poverty, but they're mostly in the western portion and own land, homes, etc; while the eastern portion is a lot richer. Homeless are near 0% of the population, and more.

So where SF is a battle between rich and poor, or rich and wanna-be-rich; Loundon County is just a battle between the established residents and those that will likely live there for
However, my main point was that the people pushing these "life-style" ordinances often never think about the consequences of the ordinances. They're only thinking about the life-style they want to maintain, everyone else be damned. So I suspect that's the same case in NYC and SF and elsewhere.

Years back, in the housing bubble, places in Virginia would go on the market for one rate, say $500k. It was typically that someone would talk into the open house, and offer $20k above the asking price, put it under contract, etc at the very first open house mere days after it entered the market. The Realtor would certainly take that into account when calculating the "market price" and what they expected things would go for; but unreasonable people would still offer significantly higher with a goal of taking it off the market and securing a place, in part because housing was moving so fast on the market, but it also fed in on itself as a result.

Yes, standard practice is that rent is not suppose to be more than 30% of your pre-tax income. It still may end up being 60% of your post-tax income though.

Years back, I rented an apartment for $1315/month. Pre-tax it was no more than 30% of my income; however, post-tax it took up one of my 2 paychecks each month (50% of my income).

It's a little simpler than that. It's more like: people have been there for years and want to continue their life style in the face of change; refusing to change, they get the government officials to pass ordinances that support their life style; thus minimizing change and forcing prices high. The poor are completely left out of the equation.

The same thing is happening in Loundon County, VA where the western half the county wants to be left alone, and the eastern half of the county is embracing massive population expansion. So one pushes these "life style" ordinances (no lot can be less than 1/2 acre, etc) and the prices sky rocket. They didn't care about the price of housing - they already owned their home so would not be affected outside of taxes.

"market rate" is not what you think it means. It's defined by the corporations, not by what the rental offices themselves think the market will do.

I made the same mistake years back. I had an apartment at $1315/month on 12-month contract. New contracts were between $1315 and $1500 - which I figured was the "market rate", and we were going to move a couple months after the contract expired. So I figured I'd let it go. Learned market rate was set by some bureaucrat in an office some where else, the local office didn't have the authority to change it (based on supply/demand in the market), and that market rate was $1700+/month.

Exactly; so not only are you paying the "mortgage" on the mobile home, you're also shelling out another $700-$1k/month for where to park it.

The economics of it never made sense to me.

No, just NO.

From a performance perspective, you immediately run across thunking between C# and C++/CLI, not to mention the API idiocies like not being able to sent a buffer from C++ to the network directly (you have to write a loop and send integer sized chunks at a time, then at the end send the final few bytes).

So unless you want to screw yourself well, just avoid C++/CLI. You'll thank me later.

. Since you mentioned you have existing libraries, etc - QT certainly seems to be very beneficial here. With the QSharedPointer types (weak, strong, etc) and concurrency functionality (QtConcurrent, QtFuture) it seems to have the main tools you're looking for, and it will integrate well with other projects in that bringing in an existing library won't be much of an issue (well, unless it's a MSVC COM or something like that; those would need to be re-written). The main caveat is that it's a little harder to share Qt code in a static way (e.g libmyqtlib.a) from a Qt project to a non-Qt project; at least, I haven't tried that. Most just use a dynamic linker which works fine to do that.

There's also a very health e-mail list and forums at qt-project.org that you can use to ask questions and get answers reasonably fast. I can't say the same for Boost, where each library may have its own list if anything at all.