Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:"For Computer Programmers" (Score 1) 213

by Forever Wondering (#47577755) Attached to: Vint Cerf on Why Programmers Don't Join the ACM

But, "staunchly" is--it was [probably] a typo. A synonym for staunchly is "strictly" [which flows better, IMO], but "staunchly" would still be acceptable.

As to "it's" vs "its", it's often a toss up for many people as its usage isn't always clear cut [even among scholars and academics]. Consider the coin that might be used. In particular, if it's possessed by its own demons :-)

Comment: Re:So much Fail. Ignore. (Score 1) 315

by Forever Wondering (#47561039) Attached to: Programming Languages You'll Need Next Year (and Beyond)

And the whole riff about GC. It makes out like it's superior in all cases.

It does mention refcounting as a subset [which perl does just fine with]. But, even with GC/refcount, you still have to break cyclic links in a tree (e.g. parent node has a list of children and each child points to its parent) when you're done or it will never GC. Also, sometimes you have to do something explicit to release resources (e.g. files) at a given time, rather than some arbitrary time later.

Further, GC is the bane of anything that must provide a constant semi-realtime response. With refcounting [can be done even in C/C++ if designed that way], you've got a "pay as you go" system [when refcount goes to zero, you free immediately]. With GC, you're "piling up debt" [of reclamation].

I've got a friend who is working on a java based web server system. When GC reclamation [finally] kicks in, the entire system goes "offline" for 35-45 seconds at a clip. He claims that particular system can be ameliorated with better programming practices (e.g. be mindful when a given construct will produce large amounts of GC), but is hard pressed to convince his colleagues of the need to do so.

Comment: Re:I know you're trying to be funny, but... (Score 5, Informative) 739

Perhaps. But, if you cared to look at the other posts on the thread, you'd see how calm and rationale he was. Or look at the gcc bug report he filed. The gcc bug has gotten fixed

I've met Linus in the flesh a number of years back and he is truly a calm and mellow guy. He only does the "bullying" for the "shock effect" to get people [with strong egos] to actually start _thinking_.

And there is some precedent for this. A number of years back, gcc was doing an illegal code motion optimization across a spinlock. After literally hundreds of posts on the gcc mailing list about how this wasn't a bug, Linus started using muscle. I would have, too, at that point. When somebody finally pointed out that the optimization was actually violating requirements in the memory model of the [then] upcoming ISO C spec, it took another hundred or so posts before they actually believed one of their own [gcc people].

Since that time, the gcc folks have become more receptive to [rather than dismissive of] bugs filed by the kernel people--which is a good thing.

Comment: Re:I don't blame them for being mad. (Score 1) 219

But, Germany wants to be part of the "special club" that has been US, GB, Canada, Australia, New Zealand for sharing SIGINT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U... But, most of those are just part of the UK, and they speak English [more or less :-)], so Germany can never really be "one of the good ole boys" ...

Comment: Re:GIGO (Score 1) 197

by Forever Wondering (#47391057) Attached to: IEEE Spectrum Ranks the Top Programming Languages

I agreed with your original first paragraph [but forgot to mention it--sorry].

We need multiple such ranking lists just like we need multiple style guides. On the latter, some are better than others, but when they all converge on a given point, that's when it's more likely to be a valid concept.

I just looked at the latest tiobe and it appears to better match how I would have [being a programmer] ranked some of the languages. Spectrum will no doubt [have to] tune their methodology, based upon the drumming they're getting in this slashdot topic.

But, comparing languages can be apples/oranges or more like wrench/screwdriver. Although a master index can have benefit, subdividing it by use cases may be better. For example:
- OS/embedded/realtime: C/C++/Obj-C
- Web server backend: perl/Java/php
- sysadmin: perl/python
Even still, there are overlaps/hybrids in these as well.

Comment: Re:GIGO (Score 1) 197

by Forever Wondering (#47389887) Attached to: IEEE Spectrum Ranks the Top Programming Languages

In the link they provided explaining how they do their rankings, they mention Google search is one metric and also mention that it's what tiobe uses [with a link to tiobe's page]. They're trying to be more transparent and use multiple metrics vs just one or two. Maybe it's time to have an alternative to tiobe. If both indexes, done with different methodologies, provide similar results, this would tend to bolster the validity of each.

Comment: Re:Because I'm lazy (Score 1) 279

by Forever Wondering (#47328805) Attached to: Why Software Builds Fail

Clang warns about bad variable names? I need to switch!

I guess I should have used:
    if (a_simple_boolean_expression_variable.that_is_automatic_scope.and_therefore_on_the_stack);
        yet_another_simple_integer_variable.that_is_automatic.and_likewise_on_the_stack = 5; // set value to five

Or, if you [yikes!] prefer camel hump notation:
    if (aSimpleBooleanExpressionVariable.thatIsAutomaticScope.andThereforeOnTheStack);
        yetAnotherSimpleIntegerVariable.thatIsAutomatic.andLikewiseOnTheStack = 5; // set Value To Five

I can be flexible when needed ...

Never say you know a man until you have divided an inheritance with him.

Working...