Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:Is there any point continuing GCC's development (Score 1) 99

by IllForgetMyNickSoonA (#47840207) Attached to: LLVM 3.5 Brings C++1y Improvements, Unified 64-bit ARM Backend
Actually, it seems that Phoronix tests are the best available around - at least a quick search didn't reveal any further recent tests. Besides, that's what TFA links to.

If you wish to imply that Phoronix tests are somehow skewed in favour of GCC, why don't you provide a link to tests claiming otherwise?

Comment: What's all the fuss about? (Score 1) 99

by IllForgetMyNickSoonA (#47840193) Attached to: LLVM 3.5 Brings C++1y Improvements, Unified 64-bit ARM Backend
Instead of only talking out of my a$$, I just compiled a small QT project of mine (8333 LOC, spread over 60 files (including auto generated moc files), lines counted with "wc -l"), with gcc 4.8.2 and with clang 3.5 (these are per default available on Ubuntu 14.04), and it seems that the compilation times are nearly identical:


real 0m26.100s
user 0m24.815s
sys 0m1.208s


real 0m27.936s
user 0m26.715s
sys 0m1.755s

All files (including compilers, libraries and includes) are on an SSD. Difference of 2 seconds or some 7%. Not exactly to be ignored, but not enough to make me smile either. At least I didn't have to change much to get it to compile, except replacing 1.0d with (double)1.0.

Comment: What's all the fuss about? (Score 2) 99

by IllForgetMyNickSoonA (#47840053) Attached to: LLVM 3.5 Brings C++1y Improvements, Unified 64-bit ARM Backend
What's the LLVM / clang fuss about anyway? I keep hearing about LLVM for years already, it's presented by its' supporters (of which many have never actually even tried it out, I bet!) as "The Solution To All (alleged) GCC Problems", but it somehow fails to replace the GCC as an omnipresent compilation system.

Until there is not a single Linux distribuition out there compiled with LLVM / clang, and there still is none, it will just not cut it.

Besides, as the Phoronix article shows, it's also not on-par performance-wise.

I'd love to move to a compiler with better / more understandable errors and warnings, especially for C++, and which compiles faster - but until the code does not execute at the same speed (and it seems it mostly lags behind GCC), and until it is not integrated into the system adequately (read: LLVM-based distribution), I do not see the point in switching.

Comment: Re:Why so much Wayland? (Score -1, Troll) 197

Disgusting presentation. The guy spits on the efforts of good people who set the base for what he is trying to "re-invent, just better" now and what he was working on for the past years. He goes at great lengths to explain how this-and-that is "oh so 90-ies" bad in X (things I never actually had a real problem with, and I am actively using X since early 90-ies; some of them completely irrelevant details) and to laugh at it while not providing even a SINGLE DAMN SCREENSHOT of the "new and better" stuff. Forgot the cable, yeah. So convenient. A plenitude of extensions, some of them obsoleted by now? Well, guess what - YOU was a part of the team who designed and wrote them in the first place!!! Nothing but hot air. The guy is a jerk and a poser, who loves insulting other people - as far as one can say judging on this video. If his attitude is representative for the whole Wayland team, then I don't have much faith the project will ever succeed. Yes, there are some technical merits to what he says, but I don't have the impression that he and his like have the capacity to do it better AND to make it to a stable and useable product. It takes much more to do so than what he displayed here. I'll be happy if they prove me wrong (every advance in Linux world is a good thing) but I wouldn't hold my breath. I now understand Canonical much better.

Comment: This can't be true! (Score 1) 132

Companies asking for FB (or whatever) credentials? As a part of job interview? I surely hope this is NOT standard behavior but rather something blown out of proportion. If somebody would ask me for my personal access data to ANYTHING, I'd consider it a bad joke and lough politely. Man, at some times it sucks to be European, but articles like this are a nice wake-up call, showing fellow humans in other parts of the world have to fight even larger idiocy. :-(

Comment: Re:Where Are Today's Hobbyists? (Score 1) 612

by IllForgetMyNickSoonA (#41518025) Attached to: Ask Steve Wozniak Anything
Since some time, I've been into remotely controlled planes. Started out by buying one, with a cheapo (but very "thinkering friendly") Turnigy 9X TX. Since then I'm building my own planes - MUCH to tinker with, the possibilities are infinite: shapes, materials, attaching gadgets, learning flight techniques, ... not to talk about the entire world of possibilities that opens up once you start designing your own planes. Maybe worth a try. :)

FORTUNE'S FUN FACTS TO KNOW AND TELL: A giant panda bear is really a member of the racoon family.