Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Comment Why batteries? Hydrogen much denser. (Score 3, Insightful) 312

As I posted below, it seems pretty obvious you would use fuel cells instead of batteries for an electric aircraft... from your energy density link compressed hydrogen has an even better energy density (142 MJ/kg) than jet fuel (46 MJ/kg)!

The cost of hydrogen production is estimated to become close to gasoline production over the next decade or so, but there is a huge pollution benefit to using fuel cells which could drive adoption quicker.

The currently very low cost of oil is probably the main thing that would keep airplanes from going electric soon.

Comment Fuel cell or battery? (Score 1) 312

An electric airplane sounds like an interesting idea, especially for short hop flights...

It also seems like it would be a nice case for fuel cells because you have a much more limited need for fueling stations (basically just airports) and it would be easier to store enough energy for a moderately long flight.

Comment Which apps? (Score 1) 260

Browsing source on my repositories I can use Ctrl-F just fine - which other apps have you encountered that?

I have to admit I've never tried using the UI over dial-up, but that seems like a pretty niche issue for most people. You could still use a command line or other git client instead which would perform a lot better with that kind of network constraint... I totally agree with those who say the modern web has gotten too bloated but for something like BitBucket I would hate to lose some nice features the site has to accommodate those with really slow connections.

Comment Re:fast growth (Score 5, Interesting) 260

If anyone can take over the throne from GitHub, why would it not be BitBucket? They produce the excellent and free Git client Sourcetree, and all around have a more reasonable pricing model than GitHub.

It's not like I don't have a GitHub account, everyone does, but I also have a BitBucket account and have no qualms switching to them entirely if GitHub really starts being a problem (well, MORE of a problem since they did just recently have a big outage... perhaps that was early warning).

Comment Re:This is what real choice looks like (Score 0) 401

However, I'm unsure how useful it is to brick the phone rather than disable the fingerprint reader in question and force the user to enter their passcode they created

At first that seems a bit nicer for the user, but thinking longer term I think it makes a lot of sense to disable the device if it's detected it has been tampered with - I feel that's OK because of the ease of restoring the system from a backup, including the secure items in the keychain. If one bit of hardware has been compromised who knows what else was - why risk it? It just adds a lot of complexity around knowing the system is truly secure or not.

Comment This is what real choice looks like (Score -1) 401

Apple is not "getting away" with anything. They are actually being serious about security on the phone. I know this might be confusing because you are used to a world that just does the minimum possible to pretend to secure hardware and telling you it's actually secure...

This is what real choice looks like. People can buy an iPhone that is actually serious about security and may lock you out of data if you mess up the device. That's why backups are important... after all if anyone had an iCloud backup of their iPhone it wouldn't matter if the phone suddenly decided to lock you out, because you could get another device and it would be restored.

Or, people can say - I'd prefer not to be as serious about security, and buy an Android device. That is a valid choice also and I can see why others would make it. Please however do not think if that is your preference, that we should also want that same lower level of security to be default. I prefer for example my parents have this higher level of security and I just have to make sure that they have backups that are working, but at least I don't have to worry about malware or thieves stealing the farm as it were.

Comment Spin, Spin, Spin (Score 1) 634

A slightly unlikely thing happened

It's not "slightly unlikely". It's a one in 64 chance.

Again, it could happen - but it's VERY unlikely. It's just a leading indicator of all sorts of other things being done not nearly so visible.

Like, for instance, posters such as yourself on all public outlets trying to claim winning six out of six coin tosses is slightly unlikely...

Comment Re:97% odds against either winning all flips fairl (Score 1) 634

Don't forget the possibility that many supposed Bernie representatives in any position of power are really Hillary plants - I'd wager more than half of the coin tosses were ever actually done, both reps just agreeing Clinton won.

Hillary really wants to win and she will stop at nothing.

Comment Guard is much more useful than you are thinking (Score 3, Informative) 123

Guard has the nice side effect of turning an optional into a non-optional, so that you can use a value through a whole method without having to unwrap (or worse, force unwrap) it.

without requiring the code-by-convention Disposable implementation

Frankly that sounds a lot clunkier to me than just having a nice defer block.

"repeat/while" is retarded and an unnecessary change away from well-known and accepted language conventions.

I don't know how long you've been programming but over the years I have run across times where I wanted to run through a loop at least once before checking the end condition, and had to contort a variety of things to accommodate a check at the top of the loop... I hardly think such a useful tool is retarded, when is serves so well in a specific niche.

Protocol extensions are nice, and are probably going to be quite useful in keeping your code readable. C# has had extension methods for a while now

They aren't really the same as extension methods you are talking about, because protocol extensions allow for default implementations that get overridden... both Swift and ObjC have had extensions on classes forever.

Swift protocol extensions are more like C# Abstract Classes. But you can have a class declare conformance to multiple protocols and so gain all of the methods from each, and furthermore you can in an extension on a class make any class implement a protocol and thus gain default protocol implementations...

Comment No actually it's not (Score 1) 123

Language stability is a very big deal if you've got a sizable body of code

That's my point though; it's really not.

I'm working for a client who moved to Swift at release. At this point we have a LOT of production code in Swift, and this is all heavy database and UI code (for an enterprise app). This is not simple stuff, nor simple code...

But the language migration has caused as most a handful of hours of work over the last year or so. Much of that is because of the migration tool, without that it probably would have been more but I don't think it would have been a huge amount more. After all, we have a lot of modern tools for dealing with changing text in batch across a large codebase.

Languages forever have treated syntax as something they simply cannot change, compounding mistake after mistake of initial design because they are too afraid to break existing code. I'm here to say that fear is overblown, and more languages should not be afraid to re-work terrible syntax to make the language better.

I suppose if you're banging out the latest iOS app in six or twelve months

The app i"m on currently has been around for about five years, so no.

I've worked for many large companies with many large and very old codebases so I'm acutely aware of the need to worry about maintainable code. It's just that it turns out worries about language changes are mostly unfounded in terms of being an undue amount of work.

Slashdot Top Deals

Never buy what you do not want because it is cheap; it will be dear to you. -- Thomas Jefferson