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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:DirectX is obsolete (Score 2) 39

by bondsbw (#48900711) Attached to: DirectX 12 Lies Dormant Within Microsoft's Recent Windows 10 Update

Really, I have to wonder what Microsoft is thinking these days.

Maybe they want to win back the consumer market they lost? Perhaps diversify a bit?

I just appreciate that they need to compete, and they are forcing their major competitors to bring new things to the table. Otherwise we might be looking at a repeat of mid-2000s, with stagnation like happened in Windows XP and IE 6... just with Apple or Google at the helm this time.

Comment: Re: Why oh Why (Score 1) 72

That's not Oracle that's ANSI/ISO SQL Standard. Complain to them.

From what I can find, the standard length is 18. That appears to be a minimum, not a maximum.

Regardless, everyone else that matters supports more. Why not Oracle?

30 characters seems pretty long to me.

[Insert obligatory 640K quote here]

It's plenty if you have standards to abbreviate everything and remove all vowels. Of course, when your NMNG_CNVNTN_RQRS_UNDRSCR_CHRCTRS

oops too long

Comment: Re:Hints from an over-the-hill programmer (Score 1) 206

by phantomfive (#48900397) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Is Pascal Underrated?

Everybody's seen expressive code. You can look at the code and understand what it does almost instantly. Comments, variable names, abstraction, everything that makes a great programmer, all of these things come into play. Conversely, everybody's seen shitty code that takes several days to understand. I don't care what language it is. You're a horrible programmer if you write code like this.

Well said. I would suggest that not everyone has seen expressive code, though.

Comment: PS: It's not easy or natural for ME, but but doabl (Score 1) 506

by raymorris (#48900329) Attached to: Senator Who Calls STEM Shortage a Hoax Appointed To Head Immigration

I should have said right up front, I'm part of modern American culture too, so saving doesn't come natural to me either. I want a 3D TV, because I really like 3D. I have to be shown, and repeatedly reminded, how to live in a way that finances aren't stressful. For instance I listen to Dave Ramsey sometimes - not to learn new information, but because I have to be reminded. It's not easy and natural for me. It's worth it, though. First I have the peace of mind of knowing we're financially secure in the present, with no bill collectors calling* . Secondly, I know we'll have all that we need later in life too.

* we have two items from the past we're still cleaning up.

Comment: Re:Contribution? (Score 1) 144

by phantomfive (#48900311) Attached to: Bjarne Stroustrup Awarded 2015 Dahl-Nygaard Prize
That's great, I was hoping you'd have something interesting to say on this point, and you did not disappoint. If I may summarize, I see three main points in your post (maybe this isn't a very good summary):

1) Knowledge of design patterns don't help programmers become better (and may make them worse)
2) GoF the book was not well-researched, they didn't show that the patterns solved a common problem.
3) GoF was not well-researched, they didn't show that the patterns even solve a problem, only that they can be used.

I would add that in my own experience, code rarely fits neatly into the GoF design patterns. Sometimes the problem matches something similar, but rarely the exact pattern. And even when it does match, I usually use a modified version (example, singleton [which I call a global variable] I rarely make an actual singleton. For example, if I have a clipboard class, I make it generic enough to have multiple clipboards, but then designate one of those as the system-wide clipboard or whatever).

btw the organization of your post is solid, that was some nice rhetoric; logical flow from the weakest point to more convincing points until the end where your final paragraph is strongly stated, but feels as though it naturally flows from the rest of your points.

Comment: not easy, but our grandparents made less, saved mo (Score 1) 506

by raymorris (#48900235) Attached to: Senator Who Calls STEM Shortage a Hoax Appointed To Head Immigration

>. Realistically, it's frippin' hard to save a lot of money with a below-average income. It's real easy to get sideswiped by a substantial unexpected expense that I'd just deal with without affecting my retirement savings plan.

It's not easy. Mindset makes a huge difference though; it doesn't have to be that hard. In the 1950s, the average income was what we'd call $24,000. (That is, $24,000 in current dollars). Average families bought homes of around 1,000 square feet or so. They cooked. Making coffee at home costs 27 CENTS. Buying Starbucks is what, $6? They played a board game versus spending $35 taking the family out to a movie.

If you play board games and make coffee, if you have a lifestyle like June and Ward Cleaver, you can save all income beyond $20,000. It's a different mindset than most Americans today, certainly. And it's entirely doable. The big thing, I think, is to pay yourself first. The FIRST $xxx dollars goes to savings, then you decide how to spend the rest, rather than trying to save whatever is left over after you're done spending.

I've rarely seen a substantial expense that's actually unexpected. The roof needs to be replaced - yeah we've been expecting that for 20 years. We knew in 1995 that the roof would last about 20 years before needing replacement. The car died? Been expecting that since the warranty ran out. I can't predict WHICH month the car will die, but I know one of the cars will probably need major repairs between 150,000 and 200,000 miles, so each month we set aside $100 for car repairs and maintenance. Medical expenses can be unexpected, which is why we have insurance, to cover unexpected high expenses. We expect to pay the deductible each year, or close to it. We actually don't know which it will be this year - the house, the car, or medical, but we can certainly expect that one of three will have a $x,000 expense each year. That is, we expect an average $x,000 / year expense from those three combined.

So we have three types of savings. One is for expected significant expenses, like replacing the roof or air conditioner. Figure each year this fund needs to cover 1/4th of the cost of your car. (Fixing a new Porsche costs more than fixing an old Chevy pickup). The next is for retirement - a special case of expected expenses. The third is the emergency fund, $1,000-$5,000 for unexpected expenses. Unlikely expenses over $5,000 get insured. Neither an expected expense nor an unexpected expense will touch your retirement if you've put a bit into each of these three accounts each month.

Comment: also, easy to abandon your rights, one sentence. (Score 1) 65

by raymorris (#48900091) Attached to: Why We Still Can't Really Put Anything In the Public Domain

Also, a commentor on TFA pointed out the requirements for abandonment of copyrights are:

1. the plaintiff intended to surrender [ownership] rights in the work; and

2. an act by the plaintiff evidencing that intent.

So to effectively put it in public domain permanently, simply write:
I surrender any rights to this work.
Done.

Comment: over 10,000 pounds, twice the size of F-250 (Score 2) 153

>. which is actually way down somewhere below 5,500 lb.

As you can see on the DMV page, it's 10,000 pounds - twice the weight of 2014 F-250.

https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/...

An F-750 heavy hauler with Caterpillar engine does qualify as a commercial vehicle.

You other assertions of fact are approximately as accurate.

Comment: Re:Poor Alan Kay (Score 1) 144

by phantomfive (#48899011) Attached to: Bjarne Stroustrup Awarded 2015 Dahl-Nygaard Prize

Would be nice, but would cause major backwards compatibility breakage because all but one compiler would have to change the magling scheme

All the same, it would be nice if they'd given a recommended method of name mangling, because over time (a decade or more) all compilers would converge on that recommendation. But anyway, to me name-mangling's a minor issue compared to problems like calling conventions, especially with things like smartpointers. Not sure there's a way to fix that problem, but it sure can be annoying when you're trying to interface with C++.

What this country needs is a good five cent ANYTHING!

Working...