Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Slashdot Deals: Prep for the CompTIA A+ certification exam. Save 95% on the CompTIA IT Certification Bundle ×

Comment Re:the comparison is pointless (Score 1) 81

If you're doing HPC, then you're definitely not the kind of 'desktop user' that the grandparent was talking about.

How do you know he's a desktop user? All the OPdid was state the benchmarks are useless and you shouldn't read the article.

When you benchmark systems with a lot of active processes,

Modern desktops are putting a lot of effort into reducing the number of wakeups per second in orer to reduce power draw. This means that on most systems, there are a lot of processes, but very few running at any given time. You're generally best waking up rarely, then blasting through all the required computation as fast as possible before going back to sleep.

Comment Re: Programming (Score 1) 381

So is theoretical Computer Science


that is how you do math,

No, it's how you do part of maths. It's how you convey ideas to others and it's how you codify things to check you're right. Last time I did some maths (as in trying to prove something new), it was me, a friend, lots of coffee and most of the time was spent talking or sketching things. the rest was spent manipulating symbols.

Manipulating symbols is a tool you use in maths to formalise your patterns. But saying that maths IS the manipulation of symbols is like saying woodworking is using a nailgun.

you are taught math or CS on under-graduate levels, which is what we are talking about

Actually it wasn't clear to me that we were talking about that. TFA (actually pretty well written though from the comments almost no one read it) was very much not about being taught maths or CS at university.

, you are learning all the basics of various forms of abstracts and the insights they bring.

Yes and manipulation of symbols is a tool to do that. But that doesn't mean that maniuplation of symbols is the sum-total of it. That's the way it's taught in schools and it massively sucks.

Comment Re: Programming (Score 1) 381

but all this says to me is that she had crap math teachers.


90% of everything is crap, and that includes maths teachers. Most people have bad maths teachers. Learning to code is a good maths teacher because you end up encouraging yourself to learn the bits you need to get the job done. It, for many people, becomes interesting because you can see something that it is useful for, rather than mindless drudgery of ridiculous "relevant" problems.

Comment Re:Nukes (Score 1) 240

Windscale was used to recycle fuel from and for NPPs.

The infamous Windscale fire had nothing to do with reprocessing.

You *specifically* noted the Windscale Pile which was (a) where the fire was and (b) nothing to do with nuclear power. It was a device for making plutonium for nuclear bombs.

You can't just ignore it to brighten up your safety statistics.

Touche my man, touche.

Comment Re:the comparison is pointless (Score 1) 81

I care quite a lot about high performance stuff and scientific computing. My stuff hours faster on my Linux luggable and cluster using -O3, and yes I did benchmark it. I don't really care what Apple do, and I doubt they'd listen.

Besides the gp was trying to be smug and superior by claiming that because they didn't do his pet test it's obviously crap and you shouldn't listen. I'm kind of sick of people like that, because they don't say anything to inform or offer insight, they're simply trying to make themselves sound smart.

Comment Re:the comparison is pointless (Score 2) 81

The compilation tests they ran are completely pointless because all it measures is the amount of time required to build XYZ which is not a measure of a good compiler.

It's one of many measures of a good compiler.

What they should be looking at is what is actually being generated for it's size, efficiency and most importantly, accuracy.

They test efficiency, that's what all the benchmarks are for.

Compiling code with -O3 on GCC will get you in trouble

No it won't, at least not more often than incredibly rarely, provided you write reasonably well defined C or C++ code. Stating anything else is just pure FUD. I use -O3 all the time and I've never had a regression test fail as a result or a bug.

However, there was no comparison to how small it could make a binary

-Os frankly is of little interest to desktop developers. Heck, I spend quite a bit of my time on 8 bitters these days, and I think you're being pedantic.

efficiency of the resulting binaries when executed.

Well it's clear you didn't read the article, because performance tests of the binaries when executed was the majority of the article.

Comment Re:Possible scenario. (Score 1) 290

Apparently I can't add or subtract pre coffee.

True they got out of the way, but the did log things.

I'm still entertained by the combination of wooden biplanes and the classic age of sail with wooden ships. Arrrr me hearties run out the long guns and ready the seaplane! Avast!

Comment Re: Like the Bible (Score 1) 603

What's wrong with comparison to other religious texts, especially Abrahamic ones.

the Koran is in its original language while the Bible exists only in translation

The old testament is mostly avilable in it's original language (depending on the precise denomination) albeit in txt spk (really---all the vowels are missing).

Comment Re:Possible scenario. (Score 1) 290

Double reply because I can't resist.

I do love how your wildly incorrect facts and figures are bracketed by "use your brain" an "ignorant fuck". I think that adds a certain special something that was otherwise missing from the post.

Can we have a "+5 Slashdot classic" mod for the post?

Comment Re:Possible scenario. (Score 2) 290

Use your brain. Imagine it. 80 years ago most ships are still made of wood and are driven by sails.

Um 80 years ago? 1935? Are youuuuuuuu sure?

You might want to look at the kind of ships sunk by U boats in the Battle of the Atlantic a scant 4 years later. Not a lot of wood and sail.

Even the largest ship ever built by that time was tiny by todays standards

Laid down 1937. 65,000 tons displacement. The biggest aircraft carriers today top out at 100,000 tons, which is not enough to make the Yamato look tiny. By any standards ships of that size are very large ships. In fact most cargo ships build today are smaller than that since the Yamato wouldn't fit through the Panama canal. The US battleships of that era were designed to transit the canal of course.

There have been a few modern post panamax ships built. The largest ship ever hit about 650,000 tons displacement at full load (10x the size), but that doesn't exist any more, sadly, and there was only ever one of it. The largest container haulers top out at 250,000 tons displacement. Ships of that size are rare, however and even so a 65,000 ton ship would be considered very large.

The largest ships 80 years ago were comparable to most of the big ships sailing today. In your comparison about military ships, the size increase from 80 years ago is fairly modest.

When it comes to sail, the last ships of the age of sail were the windjammers. They were giants as far as sailing ships went, with steel hulls, 5 masts and a small crew. Production tailed off in 1900 more or less, though some managed to operate profitably on limited routes with non-critical bulk cargo into the 1930s. Mostly though by the 30s they were displaced by steamships.

And planes were still made of wood and driven by propellers

Well sure some of them were (say what you like about the Mozzie, it was a great plane!), but by no means all. The Spitfire first flew 79 years ago and is made of dural.

The equally iconic DC3 also debuted in 1935. Looks kinda metallic to me.

The all-metal Ford Trimotor debuted in 1926 and that wasn't the first all-metal plane.

The all metal Junkers F.13 debuted in 1920---95 years ago and was probably the first all-metal transport plane.

So, you're decades out on the planes and ships. The first successful weather satellite, however flew in 1960---75 years ago this year. By 1970 (65 years ago), there was a whole fleet of satellites, including some in polar orbit giving pretty much complete coverage of the entire planet.

Genius is ten percent inspiration and fifty percent capital gains.