Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


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:Someone please (Score 2) 164

by smelch (#45981965) Attached to: Why the Major Labels Love (and Artists Hate) Music Streaming
I think you're missing the point. The point is that Spotify is bringing in more money for their supplier and the supplier is not not paying their employees (the artists) more for it. The implication is that the supplier sucks, not Spotify because it is widely believed that record companies screw their artists already. This is just another example of that.

Comment: Re:Because it's fucking awesome, that's why. (Score 1) 162

by smelch (#45963391) Attached to: Why the World Needs OpenStreetMap
I think a better question is why are you searching for an address, getting the wrong address, and calling that a desirable feature? The reason you would search for an address is because you have been given the address, or vaguely remember it. In either case it isn't obvious that you want the software to guess at what you meant and possibly fool you in to going to the wrong place.

Comment: Re:Is that a joke? (Score 1) 144

by smelch (#40172877) Attached to: Intel Ivy Bridge Processor Hits 7GHz Overclock Record
The point is that the CPU and the motherboard are all manufactured in such a way that the processor can work at a clock cycle so damn fast. That is precision. Not everything is about work/time. To your analogy, it's more like saying "We can have the engine do ten bazillion RPM! That's a quality engine! However, if you try to drive at that RPM, any flaw in the system can cause a huge amount of damage, so don't expect to drive it at that speed."

Comment: Re:I want auto! (Score 0) 305

by smelch (#39153565) Attached to: Stroustrup Reveals What's New In C++ 11
My point is that it seems to me that if you are doing something with it that you couldn't do to any type, you shouldn't be using an anonymous type. I would genuinely like to know what a valid case is for using an anonymous type where later you will be accessing one of its properties by name. If you pass that anonymous type to another function it will have to be an [object] anyway, and if its just the same function, build the properties for the anonymous type before initializing the anonymous type. You can't pass an anonymous type to another function as its type (and it would be stupid if you could), and you can't cast from an object to the anonymous type (which would lead to the errors you mentioned above). So, within the same function, your anonymous type may as well be an object instead of a var.

People will buy anything that's one to a customer.