It reminds me of the backup software called Memeo, which is sort of fun in Spanish. (I pee myself)

You are not alone with that usage pattern. (And I am happy to see that neither am I, after all.)

I was "forced" to upgrade to 57 yesterday, due to that restart, unfortunately.
Since then, many of the tabs in my ~50 browser windows just won't render. They remain blank, or flicker with various black rectangles that. New tabs are the same. Occasionally it works, and a page gets displayed.

I am seriously considering downgrading to 56. This is on Xubuntu 17.04, an i5 CPU machine with 16 GiB RAM. (So _that_ shouldn't be the issue.)

I haven't posted on Slashdot for a while, but I find it necessary to point this out.
IMO it _is_ a problem with goto.

The code was structured like this:
if(err=aFunctionReturningZeroOnSuccessOrErrorCode()) != 0) goto cleanup;
if(err=anotherFunctionReturningZeroOnSuccessOrErrorCode()) != 0) goto cleanup; ..
err = oneLastFunctionReturningZeroOnSuccessOrErrorCode();
if(err != 0) { doSomeLogging(); goto cleanup; } //hey - a redundant goto!
cleanup: freeStuff(); return err;

It could have been written completely without gotos like this:
if((err=aFunctionReturningZeroOnSuccessOrErrorCode()) == 0)
if((err=anotherFunctionReturningZeroOnSuccessOrErrorCode()) == 0) ..
if((err = oneLastFunctionReturningZeroOnSuccessOrErrorCode()) != 0) { doSomeLogging(); } //For some reason we only want to log the error from the last call
freeStuff(); return err;

No gotos needed at all! The code is shorter, and IMHO easier to read as well.

If it is a SourceForge page or similar alowing for user submissions, then submit patches for each part of your work, and in the description for each give a link to a complete tarball of the source including your work.

This allows for the maintainer to easily pickup your changes, plus future users to locate your changes before they get merged upstream.

I am an atheist, but I have close relatives who belong to religious communities, include a couple of catholic cousins. I don't think that religious people are inherently bad or evil. I do, however, think they have been systematically brainwashed. Oh, btw my standpoint on Islam is the exact opposite of yours, I have very much against Islam, but we have many nice Muslims here in Denmark, and I don't have any problems with them.

Maybe you are right: organized religion doesn't cause suffering. However, there is strong evidence that religious organizations constitute a framework that allows suffering to happen on a large scale: the most recent example being the Ryan report in Ireland.

And to add insult to injury - literally - a Spanish cardinal Canizares has tried to trivialize the abuse by saying that abortion is worse.

Now, I am no expect on the catholic church and its hierarchy, but I think a cardinal is a rather high-placed figure. So the catholic church - as a religious organization - seems to be trying to sweep a lot of stuff under the carpet. I realise it may not be the catholic religion as such, that causes the suffering. If religious people decide voluntarily not to fuck before some other religious person of the same creed - who has voluntarily decided not to fuck at all ever - has performed some weird ritual, fine by me.

However, it seems there are no organized religions that do not have some sort of religious organization in some kind of control, and those organizations are - to me anyway - obviously corrupt, hypocritical, and downright evil. And as organized religion apparantly doesn't make sense without a religious organization, the organized religion becomes guilty by direct association.

Now, it would seem that if righteous believers recognized that the organization controlling their religion was corrupt and evil, they could rebel against it and try to change the organization. And indeed this has happened: a case in point could be the Lutheran reformation. However, the new organization, while perhaps not *quite* as evil as the old one, still seems to have problems. Therefore I am compelled to think that the cause of evil is not the organization, but the religion itself.

As it happens, I consider myself a religious person, even though I am an atheist. I even believe in Jesus. I do not believe in any form of miracle, but I do adhere to many of the teachings that are attributed to Jesus in the bible. Christianity as a philosophy is not inherently bad, and a historical Jesus, who made company with people outcast from society, is a person I can admire to some extent, even if I may not agree with all the ideas that are attributed to him. Just as I can admire Gautama Buddha, Confucius or Lao-Tzu. I do, however, prefer to decide for myself, which of their ideas I find agreeable, and I am perfectly capable of separating them and their ideas from the organized religions their "successors" have created. Even the allegedly most "peaceful" of all organized religions, Buddhism, has aspects that are absolutely appalling to me. Aspects, that I do not consider compatible with their origins - but who am I to tell a religious organization that their rules are obviously opposite to what their founder taught, according to my interpretation? I doubt that Gautama had any intentions that people should make statues of him to be revered religiously. And I doubt that he would condone a massacre of 20000 hindu tamils. (For some reason, though, I find it likely that Mohammed would have had fewer problems with such a massacre.)

Thus, I believe that people who submit themselves to organized religion are forced to do so, either through their upbringing, or through brainwash later in life, often facilitated by a personal crisis, making them easy victims. Ignorance also helps. /Lasse

Full Disclosure: I'm the author of Frink and saw links to this discussion in my referrer log. Frink is an interactive calculator, but it's also a Turing-complete programming language, which makes it provably more powerful than Google calc. It tracks units of measure through all calculations, and runs under a GUI or command-line or applet or HTML page, and even runs on a variety of handheld devices.

• Arbitrary-precision math, including huge integers and floating-point numbers, rational numbers, complex numbers, and intervals.
• Date/time math (add offsets to dates, find out intervals between times,) and timezone conversions.
• Calculates historical buying power of the U.S. dollar and British pound.
• Calculates exchange rates between most of the world's currencies.
• Powerful Perl-like regular expression capabilities and text processing.
• Supports Interval Arithmetic (also known as Interval Computations) in calculations, allowing you to automagically calculate error bounds and uncertainties in all of your calculations.
• High quality graphics, including rendering to various bitmap and scalable vector formats.
• Frink is a full-fledged programming language with arrays, dictionaries, sets, functions, loops, even object-oriented programming and self-evaluation.

Some of the major issues with the Google calculator are that its units aren't well-researched nor up-to-date, (e.g. acre, furlong, township, rod, are all defined wrong, and so is the "once in a blue moon" example above because a blue moon doesn't have a fixed frequency of occurrence,) you can't set variables nor save your results anywhere, so if your calculation is more than a single line, it becomes very unsuitable indeed. The thing that I find is the deal-breaker in the Google calculator is that it invents its own rules of precedence and ignores centuries of mathematical convention. For example, if you do something like:

1 / 3.1416 foot

and then decide to get a few more significant digits and change it to:

1 / pi foot

You get wildly different results, not even having the same units of measure!

Even worse is its handling of something as simple as the two calculations:

1/2 second
-1/2 second

Which give results having entirely different units of measure! Yikes. But, with respect to Google, we have very different goals. Their goal is to be entirely stateless so any of their servers around the world can perform the calculation without regard to any calculations done before. But you generally *want* your calculator to have some state (e.g. saved results) so even a 1970s era pocket calculator with a memory button is usually more useful in that regard.

Ever heard of dtrace?

Programmers tend to like it

Why don't they just go and hire some programmers and TRAIN them in Cobol? Then they won't have to buy a new system...

(Yes, I have colleagues who work in OPM COBOL, those exist)

I have a 10 month old son and I am scanning old family photos.

Nah, black holes suck!

-Lasse

It's also Spider-Man canon that Peter Parker intentionally invented an adhesive with properties that it would be super-strong but would break down within about 24 hours. He also made a spraying device with a trigger on his palm. In the movie, Peter Parker presumably mutates so that he can shoot silk from his wrists. Thus, the movie doesn't follow the comic book canon and maybe it has entirely different properties, to be explored later.

OMG, now I'm going to be complaining about the "magic xylophone" next.