Advertisement Jump to content
  • Advertisement

bytecoder

Member
  • Content Count

    1309
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

100 Neutral

About bytecoder

  • Rank
    Contributor
  1. bytecoder

    MSVC++ is on LSD.

    Quote:Original post by Anonymous Poster Quote:Original post by bytecoder Quote:Original post by Arild Fines So the conclusion is that Stroustrup is on LSD, then? Well, considering the guy designed C++, I think it's fairly safe to assume he was on some sort of mind altering substance. Either that, or he's a few peas short of a pod. See? everyone just lets remarks like this slide - but if it were someone trash-talking or making a joke about Microsoft products, people would come out of the woodworks to Microsoft's defense. It even happened in this thread! Just an observation. Well, if it makes you feel any better, my rating dropped ~30 points after posting that [grin]
  2. bytecoder

    MSVC++ is on LSD.

    Quote:Original post by Arild Fines So the conclusion is that Stroustrup is on LSD, then? Well, considering the guy designed C++, I think it's fairly safe to assume he was on some sort of mind altering substance. Either that, or he's a few peas short of a pod.
  3. bytecoder

    Python in cmd

    Could you copy and paste the complete error? Python should show exactly what caused it, which is the important part (what you posted only reiterates what you previously said).
  4. bytecoder

    Reclassify History To Reclassify Historians?

    So what about all the people that already saw or copied the information? It sounds like it's been available for a while and I wouldn't be surprised if it made it into a few books or something.
  5. bytecoder

    Python in cmd

    What's the exact error?
  6. bytecoder

    Arabic on your shirt means you're a terrorist

    Quote:Original post by AndreTheGiant What about gender profiling? Is that ok? Suppose that 99% of all airplane related hi-jackings / terrorist activity in the history of airplanes has been carried out by males. Then does it not make more sense to 'spot-check' more males than females? Would that be considered sexist? And even if it is, would it be acceptable, if it catches more terrorists and saves more lives? How can you not use a statistic if its there, just because you are afraid of being labelled a sexist? I guess Im kind of on the same page as JohnB. Assuming the statistics support it, why the heck shouldnt you use racial profiling? People are so afraid of being called racist that they let it override any logic. It seems some people would rather be blown up than labelled racist. Well, the problem is that, even if 99% of them are male, how many people are actually terrorists to begin with? I don't think it's so much that racial profiling is bad, but rather that only going by race is. After all, if it was true that 99% of them are all male, does that make it a good idea to only check male passengers regardless of whether they're suspicious? The main point is that you shouldn't let race trump other, more import factors, e.g. if they're acting shifty, have a bomb attached to their back, etc.
  7. bytecoder

    Arabic on your shirt means you're a terrorist

    Quote:Original post by CrimsonSun It seems to me that the problem wasn't with arabic on the shirt, but rather what it said. "We will not be silent" implies that action is going to be taking place. Accompanied with arabic lettering inside an airport where everyone is bound to be uptight, it is completely reasonable to find this man suspicious. Presumably if they thought he was going to do something they wouldn't have just asked him to change shirts.
  8. Quote:Original post by Oberon_Command Always remember to initialize your variables. It will save you a lot of queer errors that could have easily been avoided. Or use a language that doesn't have a concept of uninitialized variables.
  9. Don't listen to anybody. Almost nobody knows what they're talking about, including me.
  10. bytecoder

    Introspection in a Tidy Aluminum Can

    Just pent all those fealings up. After all, what's the worst that could happen?
  11. bytecoder

    Memory problem

    You didn't...insert the memory into the harddrive, did you?
  12. If you update your game more times per second you can make it smaller without decreasing it's speed.
  13. bytecoder

    OS programming

    Google: * osdever.net * osdev.org * visopsys.org/osdev * write your own OS
  14. bytecoder

    Tools: the unsung, underpaid heroes of everything

    Quote:Original post by ApochPiQ Yes, it's a very real issue, but not without solutions. For instance, Erlang defeats this by implementing its own threading model. The problem is, that's largely in conflict with increased processor-level parallelization, where our goal is to have the hardware (not the software) be able to make more decisions about what runs when. Isn't erlang mainly designed for massively parallel computers anyway? I can definitely see how this limit will go away once we get to that stage for personal computing, but even then I'm wary of the extra effort required for state even in a language like OCaml. Quote: There's more to it than that, in any case. By the time you actually fix the problem, you're basically coding close to a functional style, without any support from the language itself, and without additional benefits. What exactly is "support from the language" and what benefits do you think would be missing? Quote: For instance, your very simple example is more or less meaningless in those imperative languages which have no first-class support for higher-order functions - notably C, C++, and Java. But even closely integrated tagging initiatives like OpenMP are unwieldy, don't fully solve the issues, and don't do anything to ease the difficulty of writing massively parallelizable code. Makes it look pretty easy to me, so long as you stay away from state. Quote: Functional style tends to produce algorithms that are inherently more conducive to parallelization. Imperative style, by contrast, tends to create serial algorithms, because of its heavy reliance on temporal coupling and shared state. That sounds like something that could be fixed given a language with proper MP support and a community encouraging it (see: goto in basic vs goto in C++). Quote: But we can still do a hell of a lot better job at creating a functional/imperative hybrid than writing botched layers on top of C++. Correct. Botched layers on python here we come ;-)
  15. bytecoder

    Tools: the unsung, underpaid heroes of everything

    I'm not so sure about going completely functional, either. It seems that what's important isn't necessarily being functional, but rather being able to determine what is referentially transparent and what isn't. This can easily be accomplished in a non-functional language by just letting the programmer tag functions as transparent or not. Even if you do that, though, I don't really see it as a good idea. Conceptually, this allows the compiler to automatically thread the application, but it seems that doing it this way would thread almost everything, whether or not it needs to be. Let's take an example: map(some_transparent_function, array) Let's say array isn't too big, only a few items in size, and some_transparent_function is obviously referentially transparent. Ok, now since we're a compiler, and since the user has been a nice little programmer and tagged all this for us, we can split off each function call into separate threads and sync up when they're all done. Now I'm not expert on how threads work, but if you do this for every piece of code like this, won't the system be swamped with relatively low-work threads? It seems to me that there are only certain cases when actually threading something like this would be worth it, and a compiler certainly can't figure them out automatically. It seems to me that being able to tell the compiler when to thread something like this and when not to--and heck, since you'd have to do this for the map function anyway, you don't even need to declare functions as transparent anymore. The easiest way to achieve this is to just have separate functions that are multithreaded, e.g.: map_threaded(some_function, array) Now, as someone who obviously has more experience with threads than I do, is this an actual concern or are my assumptions incorrect? edit: I'm too used to posting code snippets in emails. I'm gonna have to re-remember to use code tags.
  • Advertisement
×

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

GameDev.net is your game development community. Create an account for your GameDev Portfolio and participate in the largest developer community in the games industry.

Sign me up!