Linux-Advocacy Digest #843, Volume #27 Fri, 21 Jul 00 07:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious.... ("David Brown")
Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious.... ("David Brown")
Re: Star Office to be open sourced (Stefaan A Eeckels)
Re: I just don't buy it (Jeff Szarka)
Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451736 (Tholen) ("Slava Pestov")
Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary? ("David Brown")
Re: I just don't buy it (Jeff Szarka)
Re: I just don't buy it (Jeff Szarka)
Re: No win situation for Linux market ("Slava Pestov")
Re: Linux, easy to use? (Jacques Guy)
Re: I just don't buy it (Jeff Szarka)
Re: Which Linux should I try? ("Slava Pestov")
Re: C# is a copy of java ("David Brown")
Re: I just don't buy it (Jeff Szarka)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Phillip Lord)
Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451746 (tinman)
Re: Linux, easy to use? ("Slava Pestov")
Re: Star Office to be open sourced (Phillip Lord)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious....
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 12:12:22 +0200
Donovan Rebbechi wrote in message ...
>
>> GOTOs - what's
>>wrong with properly used GOTOs
>
>What do you mean by "properly used" ?
>
The problem with GOTOs is that it makes it too easy to write spagetti code,
where it is very difficult to follow the structure. But it is perfectly
possible to write logical, clear code using GOTOs - it is just not enforced
the same was as it is with more block-structured constructs.
>> - do you never use a JMP in assembly? Does
>>this make assembly bad?
>
>Assembly is OK for low level programming. It is completely unacceptable
>for high level programming.
Assembly is a low level programming language, not a high level language.
And it is perfectly possible to write well structured, maintainable and
readable programs of any size in assembly - it is just often a lot more
effort than when using other languages.
------------------------------
From: "David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious....
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 12:07:41 +0200
Donal K. Fellows wrote in message <8l7b0j$1ch$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>
>The trouble with that is that when it comes to introducing the student
>to OO, they must learn a different language as well.
I think a programming student should learn a range of languages. In my
university course (maths and computation at Oxford), we went through about 6
different languages. The course was aimed at teaching programming, not
languages - we were expected to pick up the language details ourselves as
necessary.
>Mind you, I'm
>actually a supporter of using a functional language as a first lang,
>since it is probably going to be new to everyone, and yet the results
>are comprehensible in terms of mathematics/logic, which most people
>have at least some intuitive feeling for.
I fully agree on that, at least for a university level course. But there is
a big difference between a university student and an amuteur (young or old)
trying to teach themselves.
>
>> Although I have said Basic is suitable as a teaching language, there
>> are others that are often more suitable. Pascal is always a
>> favourite - it is simple enough to learn as a first language, yet
>> powerful enough to use as a main development language.
>
>I liked Pascal (it was the first proper language I used, where proper
>is defined as not being line-number dependent, and being able to
>handle a program of practical size.) It made learning C much easier
>too, since all I had to do was understand the analogues for each of
>the constructs that I had already seen. My experience with assembler
>also helped when it came to figuring out pointers and memory
>allocation...
>
At the risk of a usenet cliche - me too! I could have written that
paragraph myself.
>> I also think you can come a long way working with much smaller
>> systems. I have heard people recommending Lego Mindstorms as a
>> teaching tool for programming. You have a limited programming
>> environment, and have very direct feedback of the results. It is
>> also very easy to motivate the student. Any opinions on this?
>
>It reminds me a bit of Logo. I can remember seeing that used to
>control a turtle robot. In fact, I was building my own robots out of
>Lego (and paper clips, tin foil, rubber bands, and a ZX Spectrum with
>robot controller) over ten years ago. My favourite was when I built a
>robotic tarantula... >:^)
>
Logo is a great language for beginners (but did you ever try Snail Logo on
your Spectrum? It was terrible - it was so incredibly slow, as it was
written in Basic! Turtle Logo on the BBC was much better). Do you have any
idea if there are free / cheap Logo packages for Windows? It would be great
for intoducing people to some basic programming.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stefaan A Eeckels)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.sys.sun.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Star Office to be open sourced
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 11:35:01 +0200
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Phillip Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> "Phil" == phil hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Phil> And more complicated.
>
> No I disagree. If lots of commands used XML, then you could
> make a nice standard API for handling it. One shared library is all it
> would need.
You've taken the XML bait, hook, line and sinker. XML is not a
format, but a language that allows you to define formats.
This is why companies like MS are so fond of XML: it allows
them to claim standards compliance, and remain incompatible.
XML without a DTD (implicit, explicit, embedded or referenced)
is largely without added value. An XML parser allows you to
access tags and contents, but without the DTD to define the
tags, an XML formatted document contains no more information
than the plain ASCII version with the tags stripped off.
<something>1234</something> doesn't tell you anything
about more about "1234" than "blank"1234"blank". You need to
know what <something> means, and XML per se cannot tell you
this. When people give "XML" examples, they'll say
something like:
<price>1234</price>
and conveniently forget that they never defined a DTD.
So your sentence should actually read
"If lots of commands used XML *and* the same DTD, then you
could make a nice standard API for handling it."
The rub is that it's as difficult (if not more difficult) to
agree on a common DTD as it is to agree on a common plain
text output format.
<aside>
XML and XSL give you 1/100th of the features of ASCII and
regular expressions for 100 times the size, while requiring
100 times more computing power.
</aside>
:-)
--
Stefaan
--
Ninety-Ninety Rule of Project Schedules:
The first ninety percent of the task takes ninety percent of
the time, and the last ten percent takes the other ninety percent.
------------------------------
From: Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I just don't buy it
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 06:26:03 -0400
On Wed, 19 Jul 2000 23:20:22 -0700, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Tue, 18 Jul 2000 13:40:42 -0700, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> >Would you want to maintain your financial records on the server?
>>
>> Encryption.
>
>Who supplies the encryption software? Where is the key stored? Could the
>data ever hit the server without encryption? Could you be sure that data is
>secure?
>
The details will be worked out in time. I'm not 100% sure NET is a
good idea. Currently it's not much more than a broad vison of how
various services might work together so it's hard to judge it.
I do like the file storage aspect. This is the exact same thing many
of us do on our LAN to make life easier. Why not extend it to the
Internet?
------------------------------
From: "Slava Pestov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451736 (Tholen)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 20:28:57 +1000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jacques Guy
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I wrote to tholenbot:
Taking posting lessons from Simon "Master of replying to his own
posts" 777, eh Jacques?
>
>> Leave those two young people to their budding tryst, you miserable bot
>> with a thpeech impediment!
>
> Sorry Tinman, sorry Slava, I should have written: Leave those two young
> *bots* -- not *people*. Just the old anthropocentric chauvinist pig
> raising his ugly head... old habits dye hard... sorry... honest!
Before calling me a "bot", I suggest you take a long hard look
at your own posting history.
> (No, the there is no misspelling there, just
> a veiled reference to an old joke).
The joke's on you, Jacques.
------------------------------
From: "David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary?
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 12:36:44 +0200
Christopher Smith wrote in message <8l957r$3ek$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>
>"Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:8l91r5$hmd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In article <8l7teg$mep$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > It's trivial to prove that a user space application doing an x/0
>> > operation won't crash NT,
>>
>> Is it? OK, it is trivial enough to prove that there are some user
>> space applications that do not crash NT when they perform a divide by
>> zero, but extending that to all is non-trivial. Suppose an x/0 caused
>> stack corruption (it could happen,) this could then lead to a series
>> of pretty-much random system calls (believable) and demonstrating that
>> that sort of thing would cause no problems is not easy.
>
>How would a user space app cause stack corruption that would affect the
>entire system, just out of interest ?
The suggested stack corruption was in the user space program, and it is the
user space program that would then issue incorrect system calls.
>
>> Especially if
>> the code is running with administrator priviledges.
>
>No. Administrator is not the same as root. It would be have to running in
>kernel mode (ie a driver) to do the sorts of things your describing (AFAIK,
>anyway).
Programs running as administrator have plenty of power. An easy example is
that they can mess up most parts of the Registry. There are also lots of
user access Registry entries that can be used to bring Windows to its knees.
There are also plenty of easy-to-imagine knock-on effects. The user-mode
app goes haywire, and uses all available memory, CPU time (a program with
Administrator priviledges could give itself real-time (sic.) priority and
run at 100%, effectively stopping the whole machine), or some other
resource. A kernel mode program might try to get some resources, and not
handle the failure well - boom!
>
>> If, for example,
>> the bug caused dud packets to be put onto the ship's network, the
>> routers might have got confused and turned the servers into (the
>> network equivalent of) a black hole. Stranger things have happened...
>
>How is a *user space* app going manipulate network packets ?
>
>
------------------------------
From: Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I just don't buy it
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 06:33:09 -0400
On Thu, 20 Jul 2000 19:58:33 -0700, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Just when you thought it was safe to enter that credit card
>> number into the web browser... :-)
>>
>
>When your are using a diskless "thin client", and all your software is
>supplied over the net from the servers public key cryptography is no
>protection. That is the vision of .NET.
I've not seen a single instance of Microsoft suggesting NET is
exclusvily (or ideally) to provide software in a thin client maner.
I believe the basic idea is that software licenses are verified via
online NET license server. A user (or a business) that rents say... MS
Office would install the software normally and users would login, be
verified by a NET server (possibly run internally) and would be
granted or denied access based on this. It would also make it very
easy for this user or business to purchase the software outright.
It makes a lot of sense, given the state of piracy Microsoft is
subject to.
------------------------------
From: Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I just don't buy it
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 06:36:26 -0400
On Thu, 20 Jul 2000 22:40:23 -0700, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> GAG! I remember when Sun tried that 10 years ago, and that was
>> with only ONE segment of ethernet between the workstation and the
>> server.
>
>Imagine that through the internet with millions or even billions of users
>all connecting to the same set of servers!
You guys need to study up on .NET a little bit. If you don't like it
fine, but it would help to have the facts.
My understanding is NET servers would be much like an ISP of today.
There would not be a central server. You might sign up for AOL.NET and
use their services or you might go for DELL.NET because it is cheaper.
There would be a whole market of NSP's (NET Service Providers)
------------------------------
From: "Slava Pestov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: No win situation for Linux market
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 20:35:53 +1000
Pete,
Why didn't you respond to the first two paragraphs of his post?
Have you realised that you have lost the argument, but are
too embarrassed to admit it?
Slava
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin) wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mig) wrote in <8l7q5k$f1u$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>>Delphi?? Get real... who's going tho code in Pascal on Linux??
>
> Who said Pascal? Try Object Pascal. They're not the same.
>
>>Delphi +C++?? Unless youre doint crossplatform work and want to port
>>from/to Windows there is no need
>
> Precisely. I have a large application in Delphi on Windows. Imagine what
> it means to me (and others) to be able to port it to Linux using the
> same package on Linux?
>
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 10:39:19 +0000
From: Jacques Guy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux, easy to use?
Tim Palmer wrote:
>
> On Thu, 20 Jul 2000 20:45:30 -0400, Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
> You are an iddiot.
Tim, mate, are you all right? You got three words out of
four right. You've been hitting the keyboard and the booze
too hard, mate. Take it easy, how are we going to tell
it's you if ever (*shudder* God forbid!) come to
answering me -- and others:
> You are an idiot.
PS. I would also like to take this opportunity to apologize
publicly to tinman, whose name I recently misspelt as
"Tinman," and to Dressed in Black, whose true name I
just as recently misspelt as "Brown" (that ought to have
been "brown").
------------------------------
From: Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I just don't buy it
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 06:37:20 -0400
On Thu, 20 Jul 2000 13:13:26 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim
Richardson) wrote:
>On Thu, 20 Jul 2000 00:49:02 -0400,
> Jeff Szarka, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> brought forth the following words...:
>
>>On Tue, 18 Jul 2000 13:40:42 -0700, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>>Would you want to maintain your financial records on the server?
>>
>>Encryption.
>
>But will you be using the closed source encryption provided by the ASP
>"for your convenience"? Or will you be using the ASP provided S/W to manipulate
>the unencrypted data?
I'm not sure yet... I doubt Microsoft is either. The basic idea though
could work very well for them if they manage to execute it well.
------------------------------
From: "Slava Pestov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Which Linux should I try?
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 20:37:52 +1000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Nonexistant. You cant' run a programmm from one distrobutian on another
> one.
>
How would you know, Tim? You've never used Linux.
------------------------------
From: "David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: C# is a copy of java
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 12:46:16 +0200
Aaron R. Kulkis wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>"Donal K. Fellows" wrote:
>> Ah, Pascal. I have fond memories of my first proper programming
>> language...
>
>Are you insane?
>
He did say "my" first proper programming language, not "the" first. Given
that Pascal *is* a proper programming language (and you would have to have a
pretty wierd definition of a p.p.l. to exclude Pascal while retaining more
than a small handful of seldom-used languages), Donal is expressing a purely
personal memory. It is hardly something that could be argued with.
------------------------------
From: Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I just don't buy it
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 06:41:30 -0400
On 21 Jul 2000 03:35:21 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
wrote:
>On Thu, 20 Jul 2000 22:15:17 -0400, Jeff Szarka wrote:
>>On Thu, 20 Jul 2000 14:15:24 -0500, WesTralia
>>>It will be 2-3 years before .NET steps out from the vapor. By
>>>that time most chip manufacturers will have chips on the market
>>>which translate Java byte-code.
>>
>>We'll see I guess. Java's whole life seems to be summed up by "wait
>>till next year"
>
>Java is widely used in industry *today*. One of the most marketable
>skills in the computing job market is java programming. If you really
>think java is going to fail, I dare you to short Sun Microsystems' stock.
>Unless you believe that they will be wildly succesful, they are way
>overvalued.
I realize this but Java (as Sun orginally pitched it) has not lived up
to expectations. How many years have we been hearing about a Java OS
and chips that would run Java byte code?
Not to mention Java has almost nothing to do with NET.
------------------------------
From: Phillip Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: 21 Jul 2000 11:47:02 +0100
>>>>> "Phil" == phil hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Phil> They can reduce inflation. In 1970s and 80s economic theory,
Phil> there was ther concept of NAIRU, which was the level of
Phil> unemployment at which inflation would be static. With more
Phil> unemployemtn than this, inflation would decrease.
I never considered dumping lots of people on the shit heap
a particularly good way of solving societies problems however.
Phil> If shareholders don't control their companies, why would
Phil> anyone invest in a capital-intensive speculative venture?
>> Share holders do not make a company publically accountable, and
>> do not make a democracy, any more than consumerism does.
Phil> True, but you haven't answered my question.
Well obviously because they think that they will get money
back from it. I mean just because I get interest from the bank does
not mean that I control it does it?
Phil
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (tinman)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451746
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 06:59:15 -0400
In article <Fkyd5.361$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Here's today's Tinman digest:
>
> 1> [usual fu snipped to save space]
>
> What alleged "fu", Tinman?
Reading comprehension problems, Dave?
> 1> Yet true, nonetheless.
>
> Incorrect, Tinman.
On the contrary.
> 1> Yet true.
On the contrary.
> Incorrect, Tinman.
>
> 1> I don't.
>
> Then why did you refer to "bad-imitation-of-phillip-glass-wannabe"?
Reading comprehension problems, Dave?
> 1> Thanks for the correction. Now I know how to spell Philip's name.
>
> I wasn't referring to the spelling, Tinman. I was referring to what
> you called "spelling", hence the quotation marks.
(;
> 1> Too bad you can't learn.
>
> Illogical, given that I already know how to "spell" Philip Glass'
> name, Tinman.
But not mine.
> 1> Why not provide someone engaging in "entertainment" with a real
> 1> conversation?
>
> Not worth that much time, Tinman.
Illogical. You waste more by engaging in tholenating.
> 1> And we started a conversation into which you jumped. ('
>
> So, you're admitting that it was Jacques who jumped in, thereby
> contradicting your earlier position.
Not at all. His jump started a different conversation. That doesn't negate
the fact that you jumped into that different conversation.
> 1> Irrelevent,
>
> Incorrect, Tinman.
On the contrary.
> 1> but begs a question: Why do you fail to place responses
> 1> appropriately?
>
> You're erroneously presupposing that I fail to place responses
> appropriately, Tinman.
Nope, I'm noting that you do fail to place responses appropriately
> 2> On the contrary. ('
>
> Even more pontification.
Incorrect.
> 3> The ones that result from digestion, and which nuture the blooming
> 3> daisies.
>
> You're presupposing the existence of emissions, Tinman.
You disprove that assertion with every post, Dave.
--
______
tinman
------------------------------
From: "Slava Pestov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux, easy to use?
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 21:05:58 +1000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Jul 2000 20:45:30 -0400, Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>>Tim Palmer wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> It was obsoleet when the 70s ended. And by the way, you mispelled
>>> "knowladgeibble" you fucking idiot!
>>>
>>
>>It's "knowledgeable", and he was much closer than you.
>
> You are an iddiot.
>
Talking to yourself again, eh Tim?
------------------------------
From: Phillip Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.sys.sun.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Star Office to be open sourced
Date: 21 Jul 2000 12:07:01 +0100
>>>>> "Phil" == phil hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> No I disagree. If lots of commands used XML, then you could make
>> a nice standard API for handling it. One shared library is all it
>> would need.
Phil> Yes, you could have a standard parser. And then on top of
Phil> this, you would have to have another parser for each
Phil> DTD. Consider this Python data structure: (6,"hello",-4.3)
You would only need one parser. You would need many DTD's
(at least if you wanted to validate the output. Most of the time that
would not be necessary).
Phil> This could be coded in XML as:
Phil> <array><int>6</int><string>hello</string><float>-4.3</float></array>
Phil> or as:
Phil> <list><value>6</value><value>"hello"</value><value>-4.3</value></list>
Phil> or in many other ways.
Yes. The point is that the requirement for a DTD would be a
formal specification for the output of the program, in a way which was
easily parsable. Well its certainly true that the author of a program
could change the output every time they re-wrote it they would not be
that likely to. And if they did the DTD would have to change.
Phil> Perhaps, perhaps not. If they were the same, they'd probalby
Phil> be embedded in different levels, eg:
Phil> <ps> <process> <pid>
Phil> or:
Phil> <ps> <user> <process-group> <process> <process-static-info>
Phil> <pid>
Again this would be made easier because any changes would be
readily apparent (many of the parsers that I have written depend on
odd parts of the document. For instance I wrote a BLAST parser that
identified the start of the meat, by being three lines after the
appearance of the name of one of the authors in the reference that
they quote. Which obviously broke when they bought out the new
version.
In the example you give the PID is still contained as a
sub-element of process, so the chances are it should all still work.
Phil> I don't doubt it.
Phil> The solution to this is well-defined file formats that don't
Phil> change. Arranging for this is a sociological problem, not a
Phil> technical one, and I don't think a technical fix will solve it
Phil> very well.
A solution based on things not changing is I think asking
for trouble. Things do change, and always will. You ask for a
"well-defined file format". Yes I agree. But defined how? By looking
at the previous versions of the program? Or by having something like a
DTD which defines the format accurately and machine readably?
Phil
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
