Law Mandating C++, OpenGL, and Linux Only

It surely has some value for people supporting cross platform development that need to test the software on different platforms. You can do it from one machine. However, I wrote an application that allowed a user to be able to input a file that contained the structural data from a 3D volume. The object was to visualize the volume as the user sliced through it and viewed it from different directions. You are constantly rendering large amounts of data, and using images of varying level of detail when the user wants to zoom in and out of a particular area. Very I/O and computationally intensive. Some of those files would be 500 gigabytes of 3D volume data. That type of thing does not work well in that type of setup. You really need some serious computing power to do that right.

 

Here's a test to see if you are a REAL programming geek. If you view these videos with great joy, then have mercy on your soul! You are a geek!

Seriously, they are very educational in terms of software development;

 

I've implemented many parsers and lexers over the years and have implemented many different types of stacks.

 

Maybe instead of making laws, you should innovate.

Maybe you could write a translator that turns 'code A' into 'code B' or something. It'd prolly be worth some money.

 

Parsers are not easy. Did you ever do anything with lex and yacc? I never did, but saw some code. Looked very obfuscated!

Speaking of obfuscated, at one time they had obfuscated C contests. Contestants would compete to see who could create the most obfuscated code!

 

There have been translators that do just that for a while now. However, the ones that I have seen generate code that is very bloated. Did not like any of them.

 

Yes, I used lex and yacc many times.

 

I should also add that we have standards for electrical voltage for the sake of convenience. In particular in the US, the choice of 120V is not optimal, but nonetheless provides a convenient standard. It makes it easy to use electrical devices in different parts of the country.

 

120V seems pretty good for consumer electronics and homes. I get the impression that 240V means having a lot more heavy-duty electrical infrastructure set up. I remember walking by some kind of electrical setup in Germany with a fence and plastered in warnings about high voltage, something I don't see in towns around here. 120V is generally safer, right? Still a mortal danger under the right circumstances, for sure, but less so than 240V. But then 240V is better for heavier equipment; we have to have special circuits to handle air conditioners and such. I don't even use one where I live

 

Really? They should call it YUCC!

 

Sorry but "serious gamers" don't use Macs so it won't affect any of us.

 

I expect that such translation is little better than machine efforts to translate human language, since even programming languages are "human" enough that it takes a human mind to generate the most efficient code possible.

 

You can transmit electrical power with less power loss due to resistance with 240V as opposed to 120V.

 

Sadly true. Apple made a good effort for a while after Steve returned to the company, but it just did not pan out. The G3, G4 and G5 systems were good for game performance (and performance in general) when they were new, but that wasn't enough to repair the damage and gain a lot of share in games.

I kind of wonder what might have happened had the Mac clone business been allowed to continue. There was a way by which the Mac was becoming more generally affordable and standardized, a real PC alternative. It was only hampered by Apple's old OS at that time, which of course lacked protected memory and preemptive multitasking.

 

Interesting.. So, providers could give us electricity more efficiently? But then, I wonder how distances differ. I imagine that 240 might have a shorter effective range, kind of like how faster data rates are more limited in range.

 

Actually machines do better at translating human languages than they do code. Part of the problem is that coding is somewhat of an art in that there is no one way of doing a particular task. Computers are intrinsically forced to output deterministic responses due to that fact that they can only respond in the fashion in which they were programmed.

 

They're terrible at doing human languages because of how idiomatic and nuanced human languages tend to be. Far too much about human language entirely escapes the logic of a computer and needs to programmed in specifically by a human in hopes of having the machine catch and properly interpret that particular pattern every time.

Programming languages present a problem for very different reasons, perhaps, but it looks like they're still just as problematic, if not more so, because of those reasons.

 

Yes they could give us electricity more efficiently using 240V rather than 120V. That is why Europe mostly uses 240V. I think (but not exactly sure) that its only due to historical reasons that the US still uses 120V. Distance is not the issue its due to the following relationship

P = V * I

where
P = Power
V = Voltage
I = current

It is clear from the about relationship that for a given level of power, less current is needed as voltage increases. Because less current is needed, you can use less conductive material, which in turn results in less resistivity and thus less power loss due to resistivity.

 

Actually its interesting because what you put forward concerning human languages is related to the problem in translating computer languages. Part of the problem is that experienced programmers will understand a particular problem well enough such that they know how to manipulate the language in ways that depart from common usage such that a particular problem can be solved more efficiently. It would be very difficult to program a translator to understand such because such things really depend on the level of ingenuity of the developer.

 

Cool. I don't understand much about current and voltage. My Murkan education failed me there

 

Makes sense. In either application, a true A.I. that can "understand" and "comprehend" the way a human brain does would be needed to translate such languages properly, but by then we've built something that is practically human in machine form anyway, raising all sorts of questions and concerns.

 

Well I majored in physics so I learned a little bit about a lot of things.

BTW, for anyone following, I edited my previous response to US uses 120V

 

As a geekasaur who wrote machine code on a mainframe with 16k of Ram in the 1970's it was an interesting way of programming because you can literally alter the code while it is running. Makes it a pig to debug when it crashes and it consumes huge amounts of programming time to maintain. That explains why it was superceded.

Seen all kinds of languages come and go as the current programming flavor of the year. Many of them were just not ready for prime time when they were released and as a result went extinct which is a pity because they usually had a couple of cool features.

That said nothing beats OOP as a fundamental way to program. I came up with my own version of it back when COBOL was the mainframe language of choice. I also programmed my own debugging routines that would enable me to turn around code in a fraction of the time. I made good use of those floppy disks to carry around all of my own standardized library routines so that I would not have to rewrite them over and over again. Back then it was a form of self defense since the programming tools we have today did not exist.

Languages today are far more sophisticated and while I have my personal preferences I don't insist that others must use them. If you know one language it is easy enough to read another and learn how to code in it.

Standardization is essential as far as programming methodologies go and it should be up to each organization to define and police their own. Programmers by nature are prone to experiment and take shortcuts which is why I am a big proponent of QA. As far as I am concerned QA keeps programmers honest and that is to the benefit of everyone concerned including end users.

Watch out for the programming "cults" where salespeople hype the alleged "benefits" of "self coding" methodologies that will eliminate the need for programmers. Those things are always a scam and chew up massive amounts of CPU, RAM and disk space while leaving gaping holes everywhere that can be exploited.

As far as the OP goes this is something that I have seen multiple times over the decades. Management makes dumbass decisions and tries to enforce them and the programmers just invent a way to get around the problem created by management.

There is always a bug somewhere in the code and you won't find it until after it manifests itself at the worst possible time. That is why it is always best to be honest and admit that there is a problem and keep the end users in the loop while you fix it. And yes, it was the last change that you made and rushed into production that caused the problem.

I am also a fan of AGILE as a development methodology since it keeps everyone in the loop and makes for a better final product.

 

True A.I. is not possible because humans can only manipulate matter, which is not sentient. True intelligence, such as what is exhibited by humans, can only come from sentient beings. That is not to say that A.I. cannot come to the point of emulating the behavior of humans to some extent.

 

If you mean making hackinstoshes you can still do it. In fact I tell anyone who is interested in a Mac to just build or buy a cheap PC and install the OS on that. Macs use the same parts that PC makers use as far as graphics cards, memory, harddrives etc. albeit not the best ones available. I read that Mac is might be getting rid of Intel CPUs so that might put an end to that though if they use a custom CPU, at least till someone makes a workaround for it.

In this day and age there is simply no reason to buy a Mac. They are overpriced, Windows 7 and 10 are excellent operating systems (we will just forget about 8 and sweep that under the rug LOL) although XP will always be my top choice but that is nostalgia talking. Even in the laptop market I can buy a significantly more powerful windows laptop (or linux if you are so inclined) at a much lower price point than Apple.

Even though I scoff and deride Apple I still want them to keep putting stuff out in the PC market because having competition is always a good thing and right now there is no competition for Windows PCs. Linux is still the red headed step child even though its significantly better than the last time I used it several years back.