|
Kent Sharkey wrote: I know I missed the beginning of it, maybe that's why?
Yes, definitely. Without the beginning you're completely lost. You should watch at least the three first movie-length parts, then optionally skip seasons 1 and 2 (like in Star Trek there's no real story arc) but seasons 3 and 4 are just great.
If the brain were so simple we could understand it, we would be so simple we couldn't. — Lyall Watson
|
|
|
|
|
It also was the first sci-fi show I ever saw to accurately represent spaceship maneuvering with thrusters and dealt correctly (at least from a visual standpoint) with the physics of mass and momentum. In other words, when a ship fired its thrusters to execute a rotation, it would then fire the counter thrusters to terminate that rotation. You don't see that anywhere else. Even the latest Star Trek "Into Darkness", they fire the thrusters to align the two spacecraft (gotta love how space makes all that noise) but they never fire the counter thrusters so they can stay in alignment. Of course, that level of technical detail is beyond the casual observer, haha.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
How will this end?
In fire.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
Under the hood, it's a fancy Web app, using Google's browser. If only they had something comparable to create it with!
|
|
|
|
|
The Internet Archive has done an amazing job of preserving classic games by making them playable in your browser; the group's efforts have covered everything from MS-DOS games to titles from the arcades. And now you don't even have to leave Twitter to play some of them. Finally, someone has developed a reason to care about Twitter
And just out of curiousity, what happens if I do this? https://archive.org/details/msdos_Oregon_Trail_The_1990 via @internetarchive
Edit: nope, doesn't work.
|
|
|
|
|
Still not as good as other communities for short-blogging.
Personally, (not being fanatic) but if I have to post something small (~140 characters), I post it on Lounge. Lounge has more fun than Twitter.
The sh*t I complain about
It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem
~! Firewall !~
|
|
|
|
|
Afzaal Ahmad Zeeshan wrote: Personally, (not being fanatic) but if I have to post something small (~140 characters), I post it on Lounge. Lounge has more fun than Twitter.
Very true. (Still, Oregon Trail is the best use of 140 characters I can think of. Maybe Lemmings.
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/vcblog/archive/2015/04/29/c-11-14-17-features-in-vs-2015-rc.aspx[^]
I'm not quoting anything since all the interesting stuff is in a pair of tables; but the only incomplete C++11 items are expression SFINAE (no), constexpr (partial), and C99 preprocessor (partial). C++11 constexpr is footnoted as will probably be working before RTM, the preprocessor is unchanged from VS2013. Even after reading the standard proposal[^] and wiki article[^] I'm not sure WTE SFINAE is supposed to be about beyond that it involves the cluster elephant of C++ templates. Hidden in the faq is a comment that at the compiler level they're planning to release it as an VC2015 update instead of holding it for the next major release; but to avoid compatibility problems the STL won't be updated until later.
C++14 support went from 1/11(12 if you count an optional item) to 8/11 bullet points; and C++17 went from 1/10 to 4/10.
The C++14/17 standard library is complete except for 7 items waiting on constexpr to be fully debugged and one that's related to SFINAE.
Most of the updates are in the just released RC build; but a few were implemented between when that codebase was locked down and now, and won't be available publicly until RTM.
If anything in my attempt to summarize that's wrong I plead knowing just enough C++ to be dangerous. 
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
SFINAE[^] itself is a concept that has been an important part of C++ since the use of templates was seriously explored.
It basically allows the compiler to consider any potential type for the creation of a template. If an error were to occur because of one of the potential substitutions, it will simply remove that from the list of candidates. As long as there is a valid candidate to instantiate the template no error will be emitted.
The "expression SFINAE" in the C++11 standard expands the compiler support to evaluate and consider certain expressions that are known at compile-time, and therefore should be able to be resolved by SFINAE.
IMO, this is a corner-case that will be nice when it's support appears, but it is by no means something that will be sorely missed by many.
constexpr on the other hand is one that I have been waiting for from VS for years.
Dan Neely wrote: If anything in my attempt to summarize that's wrong I plead knowing just enough C++ to be dangerous.
Everything you said was accurate.
I assert that C, C#, JAVA, JavaScript and even C++ programmers know enough to be dangerous in C++.
I think the devs that are dangerous, are the ones that believe they have learned it all...
I'm pretty sure that's not you 
|
|
|
|
|
I'll take a look at your article later; but thanks for the plain English short version. Unless I start doing crazy stuff with templates, that's probably all I really need to know.
Paul M Watt wrote: I assert that C, C#, JAVA, JavaScript and even C++ programmers know enough to be dangerous in C++.
I think the devs that are dangerous, are the ones that believe they have learned it all...
I'm pretty sure that's not you
I've got mixed feelings about the syntax similarities in that family too. Yeah it's nice that you can generally follow code in any of them if you know just one, and being able to jump in and bang out a few quick updates right away is convenient; but they all have enough gotchas to ambush the overconfident. And despite using it for most of the last decade I still wouldn't even claim to know all of C# Winforms programming; never mind WPF or the web bits.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
Dan Neely wrote: I've got mixed feelings about the syntax similarities in that family too. Yeah it's nice that you can generally follow code in any of them if you know just one, and being able to jump in and bang out a few quick updates right away is convenient; but they all have enough gotchas to ambush the overconfident.
Yes there are both pluses and minuses in making these languages have similar syntax. It requires discipline to learn and adopt the idioms of each. Often you can look at, say, C# code and tell whether the dev came from a C++ or VB background but, ideally, you shouldn't be able to.
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
IBM sees the future of quantum computing as having a major impact in the life sciences and chemistry fields. Sadly, all it shows are cat videos
|
|
|
|
|
Kent Sharkey wrote: Sadly, all it shows are cat videos
Dead cat videos, or live cat videos? Or do I have to watch the video to find out whether that is dead or live?
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
I was trying to figure out how to work that in, so thank you.
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
And if you watch dead cat video, you will never know if you killed it by watching it 
modified 19-Nov-18 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
The very act of watching could change the state, so leave them unwatched.
|
|
|
|
|
Cat scans? 
New version: WinHeist Version 2.1.1 new web site.
I know the voices in my head are not real but damn they come up with some good ideas!
|
|
|
|
|
Life sciences, chemistry, and... last but not least, intelligence fields.
|
|
|
|
|
The holographic headgear stole the show, thanks to a number of head-turning demonstrations and the unveiling of the Windows Holographic platform. Just wait until ... a certain industry ... gets their "hands" on it. Boom chicka-wow-wow
|
|
|
|
|
Kent Sharkey wrote: Just wait until ... a certain industry ... gets their "hands" on it. Boom chicka-wow-wow
There are some things that a hologram cannot replace. Enhance perhaps, but not replace 
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
NSA?
We don't need no stinking drones.
New version: WinHeist Version 2.1.1 new web site.
I know the voices in my head are not real but damn they come up with some good ideas!
|
|
|
|
|
|
According to Paul Thurrott this is a bad thing[^]...
|
|
|
|
|
Microsoft today announced Project Oxford, an evolving portfolio of REST APIs and SDK that will help developers build intelligent apps. "Tommy, can you hear me?"
|
|
|
|
|
Kent Sharkey wrote: help developers build intelligent apps
Real stupidity will beat artificial intelligence every time.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
