|
Give it a try; you'll like it. It gives you a Windows app called Ubuntu. The app opens instantly and brings in in a Linux bash shell which is just a window on your Windows desktop. Your hard drive is available as /mnt/c.
I've used VMware before but this one beats the heck out of it. Oh, btw, you need to enable Windows System for Linux.
Mircea
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't realize you were talking about Windows System for Linux. I'd also been looking at that.
|
|
|
|
|
It's sad that you had such a bad experience and that some people think they're supperior just because they know something you don't. Unfortunately I have met that kind of people myself from time to time.
That being said I am still on Linux for my programming needs (since 2002). But I mostly do PHP/web programming and I find it easier to use docker on Linux for that.
All OS have their quirks. I manage both Windows and Linux servers in my daily work so I get to experience them first hand.
My best advice is (if you still want to). Try it again in a virtual machine. Just remember Windows is not the same as Linux. Oh and I have always found that Linux Mint is easier to work with than Ubuntu, even though Mint is based on Ubuntu.
|
|
|
|
|
It's been years, but I installed Ubuntu into a system and wanted it to duel-boot with Windows. After the Windows install I didn't seem to have Ubuntu. Hand-rebuilding the grub file and making it work again.
If done in the other order, Windows, then Ubuntu, one had a duel-boot system.
Of course, that was "then".
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
I like that you call it duel-boot instead of dual-boot. It implies that the two OS's are doing pistols at dawn - often not far from the truth. 
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
If you're illiterate, do you live your life by a set of unwritten rules?
If you can't laugh at yourself - ask me and I will do it for you.
|
|
|
|
|
Unwritten rules are the best ones - you can quietly rewrite them while no-one is looking ... 
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
In the latest (or upcoming, i forget) version of C#, you can write code that the *compiler* will execute to generate code that the compiler will then compile. All this happens on build.
Really cool, because now you can add source generation and stuff directly into your source code itself which directs the *compiler* on what to do.
C# also provides a couple of ways in which it already generates code for you, among the most notable being the state machines that support the yield keyword and the ones that support await.
What Microsoft *should* do: Turn these opaque state machine generators into source directed at telling the compiler what to generate. That way you can modify them even.
What Microsoft will do: Leave these alone, keep them opaque, and in a decade when they have .NET 6 and C#20 they'll add something in that does the same thing but far more unweildy. 
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
honey the codewitch wrote: you can write code that the *compiler* will execute to generate code that the compiler will then compile. All this happens on build.
#define MAINTENANCE_NIGHTMARE ...
|
|
|
|
|
Not really, if you're already using code generation for your source. It's more structured and standard than a custom build step.
Besides, C++ already lets you come close with all of its template magic. See also, the Spirit parser generator.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
fine, then you can debug the code that doesn't exist in source.
|
|
|
|
|
Same problem with any code generation. Your inputs aren't directly debuggable. The outputs must be debugged. But since you bring it up, I'd be willing to bet MS provides a way to debug them (i haven't used the feature yet), which would be better than you get with most code generation tools.
It seems like your real issue here is using code generation for your projects, since what you're bringing up are problems with source code generation in general.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
honey the codewitch wrote: Same problem with any code generation.
yes.
enjoy!
|
|
|
|
|
I like my parser generators, thanks.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
I refer the honourable gentleman to Jeron1's signature[^]
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Now my brain hurts. *sadface*
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Yay! Back to the future! I gave up writing self-modifying code about 30 years ago.
I knew I should have stuck to it 
Mircea
|
|
|
|
|
In seriousness though this quite isn't that. It lets you do what the C++ compiler can already kind of do with clever usage of templates and consts.
The difference between self modifying and self generating at least to me, is the former does so at runtime, and in practice, jit compilers still do the self modifying thing in order to work.
But also it's clearer to see the code at compile time then doing it at runtime, because then you can examine the output. I actually write code generators for modern platforms quite a bit, like parser generators - things that are arduous or sometimes nearly impossible or completely unrealistic to do by hand.
This is a clean way to handle a situation like that.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
You can pretty much get there from here now with pre-build events. I think that's close enough for my purposes as I have done that sort of thing in the past. Actually I would rather they didn't get into it any farther than that since it's usable as it is.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
I can understand the feeling. It seems like they're adding a lot of fluff to the language. I kind of like the feature but then i've had a long (perhaps torrid) love affair with code generation in all its forms. My father was a toolmaker - his work was very meta, and so is mine. I guess I'm a toolmaker at heart, even though he didn't raise me.
I rely on pre-build steps a lot, but I haven't done pre-build scripting as such - i leave whatever heavy lifting needs to be done on the exe itself, and since i built it for being used as a pre-build step it's no problem
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
I am fairly familiar with code generation. I wrote my own scripting language a while ago and then changed it internally from an interpreted virtual machine to native machine code generation. That was two tons of fun. The debugging process was unlike anything I have ever done. I wrote my own debugger for it too. Imagine running a process written in the script language being debugged using your own debugger. I guess that's no big deal but now imagine also using VS's debugger on both of them. Debugging the debugger while it is debugging the scripted process which is also running in a VS debugger. It's kind of a mind-bender. Making it all work was too but it is and it's still going strong. We passed one thousand installed systems a while ago.
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
It's quite old video. Few would have seen it in past too but its still fun to watch again: YouTube: MWBM-1
|
|
|
|
|
we are hardwired by our genetics - but we CAN (and SHOULD) do better
and 'men will be men' better not be an excuse for anything ...
|
|
|
|
|
If the guy had pressed '1', perhaps then he would not have suffered the embarrassment at the end.
Also strange to note that an 18-floor building has only one elevator.
|
|
|
|
|
Suffer? Embarrassment? Tactical priorities can change any time and there is no trophy for second place. There is no time to discuss your actions, nor your orders. Any questions? I know a few drill sergeants who can help you.
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
