Monday, April 25, 2016
My rating: 1 of 5 stars
It was a strain putting up with all those bad jokes. But I persisted. If only it had been a film: If I hadn't walked out, I wouldn't have lost so much time. I tried to zip through it cursorily, but there were too many fifth-rate conundrums competing for pun status. I put my thorough review on Amazon -- I think -- it's not exactly art, either.
View all my reviews
Monday, February 15, 2016
The first-ever detection was made by both facilities of the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO) in Washington and Louisiana simultaneously last September.
Gravitational radiation has been directly detected. The first-ever detection was made by both facilities of the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO) in Washington and Louisiana simultaneously last September. After numerous consistency checks, the resulting 5-sigma discovery was published today. The measured gravitational waves match those expected from two large black holes merging after a death spiral in a distant galaxy, with the resulting new black hole momentarily vibrating in a rapid ringdown. A phenomenon predicted by Einstein, the historic discovery confirms a cornerstone of humanity's understanding of gravity and basic physics. It is also the most direct detection of black holes ever. The featured illustration depicts the two merging black holes with the signal strength of the two detectors over 0.3 seconds superimposed across the bottom. Expected future detections by Advanced LIGO and other gravitational wave detectors may not only confirm the spectacular nature of this measurement but hold tremendous promise of giving humanity a new way to see and explore our universe.
A photo posted by Astronomy Picture Of The Day (@astronomypicturesdaily) on
Thursday, January 28, 2016
Sunday, December 20, 2015
A photo posted by Ernest Clayton Cordell, Jr. (@ernie.cordell) on
Thursday, November 12, 2015
Friday, October 30, 2015
Wednesday, September 10, 2014
This is a
very general observation, and no wondrous coding revelation, but when I read
what Scott Meyers
had added to the beginning of The
Third Edition of Effective C++, I noticed a certain parallel
with the "staged" approach in Jeff Alger's C++ for Real
Programmers (previously titled Secrets of the C++ Masters).
What that seemed to emphasise was the heterogeneity of C++, a characteristic of the language itself, perhaps an immaturity, but assuredly a certain "patchwork" quality in its construction, and one that endures through ISO/IEC 14882:1998, which was then amended by the C++03, ISO/IEC 14882:2003, standard, called C++0x until that standard was finalised as C++11 and what is/will be C++14.
Scott Meyers calls this variety of approaches to C++ "a federation of languages," as we see in the Third Edition's first item:
Item 1: View C++ as a federation of languages (Scott Meyers, "Effective C++, 3rd ed." ISBN-13: 978-0-321-33487-9)
The easiest way is to view C++ not as a single language but as a federation of related languages. Within a particular sublanguage, the rules tend to be simple, straightforward, and easy to remember. When you move from one sublanguage to another, however, the rules may change. To make sense of C++, you have to recognize its primary sub-languages. Fortunately, there are only four:
- C. Way down deep, C++ is still based on C. Blocks, statements, the preprocessor, built-in data types, arrays, pointers, etc., all come from C. In many cases, C++ offers approaches to problems that are superior to their C counterparts (e.g., see Items 2 (alternatives to the preprocessor) and 13 (using objects to manage resources)), but when you find yourself working with the C part of C++, the rules for effective programming reflect C’s more limited scope: no templates, no exceptions, no overloading, etc.
- Object-Oriented C++. This part of C++ is what C with Classes was all about: classes (including constructors and destructors), encapsulation, inheritance, polymorphism, virtual functions (dynamic binding), etc. This is the part of C++ to which the classic rules for object-oriented design most directly apply.
- Template C++. This is the generic programming part of C++, the one that most programmers have the least experience with. Template considerations pervade C++, and it’s not uncommon for rules of good programming to include special template-only clauses (e.g., see Item 46 on facilitating type conversions in calls to template functions). In fact, templates are so powerful, they give rise to a completely new programming paradigm, template metaprogramming (TMP). Item 48 provides an overview of TMP, but unless you're a hard-core template junkie, you need not worry about it. The rules for TMP rarely interact with mainstream C++ programming.
- The STL. The STL is a template library, of course. but its a very special template library. Its conventions regarding containers. iterators, algorithms, and function objects mesh beautifully, but templates and libraries can be built around other ideas. too. The STL has particular ways of doing things, and when you’re working with the STL, you need to be sure to follow its conventions.
Keep these four sublanguages in mind, and don’t be surprised when you encounter situations where effective programming requires that you change strategy when you switch from one sublanguage to another. For example, pass-by-value is generally more efficient than pass-by-reference for built-in (i.e., C-like) types. but when you move from the C part of C++ to Object-Oriented C++. the existence of user-defined constructors and destructors means that pass-by-reference- to-const is usually better. This is especially the case when working in Template C++, because there, you don’t even know the type of object you’re dealing with. When you cross into the STL, however, you know that iterators and function objects are modeled on pointers in C, so for iterators and function objects in the STL, the old C pass-by-value rule applies again. (For all the details on choosing among parameter-passing options, see Item 20.)
C++, then, isn’t a unified language with a single set of rules; it’s a federation of four sublanguages, each with its own conventions. Keep these sublanguages in mind, and you’ll find that C++ is a lot easier to understand.
Jeff Alger speaks of varying stages of familiarity or steps along the way to mastery. It is interesting to note that what he calls "The Zen of C++" is an awareness of features in the language, in the end "idioms" that solve problems in some different or unexpected way:
The Zen of C++ (Jeff Alger, "C++ for Real Programmers," ISBN 0-12-049942-8)
C++ is a language learned in stages. Only when the last stage is reached does it all finally start to make sense, to combine into a Zen that unifies the otherwise scattered tricks and syntax. I think of learning C++ as being like rising up in an elevator. Ding! Second floor. C++ is a more reasonable C, strongly typed as long as you don’t fool around too much and, hey, how about those nifty // comments? All those C programmers who didn’t want to go into management needed a career path, and Bjarne Stroustrup, bless his soul, dreamed up a doozy.
Ding! Third floor. C++ is a decent-but-not-great object-oriented programming language. It’s not Smalltalk, but hey, what do you expect from a language that runs so blindingly fast? C++ is the COBOL of the 1990s, politically correct and sure to get your project funded by top management. Heck, they might even double your budget if you mention C++ often enough in your proposal. That’s just as well, because no one really knows how to estimate and manage C++ projects, and as to tools, say, lot of weather we’re having, isn’t it? Ding!
Top floor, everybody out. Hey, where did everyone go? Sure is drafty up here. C++ is really yacc++, not so much a language as a way of creating your own languages. It is elegant not for its simplicity like jumbo shrimp, the terms C++ and simple grate on the ears when used in the same sentence but for its potential. Lurking behind every gnarly design problem is a clever idiom, a nice twist to the language that makes the problem melt away like the Wicked Witch of the West without her umbrella. That idiom solves the problem as elegantly as a real language like Smalltalk or Lisp would, but without causing smoke to rise from your CPU and the stock of companies that manufacture memory chips to rise on Wall Street. C++ isn’t a language -- it’s an experience, a mind-altering drug.
This is also reminiscent of what Scott Meyers says about James O. Coplien's Advanced C++ Programming Styles and Idioms (ISBN-13: 978-0201548556) being a psychedelic book because it's purple and expands your mind.
Maybe the range of approaches is just a patchwork in paisley.
Monday, September 01, 2014
Wednesday, July 30, 2014
Monday, June 16, 2014
L’été invincible d’Albert Camus | Si omnes ego non, réserve naturelle
Sunday, January 26, 2014
It reminds me of the groups of people who always followed my father around at cocktail parties, hoping to get advice. He always said that there was no such thing as a free drink for him: Had I the experience, I think I might have prepared a document for him to carry so that he might pass it around events like this. Since I have a more tech-savvy clientele, I should be able to get away with posting a link ;)
How To Hire An Awesome Developer on oDesk: Part I
Friday, September 13, 2013
Вы знаете, сказала Канистра, что в хорошей легковой машине всегда есть Часы. Машина идёт -- и они идут. Машина стоит, -- а они всё равно идут. Вот такие Часы были в одной "Победе."
"Победа" эта была чудесной машиной, очень быстроходной. И все хвалили её за это.
А Часы не хвалил никто.
Понятно, что Часы завидовали машине. Она решили показать, что могут идти быстрее. И ушли вперёд почти на целый час.
Но их не похвалили. Наоборот, выругали и отдали в починку.
Часы удивлялись: ведь они спешили так же добросовестно, как и машина. Почему же ими недовольны?
Впрочем, в мастерской им быстро всё разъяснили. И часы вернулись на своё место. Теперь они уже твёрдо знали, что не во всяком деле нужно спешить. По крайней мере Часам это совсем не нужно.
-- Вы, кажется, из кабинета? -- спросил у Чернильницы Веник.
-- Да, я там живу и работаю, -- подтвердила Чернильница.
-- Тогда вам должно быть известно, как в кабинете повесили Занавеску?
-- Нет, я не помню.
-- Не помните? Ну, тогда слушайте.