Re: for the greater glory of god

[Victor Bazarov]

kwikius wrote:

>
Interesting... Times are changing:
[..]
For the greater glory of god, [..]

regards
Andy Little

You seem lost, Andy. Are you in the right forum?

V
--
Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask

[kwikius]

Victor Bazarov wrote:

kwikius wrote:

>>
Interesting... Times are changing:
[..]
For the greater glory of god, [..]

regards
Andy Little

You seem lost, Andy. Are you in the right forum?

Yes Victor, but thanks for the concern.

I'm only now starting to realise what a great little library I wrote
in PQS (now Quan) I don't work on it publically any more. As to why..
the article in the first link gives a clue.

PQS first was put in public in 2003 . Shortly after we had publication
of Fortress funded by Amreican military with $140 M

<http://research.sun.com/projects/plrg/PLDITutorialSlides9Jun2006.pdf>

<http://research.sun.com/minds/2005-0302/>

(And I am pretty sure that Sun will have some personnel dedicated to
filtering this list and boost.org etc)

Now we also have e.g Google calculator.

<http://www.google.com/help/features.html>

Also this stuff uses the same mechanisms as Quan

<http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2661.htm>

Of course there were C++ units libraries before PQS, but PQS was
different , because it actually worked :-) and I do take credit for
PQS having an influence on all that stuff ?

Yes absolutely, beacause as someone said PQS/Quan was 'cute'.. that's
the power of Quan.. simple elegant and expressive.

(I use Quan extensively everyday and I now realise that it should
really be a language on its own, more of a scripted languge, but not
as hideously complex as Fortress. The C++ template metaprogramming
mechanism is just too cumbersome. Concepts might help , but my guess
is that they will slow down compilation even more.. C++0x is just too
big and complex now. The ideas of Concepst are nice but in another
language)

So I'm singing my praises :-)

I am happy for the guy in the link. I salute him for standing up for
himself, and also for giving me some hope that when people rip my
stuff off without acknowledgement then there is something I can do
about it, so to me its a powerful result. (Then I might start
publishing in public again)

Unfortunately in C++ , if your code uses templates then you have to
provide the sources.. and then it is so easy to rip stuff off, and IME
if its any good the status quo is that it will just be ripped off
without acknowledgements. I've seen this with my work and with other
work too, not too far from this list. Its a nasty business and makes
software development a nasty business, so heres one guy that did
something about it and won.
regards
Andy Little

[Chris M. Thomasson]

"kwikius" <an**@servocomm.freeserve.co.ukwrote in message
news:a9**********************************@y38g2000 hsy.googlegroups.com...

Victor Bazarov wrote:

>kwikius wrote:

>>>
Interesting... Times are changing:
[..]
For the greater glory of god, [..]

regards
Andy Little

You seem lost, Andy. Are you in the right forum?

Yes Victor, but thanks for the concern.

[...]

Sun... Well, read the entire following thread:

http://groups.google.com/group/comp....c94118046142e8

It seems like some researchers at Sun don't like to do their own homework...

Sun: I invented it!

Joe: No, you certainly did not!

:^|

[Chris M. Thomasson]

"Chris M. Thomasson" <[e-mail] in message
news:ma******************@newsfe06.iad...

"kwikius" <an**@servocomm.freeserve.co.ukwrote in message
news:a9**********************************@y38g2000 hsy.googlegroups.com...

>Victor Bazarov wrote:

>>kwikius wrote:

Interesting... Times are changing:
[..]
For the greater glory of god, [..]

regards
Andy Little

You seem lost, Andy. Are you in the right forum?

Yes Victor, but thanks for the concern.

[...]

Sun... Well, read the entire following thread:

http://groups.google.com/group/comp....c94118046142e8

It seems like some researchers at Sun don't like to do their own
homework...

Sun: I invented it!

Joe: No, you certainly did not!

:^|

BTW, all the links to my personal web-pages in that thread are dead. I moved
to South Lake Tahoe since then and my ISP is not Charter instead of Comcast.
Here is a working link to the Proxy Garbage Collector referenced:

http://webpages.charter.net/appcore/...mple_h_v1.html

[Chris M. Thomasson]

"Chris M. Thomasson" <[e-mail] in message
news:Le******************@newsfe06.iad...

"Chris M. Thomasson" <[e-mail] in message
news:ma******************@newsfe06.iad...

>"kwikius" <an**@servocomm.freeserve.co.ukwrote in message
news:a9**********************************@y38g200 0hsy.googlegroups.com...

>>Victor Bazarov wrote:
kwikius wrote:
>
Interesting... Times are changing:
[..]
For the greater glory of god, [..]
>
regards
Andy Little

You seem lost, Andy. Are you in the right forum?

Yes Victor, but thanks for the concern.

[...]

Sun... Well, read the entire following thread:

http://groups.google.com/group/comp....c94118046142e8

It seems like some researchers at Sun don't like to do their own
homework...

Sun: I invented it!

Joe: No, you certainly did not!

:^|

BTW, all the links to my personal web-pages in that thread are dead. I
moved to South Lake Tahoe since then and my ISP is not Charter instead of
Comcast.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Ummm... I meant to say that my ISP is NOW Charter instead of Comcast.

Here is a working link to the Proxy Garbage Collector referenced:

http://webpages.charter.net/appcore/...mple_h_v1.html

If you read Suns patent application, it CLEARLY is a mirror image of Joe
Seighs atomic_ptr algorithm:

http://atomic-ptr-plus.sourceforge.net
I hope their application gets rejected! Anyway, please read here for
intricate details:

http://groups.google.com/group/comp....410f7e02201aa1

http://groups.google.com/group/comp....f47a280b56c909

What a JOKE! Apparently, you get to read USENET and "invent" everything you
come across!

:^/

[Bo Persson]

kwikius wrote:

>
I am happy for the guy in the link. I salute him for standing up for
himself, and also for giving me some hope that when people rip my
stuff off without acknowledgement then there is something I can do
about it, so to me its a powerful result. (Then I might start
publishing in public again)

Unfortunately in C++ , if your code uses templates then you have to
provide the sources.. and then it is so easy to rip stuff off, and
IME if its any good the status quo is that it will just be ripped
off without acknowledgements. I've seen this with my work and with
other work too, not too far from this list. Its a nasty business
and makes software development a nasty business, so heres one guy
that did something about it and won.

Stealing someone's source is a copyright violation, which is illegal.
Reimplementing someone's elses ideas is not.

The first guy writing a Model Train Control System doesn't
automatically get a monoply on that market. Neither does someone
designing a unit converting library. Or writing a C++ compiler, or an
OS.
Bo Persson

[kwikius]

On Aug 19, 5:43 pm, "Bo Persson" <[e-mail]:

kwikius wrote:

I am happy for the guy in the link. I salute him for standing up for
himself, and also for giving me some hope that when people rip my
stuff off without acknowledgement then there is something I can do
about it, so to me its a powerful result. (Then I might start
publishing in public again)

Unfortunately in C++ , if your code uses templates then you have to
provide the sources.. and then it is so easy to rip stuff off, and
IME if its any good the status quo is that it will just be ripped
off without acknowledgements. I've seen this with my work and with
other work too, not too far from this list. Its a nasty business
and makes software development a nasty business, so heres one guy
that did something about it and won.

Stealing someone's source is a copyright violation, which is illegal.
Reimplementing someone's elses ideas is not.

Oh aye. and don't forget to give the impression its your original
work... and start dishing crud about the original author. Its quite
possible that you don't see anything wrong with that attitude...

regards
Andy Little

[kwikius]

On Aug 19, 11:36 am, "Chris M. Thomasson" <[e-mail]:

<...>

If you read Suns patent application, it CLEARLY is a mirror image of Joe
Seighs atomic_ptr algorithm:

http://atomic-ptr-plus.sourceforge.net

I guess you gotta to do what you're told when you work for a
megacorp ...

regards
Andy Little

[coal]

On Aug 19, 5:16*am, kwikius <[e-mail]:

I'm only now starting to realise what a great little library I wrote
in PQS (now Quan) I don't *work on it publically any more. As to why..
the article in the first link gives a clue.

PQS first was put in public in 2003 . Shortly after we had publication
of Fortress funded by Amreican military with $140 M

<http://research.sun.com/projects/plrg/PLDITutorialSlides9Jun2006.pdf>

<http://research.sun.com/minds/2005-0302/>

(And I am pretty sure that Sun will have some personnel dedicated to
filtering this list and boost.org etc)

Now we also have *e.g Google calculator.

<http://www.google.com/help/features.html>

Also this stuff uses the same mechanisms as Quan

<http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2661.htm>

Of course there were C++ units libraries before PQS, but PQS was
different , because it actually worked :-) and I do take credit for
PQS having an influence on all that stuff ?

*Yes absolutely, beacause as someone said PQS/Quan was 'cute'.. that's
the power of Quan.. simple elegant and expressive.

(I use Quan extensively everyday and I now realise that it should
really be a language on its own, more of a scripted languge, but not
as hideously complex as Fortress. The C++ template metaprogramming
mechanism is just too cumbersome. Concepts might help , but my guess
is that they will slow down compilation even more.. C++0x is just too
big and complex now. The ideas of Concepst are nice but in another
language)

So I'm singing my praises :-)

I am happy for the guy in the link. I salute him for standing up for
himself, and also for giving me some hope that when people rip my
stuff off without acknowledgement then there is something I can do
about it, so to me its a powerful result. (Then I might start
publishing in public again)

Unfortunately in C++ , if your code uses templates then you have to
provide the sources.. and then it is so easy to rip stuff off, and IME
if its any good the status quo is that it will just be ripped off
without acknowledgements. I've seen this with my work and with other
work too, not too far from this list. Its a nasty business and makes
software development a nasty business, so heres one guy that did
something about it and won.

I agree for the most part. I think some decade someone will develop
an online C++ compiler that is able to output fully instantiated code.
That way it will be possible for library writers to have more
protection.
They could offer a service that uses such a compiler and their
library
to produce code for users. You have to stand up for yourself
otherwise
you are likely to be abused.

Brian Wood
http://webEbenezer.net

"Ho, every one that thirsts, come ye to the waters, and he that
hath no money; come ye, buy and eat; yea, come, buy wine and
milk without money and without price. Wherefore do ye spend
money for that which is not bread?" From Isaiah 55

[kwikius]

On Aug 20, 4:22 am, [e-mail] wrote:

I agree for the most part. I think some decade someone will develop
an online C++ compiler that is able to output fully instantiated code.

Actually at the end of the day this is a polar. There are two
activities, one being the creation of types, (and you do this every
time you create a new C++ class )and then there is using those types
in expressions, essentially the difference between library and
application development.

It would be ideal to be able to provide the interface of a type or
Archetype ( a collection of types tied by a semantic) for use in an
application, but to hide the details. Apart from being able to protect
implementation details, this should also be able to provide targetted
error messages and speed up compilation. In C++ you do already have
some types whose implementation is hidden, which are the inbuilt
types.

In C++ you have the basis of this language for type creation and
description of semantics, but then you have to deal with the archaic
inbuilt types, which you cant manipulate.
It sure would be nice to say I want the library X ints which are 32
bits and don't allow conversion from real. I only want 4 byte floats
only and dont want the compiler to know about long and double
etcetera. And of course with that capabaility you could tailor your
types to a particular platform or make them generic.

Yep.. in C++ there is a nice little language struggling to get out :-)

regards
Andy Little

[Chris M. Thomasson]

"kwikius" <an**@servocomm.freeserve.co.ukwrote in message
news:e2**********************************@r66g2000 hsg.googlegroups.com...

On Aug 19, 11:36 am, "Chris M. Thomasson" <[e-mail]:

<...>

>If you read Suns patent application, it CLEARLY is a mirror image of Joe
Seighs atomic_ptr algorithm:

http://atomic-ptr-plus.sourceforge.net

I guess you gotta to do what you're told when you work for a
megacorp ...

YIKES!

Well, I really do hope that the so-called inventors listed in the patent
documentation did not steal an advanced and important lock-free algorithm
posted on USENET. Although, the patent teachings are a mirror image of the
atomic_ptr algorithm; what a shame!

;^(...

[kwikius]

On Aug 19, 11:16 am, kwikius <[e-mail]:

Victor Bazarov wrote:

kwikius wrote:

Interesting... Times are changing:
[..]
For the greater glory of god, [..]

regards
Andy Little

You seem lost, Andy. Are you in the right forum?

Yes Victor, but thanks for the concern.

I'm only now starting to realise what a great little library I wrote
in PQS (now Quan) I don't work on it publically any more. As to why..
the article in the first link gives a clue.

PQS first was put in public in 2003 . Shortly after we had publication
of Fortress funded by Amreican military with $140 M

<http://research.sun.com/projects/plrg/PLDITutorialSlides9Jun2006.pdf>

<http://research.sun.com/minds/2005-0302/>

(And I am pretty sure that Sun will have some personnel dedicated to
filtering this list and boost.org etc)

Now we also have e.g Google calculator.

<http://www.google.com/help/features.html>

Also this stuff uses the same mechanisms as Quan

<http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2008/n2661.htm>

Of course there were C++ units libraries before PQS, but PQS was
different , because it actually worked :-) and I do take credit for
PQS having an influence on all that stuff ?

Yes absolutely, beacause as someone said PQS/Quan was 'cute'.. that's
the power of Quan.. simple elegant and expressive.

(I use Quan extensively everyday and I now realise that it should
really be a language on its own, more of a scripted languge, but not
as hideously complex as Fortress. The C++ template metaprogramming
mechanism is just too cumbersome. Concepts might help , but my guess
is that they will slow down compilation even more.. C++0x is just too
big and complex now. The ideas of Concepst are nice but in another
language)

Whoacha !

F# has units .. Note the date !

http://tinyurl.com/5vm4vy

Whoops Andy .. you done it again.

Looks like they went for the quan semantics .. good.

Now Lads . if you are reading this then look at the named quantities
in quan.

Whats important about named versus anonymous quantities is that you
can distingish dimensionally equivalent quantities for I/O. Its an
important feature, so I hope you can put that in... type inference on
an expression returns an anonymous quantity, which you can assign to a
dimensionally equivalent named quantity of your choice for i/o.

regards
Andy Little

[Jerry Coffin]

In article <d8eebf07-7152-4eb9-a625-
36**********@a2g2000prm.googlegroups.com>,
an**@servocomm.freeserve.co.uk says...

[ ... ]

F# has units .. Note the date !

http://tinyurl.com/5vm4vy

Whoops Andy .. you done it again.

Looks like they went for the quan semantics .. good.

Yup. From the looks of things, those evil bastards who defined VHDL
copied quan too. For example, see section 2.2.2 of:

http://tams-www.informatik.uni-hambu...cookbook/VHDL-
Cookbook.pdf

When you've worked yourself into a serious froth over how yet another
group of people has stolen your work without any attribution at all, do
a bit of googling, and realize that VHDL had this in 1987 (or well
before that really, but it was formally approved as a standard in
1987...)

--
Later,
Jerry.

The universe is a figment of its own imagination.