1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. COMP.UNIX.PROGRAMMER

  • Re: Python (was Re: I did not inhale)

    From James Kuyper@21:1/5 to Dmitry A. Kazakov on Sun Aug 25 10:48:48 2024
    On 8/25/24 06:32, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
    On 2024-08-25 09:50, Sebastian wrote:
    In comp.unix.programmer Dmitry A. Kazakov <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
    wrote:
    Windows did many things wrong, but accessing file descriptors by numbers >>> is beyond even Windows. In Windows a file is an OS object. You access it >>> getting an opaque handle to. Note that a handle can be marshaled from
    one process to another. Try that with process-local numbers!

    UNIX domain sockets support the passing of file descriptors between
    processes.

    File descriptor (a pointer to) is not file number.

    You cannot pass number 1 simply because 1 is already in use.

    True, but since passing the file descriptor provides you with all you
    need to achieve the same functionality, that distinction is unimportant.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From James Kuyper@21:1/5 to Dmitry A. Kazakov on Tue Aug 20 09:59:11 2024
    On 8/20/24 02:52, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
    ...
    It is no complain, merely stating an elementary economic fact. If the
    price does not reflect the costs, there is no market. No market, no competition. No competition, no quality.

    The problem with that theory is that it doesn't line up with facts, at
    least, not as I've seen them. Free software is often of comparable or
    greater quality than commercial software, partly because a lot more eyes
    have examined the code for bugs. For several decades now, virtually all
    of my software needs have been met by free software of adequate quality
    for my needs. The only software I've paid for in years is cheap
    smartphone games that my kids insist on playing - but what I'm paying
    for is the marketing that convinced my kids they "need" the game, not
    the quality of the game itself.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From James Kuyper@21:1/5 to Keith Thompson on Tue Aug 20 10:52:55 2024
    I originally posted this a couple of days ago, to the wrong newsgroup.
    Sorry.

    On 8/18/24 15:24, Keith Thompson wrote:
    David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes:
    [...]
    Without looking it up, what does the C standard library "fegetmode"
    function do?

    Nothing, it's specific to GNU libc.

    ? It's in every draft version of the C standard that I have since
    n2346.pdf, dated 2019-03-13. In the latest draft I have, n3096.pdf, it
    is described as follows:

    7.6.5.1
    "The fegetmode function
    Synopsis
    #include <fenv.h>
    int fegetmode(femode_t *modep);

    Description
    The fegetmode function attempts to store all the dynamic floating-point
    control modes in the object pointed to by modep.

    Returns
    The fegetmode function returns zero if the modes were successfully
    stored. Otherwise, it returns a nonzero value."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lawrence D'Oliveiro@21:1/5 to James Kuyper on Wed Aug 21 01:12:22 2024
    On Tue, 20 Aug 2024 09:59:11 -0400, James Kuyper wrote:

    On 8/20/24 02:52, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
    ...
    It is no complain, merely stating an elementary economic fact. If the
    price does not reflect the costs, there is no market. No market, no
    competition. No competition, no quality.

    The problem with that theory is that it doesn't line up with facts, at
    least, not as I've seen them. Free software is often of comparable or
    greater quality than commercial software, partly because a lot more eyes
    have examined the code for bugs.

    Free software is still subject to the same laws of economics, but it
    changes the way the equation is applied.

    Proprietary software is built on the concept of “artificial scarcity”: the cost of making copies of the software is inflated through the threat of lawsuits for copyright infringement, thereby making it more economical to
    keep paying more money to the copyright owners.

    Free software doesn’t bother trying to make scarce that which is not naturally scarce: the software itself is freely copyable, but of course
    the skills in developing and maintaining it, and also in adapting it for different uses, are a different matter. Such a model also works because it results in better alignment between the customer’s needs and those of the software developer.

    Think of it as the old “give away the razor, sell the razor blades” idea
    in a new form.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)