archived
stringclasses
2 values
author
stringlengths
3
20
author_fullname
stringlengths
4
12
body
stringlengths
0
22.5k
comment_type
stringclasses
1 value
controversiality
stringclasses
2 values
created_utc
stringlengths
10
10
edited
stringlengths
4
12
gilded
stringclasses
7 values
id
stringlengths
1
7
link_id
stringlengths
7
10
locked
stringclasses
2 values
name
stringlengths
4
10
parent_id
stringlengths
5
10
permalink
stringlengths
41
91
retrieved_on
stringlengths
10
10
score
stringlengths
1
4
subreddit_id
stringclasses
1 value
subreddit_name_prefixed
stringclasses
1 value
subreddit_type
stringclasses
1 value
total_awards_received
stringclasses
19 values
True
s73v3r
null
>Yes, you can access WinRT with standard C++ but it is so unbelievable pull-your-hair-out ugly, that it doesn't matter in the real world. Actually, it does, as people have been doing that same stuff for years. It's the same shit you have to deal with you use COM. Furthermore, all it takes is one person to write a standards compliant wrapper around it, and it's gone.
null
0
1316562672
False
0
c2ldcj4
t3_kl1qp
null
t1_c2ldcj4
t1_c2l7jk0
null
1427626007
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
s73v3r
null
Nah, there'd still be enough in the way of memes and cat pictures to keep it afloat.
null
0
1316562765
False
0
c2ldd0q
t3_kl1qp
null
t1_c2ldd0q
t1_c2l7m0j
null
1427626014
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
s73v3r
null
>The UI paradigm sucks for anything more complex than RSS feed widgets and fullscreen video players. Not entirely accurate. The UI paradigm is designed to be used with touch. That's the entire point of it. It's a toolkit and UI paradigm designed from the ground up to work with your finger. Regular Windows desktop apps don't do that in the slightest, and it's part of what's made iOS and Android so popular. >For tablets/phones metro is pretty cool but for productivity desktop apps? No, but that's why you build the app using the regular Win32 toolkits. You're not going to be using touch anyway, so why would you bother with a toolkit designed for it?
null
0
1316562882
False
0
c2lddkq
t3_kl1qp
null
t1_c2lddkq
t1_c2lajma
null
1428193603
0
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
imMute
null
>If the winner of the bidding war isn't the current owner, then the *owner* is forced to sell it to the high bidder at that price or pay a steep penalty. FTFY Also, what's to stop the owning company from entering an impossibly large bid?
null
0
1316562907
False
0
c2lddon
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2lddon
t1_c2ld6jf
null
1427626023
3
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
[deleted]
null
> On the subject of homework and exercises and extended interview periods We've used them in the past for applicants with zero commercial / FOSS software experience (like myself), and they're moderately valuable - it's a chance to prove your capacity to learn quickly, which is something we highly value. That said, last time round, one of our candidates obviously cheated, as his 'homework' was good but in the coding exercises we ran through together in the interview it became very obvious that he didn't know what a method or argument was. :/ And then there was the guy who emailed his mate asking him to the 'homework' for him, and accidentally cc'ed my boss on that email... But I'll emphasize that we only do this for people who have no experience and a patchy portfolio.
null
0
1316562911
False
0
c2lddpo
t3_kls47
null
t1_c2lddpo
t1_c2lab04
null
1427626023
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
annodomini
null
Too late. [Halliburton already called dibs on that](http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/search-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PG01&s1=20080270152&OS=20080270152&RS=20080270152).
null
0
1316562919
False
0
c2lddr9
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2lddr9
t1_c2lcpob
null
1427626030
27
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
yeswecould
null
> None of the three are designed for non-professionals. This could be seen as a feature.. Anyhow, maybe they will port [TouchStudio](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmK3ahyODeg), although it's not app dev language for non-professionals, it is a scripting language for non-professionals.
null
0
1316562937
False
0
c2lddto
t3_kl1qp
null
t1_c2lddto
t1_c2lart6
null
1427626025
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
frymaster
null
I ask if something exists, and that makes me a know-it-all? I don't follow.
null
0
1316562965
False
0
c2lddyk
t3_kl7h0
null
t1_c2lddyk
t1_c2ld76g
null
1427626031
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
iplawguy
null
Patent lawyer here. Interesting post. I'd like to review the methodology of the study. I'm open to the idea that the patent system takes more than it gives, but I see it as a (highly complex) empirical question.
null
0
1316563029
False
0
c2lde9h
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2lde9h
t1_c2lbs8y
null
1427626033
9
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
macrocephalic
null
start by defining a constant as "<insert butt of joke's name>_is_gay == true. Then every time you need to evaluate a binary choice you can use if something = Bob_is_gay then. Or while Bob_is_gay.
null
0
1316563031
False
0
c2lde9v
t3_klhlv
null
t1_c2lde9v
t3_klhlv
null
1427626033
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
godless_communism
null
Change "life" to "humans"
null
0
1316563196
False
0
c2ldf2h
t3_klhlv
null
t1_c2ldf2h
t1_c2lakc5
null
1427626041
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
GTChessplayer
null
>You do realize that patents were originally a godsend right? It's just more liberal big government getting in the way of free-market competiton. >It's like saying police are a result of government intervention and therefore we should eliminate police due to police brutality or corruption. If you actually read some Nobel Prize winning economics research, you would see that this is true: if you eliminate the state and have people purchase private protection, it will be more efficient and more in the interests of the people. Do you have any Nobel Prize winning research that supports your dogma?
null
0
1316563203
False
0
c2ldf3f
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldf3f
t1_c2lc3se
null
1427626041
-3
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
coldacid
null
I wonder how many user complaints that will generate.
null
0
1316563226
False
0
c2ldf80
t3_kl1qp
null
t1_c2ldf80
t1_c2ld97w
null
1427626043
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
s73v3r
null
Why is HTML on top of JavaScript? Shouldn't they be the same box?
null
0
1316563390
False
0
c2ldfyz
t3_kl1qp
null
t1_c2ldfyz
t1_c2l6kir
null
1427626051
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
Peaker
null
There's actually another lesser known alternative for writing generic code in C, and it's based on a single macro that could be viewed as sort of a "downcast" macro: #define container_of(ptr, container, member) \ ((container *)(((char *)(ptr)) - offsetof(container, member))) Actually, the macro can be slightly enhanced to be more type-safe (e.g: verify that `container.member` has the type of `*ptr`). Anyway, once you have this, you can implement an algorithm or a data structure that is for a pure spine. For example, you implement a linked list: struct list { struct list *prev, *next; }; void list_add(struct list *where, struct list *what); void list_del(struct list *what); ... Then, if you have a struct foo{..} and you want to have a list of foo's, you throw in a `struct list` in there: struct foo { .. data .. struct list node; }; And now, you can add foo's to a list: list_add(some_list_position, &foo.node); Now, if you iterate the list, you can do something like: struct list *p; foreach(p, some_list) { struct foo *foo = container_of(p, struct foo, node); ... work with foo ... } This approach has a whole slew of advantages (I can expand on that if you want), that it was copied to C++ too. I use this approach for generic code in C a whole lot, and it works well. EDIT: Oops, cast to (char *) in the macro.
null
0
1316563409
True
0
c2ldg1v
t3_klphp
null
t1_c2ldg1v
t1_c2lbo8r
null
1427626052
3
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
EdgarVerona
null
Ah, I take it from your wording that you helped in its creation? Neat! It's a very impressive tool, well done! I can picture now how it's done, but it still impresses me ;)
null
0
1316563410
False
0
c2ldg20
t3_kg44k
null
t1_c2ldg20
t1_c2ld465
null
1427626052
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
[deleted]
null
This is not what first-to-file means.
null
0
1316563434
False
0
c2ldg6c
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldg6c
t1_c2lb3rp
null
1427626054
4
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
s73v3r
null
Not really, as most corporate users would probably have those wrapped in a web interface.
null
0
1316563493
False
0
c2ldgg8
t3_kl1qp
null
t1_c2ldgg8
t1_c2l7htg
null
1427626058
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
[deleted]
null
Why is it not right? Employment contracts often have clauses about the employer owning any IP you develop.
null
0
1316563504
False
0
c2ldgi2
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldgi2
t1_c2lczdu
null
1427626058
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
lolol42
null
Jesus Christ. I thought you were joking. Then I read your link
null
0
1316563534
False
0
c2ldgmx
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldgmx
t1_c2lddr9
null
1427626060
5
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
lolol42
null
Why would we do that? It would hurt the bottom lines of corporations. /s
null
0
1316563613
False
0
c2ldh0s
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldh0s
t1_c2lbj62
null
1427626065
0
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
s73v3r
null
And that solution is bound to have a few problems with it, so someday in the future, someone comes up and says, "I'm gonna write a new solution to this problem, one that fixes bugs X & Y!"
null
0
1316563652
False
0
c2ldh6i
t3_kl1qp
null
t1_c2ldh6i
t1_c2l7j6j
null
1427626067
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
codeki
null
Like Edison patenting many of Tesla's inventions?
null
0
1316563653
False
0
c2ldh6n
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldh6n
t1_c2lczdu
null
1427626067
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
ZorbaTHut
null
Oops, typo. Fixed, thanks. > Also, what's to stop the owning company from entering an impossibly large bid? Nothing at all . . . but keep in mind that they're taxed based on the highest bid. So if they want to bid a billion trillion dollars, they're welcome to, but they're going to have a hell of a tax bill coming up.
null
0
1316563722
False
0
c2ldhiq
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldhiq
t1_c2lddon
null
1427626071
5
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
s73v3r
null
>but what I am worried about is ARM; how apps could be ported to work on them. They won't. Legacy apps won't work on ARM. Metro apps will, however.
null
0
1316563763
False
0
c2ldhpk
t3_kl1qp
null
t1_c2ldhpk
t1_c2l7m4t
null
1427626074
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
grauenwolf
null
The tablets they gave out at the conference were x86 and powerful enough to run Visual Studio.
null
0
1316563820
False
0
c2ldhyw
t3_kl1qp
null
t1_c2ldhyw
t1_c2ld5p0
null
1427626078
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
[deleted]
null
Testing takes time, good testing takes a lot of it and there is no escaping it. However, I'm surprised this article was about test run time and not test development time. Running tests should not consume developer time, only writing tests should. If waiting on automated tests to run is creating a time bottleneck on development, your development strategy is wrong. Targeted testing by expanding on failing tests, or writing new tests during development is highly valuable, but wider regression testing should only spin once the entire changeset is ready to be merged. Then you can move onto something else, and it doesn't really matter how long your tests take to finish up. If your targeted testing was worthwhile, 95% of the time your patch will sail through the rest of your suites fine. >More tests always sounds great at first but it doesn’t mean much to a 2-year old Rails app with a 60 minute test suite. [...] it’s sad to watch a promising young app become bombarded with tests and in a few months completely miserable to work on. A 60 minute test suite is whats dragging you down? Of man if we could all be so lucky. For my project, all of our automated tests, if ran sequentially, take a few days. We don't have the option to sit around with our thumbs up our ass waiting on tests and our development strategy reflects that. But every single change is still completely tested before it hits our release branch.
null
0
1316563851
True
0
c2ldi3z
t3_klypn
null
t1_c2ldi3z
t3_klypn
null
1427626080
7
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
[deleted]
null
The last numbers in the sequence are 1/n, 1/n! and (a^n)/n!
null
0
1316563928
False
0
c2ldihf
t3_km5t1
null
t1_c2ldihf
t3_km5t1
null
1427626085
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
s73v3r
null
Except the old toolkits work just fine.
null
0
1316563930
False
0
c2ldihp
t3_kl1qp
null
t1_c2ldihp
t1_c2l8lam
null
1427626085
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
s73v3r
null
WRONG. Again, if you have prior art, that will cause their patent to be rejected.
null
0
1316563996
False
0
c2ldisw
t3_khvyw
null
t1_c2ldisw
t1_c2lbyxu
null
1427626089
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
doubtingthomas
null
That's a pretty high bar to call something "strongly typed", and I don't think it's the commonly understood definition.
null
0
1316564017
False
0
c2ldiw5
t3_kljc0
null
t1_c2ldiw5
t1_c2ldagn
null
1427626090
9
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
s73v3r
null
That's far, far different than saying they get by without lawyers.
null
0
1316564039
False
0
c2ldize
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldize
t1_c2ld52p
null
1427626091
6
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
adolfojp
null
The diagram separates the presentation layers from the programming languages. The presentation layer for C++, C#, and VB is XAML. The presentation layer for JavaScript is HTML/CSS
null
0
1316564043
True
0
c2ldj0g
t3_kl1qp
null
t1_c2ldj0g
t1_c2ldfyz
null
1427626092
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
s73v3r
null
>Fair enough. However, I still think that if people want a quality product, they will pay for it. iPhone ripoffs are always going to be crap, the QC just isn't there. True, however I think these are mainly targeted at those that don't really know any better.
null
0
1316564146
False
0
c2ldji1
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldji1
t1_c2ld5a6
null
1427626098
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
Peaker
null
* `#include` is a pretty bad way to implement a module system. In C, it's almost bearable. With templates, it becomes quite horrible (Maybe that was fixed in a newer C++, though). * Reference types are a nice feature. But typedef's of reference types are pretty terrible. Example: typedef int &my_int; my_int x = y; x = 7; /* This does not seem like it should mutate y! */ * C-level features (low-level casts) and OOP don't mesh well, because one of the principles of OOP is data hiding, and C++ implements that with private fields. By (accidentally or not) casting values, you can break through the encapsulation. The preprocessor and #include system also allow breaking the encapsulation (e.g: #define private public). * Higher-level abstractions and manual memory management don't always work well together. For example, lexical scopes are an immensely important higher level abstraction, but meshing it into C++ would be problematic because of the manual memory management. So C++ ends up lacking a very important high-level feature due to low-level concerns. * The syntax of C is not a great match for C++. This may not have to do with low-level/high-level though, just an extension for a language that is bigger than the language itself is unlikely to have a nice syntax. * When writing low-level code, exceptions can get in the way. * When using 3rd party libraries, you don't get to choose which C++ features are too expensive -- so you either have to compromise, or you have to live in a very poor subset of the library world. * Low-level code needs to interface with other languages and ABIs well. AFAIK, C++ has no standardized ABIs, and this makes interoperability, especially low-level inter-language/kernel-user interoperability difficult. * The C++ libraries are *huge* which often contradicts low-level code requirements for small footprints. Same applies for template instances. C encourages rewriting these things differently which may be worst in various aspects, but will probably have a smaller footprint.
null
0
1316564176
False
0
c2ldjnb
t3_klphp
null
t1_c2ldjnb
t1_c2lbrja
null
1427626100
4
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
s73v3r
null
No, that's an awful idea, as you'd basically be insuring that every patent ends up in the hands of the bigger companies.
null
0
1316564228
False
0
c2ldjvb
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldjvb
t1_c2ld6jf
null
1427626104
16
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
RamkarofRila
null
Nothing, but they'd have to pay tax proportional to that ridiculously high bid. AKA: A bad idea.
null
0
1316564369
False
0
c2ldkhh
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldkhh
t1_c2lddon
null
1427626111
12
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
s73v3r
null
Methinks you're not at all familiar with the history of why patents came about. They were originally devised as a way to encourage inventors to disclose their inventions into the public domain, so that the knowledge was not lost when the inventor died. Of course, given your little uninformed snipe at Obama supporters, I can't expect you to understand. Especially because you tried to make a little partisan snipe, without realizing that it was the Founding Fathers that put patents in the Constitution to start with, and Congress that enacted the recent reform bill.
null
0
1316564395
False
0
c2ldkm5
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldkm5
t1_c2ld81q
null
1427626114
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
grauenwolf
null
> BDD is a second-generation, outside-in, pull-based, multiple-stakeholder, multiple-scale, high-automation, agile methodology. It describes a cycle of interactions with well-defined outputs, resulting in the delivery of working, tested software that matters. -- Dan North Well he certainly has all the buzz words in place. But I fail to see how someone can critically think about the overall design when they are neck deep in writing code.
null
0
1316564443
False
0
c2ldkv3
t3_klypn
null
t1_c2ldkv3
t1_c2ld9pi
null
1427626117
10
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
thebru
null
Ha! No, but sometimes. That was the least of the problems with this particular project =\
null
0
1316564498
False
0
c2ldl4x
t3_klhlv
null
t1_c2ldl4x
t1_c2l9q13
null
1427626120
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
ChaosMotor
null
>That's why the inventor makes you sign an NDA prior to showing it to you. That way, if you do happen to patent something that is eerily similar to the invention, they can invalidate your patent. Most investors won't sign an NDA until far along into the process. >It's meant to bring our law in line with the rest of the world. Oh bullshit. Just because something is the prevailing standard doesn't mean it's the right course of action. >And now, it's easier for small businesses too, as they don't have to adhere to the strict documentation requirements for the date and time of the work on their inventions. Nominally easier in one sense, but massively more burdensome in another, more important sense. >And if you can't come up with the money after producing your product, then maybe it wasn't worth patenting in the first place. Because there are *no* disadvantaged persons in our society, and there's *no way* that something extremely useful could take a long time to get the money for? >Do you not understand how much of a monumental burden the previous system was on underfunded inventors, or are you just a troll? I *am* an underfunded inventor, jackass. I've *fucking lived this*, have ***YOU***?
null
0
1316564502
False
0
c2ldl5g
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldl5g
t1_c2lcyyr
null
1427626121
0
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
s73v3r
null
No, you're the one that's off topic, and you have been from the start. The original comment that started this was saying that they don't want to kill you, as that would mean they'd get less in revenues.
null
0
1316564507
False
0
c2ldl65
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldl65
t1_c2ld9i5
null
1427626121
0
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
ChaosMotor
null
Except, it does.
null
0
1316564530
False
0
c2ldla5
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldla5
t1_c2lcz2b
null
1427626122
0
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
skew
null
That's a broader question - this was just about the net value of NPEs. Another narrow question suggested by (Ars' reporting of) the study is the net value of *software* patents, if they accounted for 62% of the estimated losses.
null
0
1316564557
False
0
c2ldlf0
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldlf0
t1_c2lde9h
null
1427626124
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
s73v3r
null
>Thank you for agreeing that I am right. In that one small case. Not everything. >Also I find it funny that you are stalking me. I find it funny you have a highly inflated ego. You're not being stalked. I simply read the list of comments, and responded to those I felt needing responding to.
null
0
1316564565
False
0
c2ldlga
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldlga
t1_c2ld9vm
null
1427626124
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
ChaosMotor
null
You provide so many well backed citations that I find myself not needing to! It's not like you simply bluster around and say things without basis, oh, you know, *everywhere*.
null
0
1316564570
False
0
c2ldlh8
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldlh8
t1_c2lcztz
null
1427626125
0
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
ChaosMotor
null
And Communism works on paper.
null
0
1316564602
False
0
c2ldlmt
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldlmt
t1_c2ldg6c
null
1427626134
-7
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
s73v3r
null
And without governments, we'd be like Somalia.
null
0
1316564655
False
0
c2ldlvi
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldlvi
t1_c2ldb48
null
1427626146
-1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
s73v3r
null
I fail to see how employment contracts having that clause makes it right.
null
0
1316564694
False
0
c2ldm1m
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldm1m
t1_c2ldgi2
null
1427626138
3
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
AgentConundrum
null
> The cheapest tool is often not the best. The cheapest tool to buy is not always the cheapest tool to use. If you spend twice as long to complete a task with the dollar-cheap tool than you would with another tool, then that tool costs you (hoursLost * billable_rate). If this cost is more than the difference in the costs of the tools, then you're not working in the cheapest way possible.
null
0
1316564719
False
0
c2ldm5c
t3_kljc0
null
t1_c2ldm5c
t1_c2l9lx7
null
1427626138
4
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
grauenwolf
null
How are those gyrations any better than simply writing this: class MockCampaignOverviewService : CampaignOverviewService override List<Campaign> retrieveCampaigns()
null
0
1316564723
False
0
c2ldm68
t3_klypn
null
t1_c2ldm68
t1_c2lda1v
null
1427626139
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
[deleted]
null
[deleted]
null
0
1316564739
1426106095
0
c2ldm9a
t3_kl7h0
null
t1_c2ldm9a
t1_c2ld09c
null
1427626140
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
s73v3r
null
I doubt the majority of tablets sold will be like that. I'm guessing most offered will be ARM.
null
0
1316564740
False
0
c2ldm9i
t3_kl1qp
null
t1_c2ldm9i
t1_c2ldhyw
null
1427626140
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
H3g3m0n
null
I find that Javascript Garden thing annoying. It's a fairly big square block that obscures the side notes. Even those little, discrete, expandable side tabs git me the shits. Never use that kind of thing anyway. If you are going to do it, I would recommend a bar down the bottom kind of simulating a footer, or maybe up the top where you expect navigation buttons to be. That way it doesn't obscure much and it's only stealing a small sliver rather than a chunk. I suppose a hierarchical index tree view would be handy, provided there isn't any content on that side that would get obscured.
null
0
1316564861
False
0
c2ldmtw
t3_kliaa
null
t1_c2ldmtw
t1_c2l81sj
null
1427626145
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
Concise_Pirate
null
I should learn to read! :-)
null
0
1316564879
False
0
c2ldmx1
t3_klhlv
null
t1_c2ldmx1
t1_c2lcvfs
null
1427626146
3
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
seekret
null
I could probably Google this, but I don't want to sift through legalese. You mention prior art, does this still provide protection under the new system? So if I invent the iPod and Apple patents the iPod technology, but I had been selling it for six months with no patent, does that mean that Apple wins or I win in court?
null
0
1316564911
False
0
c2ldn32
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldn32
t1_c2lcyyr
null
1427626157
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
iplawguy
null
Looking at the study, the methodology appears deeply flawed (they used stock price as the dependent variable). Also, worth noting that the new patent reform law makes it more difficult to join multiple defendants in a patent suit, a favorite tactic of trolls, and also casts further doubt on software patents, which face more hurdles than most people realize. Edit: if you want to see intelligent discussion of patent law, read something by Mark Lemley at Stanford Law School.
null
0
1316564941
False
0
c2ldn84
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldn84
t1_c2ldlf0
null
1427626157
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
thelordpsy
null
Back in school someone wrote a function: IsBool(String input) { return input == "true"; }
null
0
1316564948
False
0
c2ldn9r
t3_klhlv
null
t1_c2ldn9r
t3_klhlv
null
1427626150
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
s73v3r
null
>Most investors won't sign an NDA until far along into the process. Showing them your invention without an NDA is completely retarded and removes any sympathy I would have for your plight. >Oh bullshit. Just because something is the prevailing standard doesn't mean it's the right course of action. More comprehensive reform would be better, I agree. However, doesn't change the fact that bringing things in line with the prevailing standard isn't a good idea, and makes things easier for everyone. >Nominally easier in one sense, but massively more burdensome in another, more important sense. No, it isn't. It's no more easy or hard to do now. >Because there are no disadvantaged persons in our society, and there's no way that something extremely useful could take a long time to get the money for? So what? Just because you had the idea, you should get paid for it, even if you can't use it? And seriously, if it is "extremely useful", it won't take a long time to get funding. >I am an underfunded inventor, jackass. So you know that the previous system was absolutely no better, right?
null
0
1316564983
False
0
c2ldnfg
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldnfg
t1_c2ldl5g
null
1427626154
7
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
mappu
null
There's a historical reason for using ii and jj instead of i and j - it has something to do with FORTRAN or MATLAB or something like that treating i as a built-in constant for sqrt(-1)
null
0
1316564990
False
0
c2ldnge
t3_klhlv
null
t1_c2ldnge
t1_c2l8dpv
null
1427626154
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
[deleted]
null
>not getting "shit" done, because, well, then you end with "shit". Who cares about quality? This is an article about hiring for an early stage startup!
null
0
1316565095
True
0
c2ldnxw
t3_kls47
null
t1_c2ldnxw
t1_c2lbdv0
null
1427626161
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
RedSpikeyThing
null
It works pretty well with its original intent in mind. Unfortunately the system got fucked along the way and the original intent was lost.
null
0
1316565110
False
0
c2ldo0r
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldo0r
t1_c2lbfop
null
1427626162
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
seekret
null
In the case of Edison I think people are assuming that the employees didn't sign such a contract. I think that if I were Edison I would have *everybody* I ever gave a nickel to sign a contract like that, because that was basically his style. Heck, Radioshack makes it's retail employees sign a contract saying any idea they have for up to 6 months after employment (time frame might be off) belongs to Radioshack.
null
0
1316565111
False
0
c2ldo0x
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldo0x
t1_c2ldgi2
null
1427626162
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
s73v3r
null
No more than the old system. Prior art still exits, and can still be used to invalidate a patent. There's plenty to be upset about in the patent system without you making up bullshit.
null
0
1316565151
False
0
c2ldo77
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldo77
t1_c2ldla5
null
1427626163
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
s73v3r
null
Hey pot, I'm kettle. You're black. Seriously, you've put absolutely no citations of your own, either, so you don't get to bitch.
null
0
1316565216
False
0
c2ldoi1
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldoi1
t1_c2ldlh8
null
1427626165
-1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
TheManFromInternet
null
That alone is the difference between a functional and a dysfunctional US economy, and we all know what state it is in now.
null
0
1316565252
False
0
c2ldonh
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldonh
t3_klqte
null
1427626167
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
RedSpikeyThing
null
>There should be a develop-or-die clause on patents - after filing the patent, you have five years to develop a product that uses it, or you lose all rights to it. I like this idea, though it sounds problematic for things that are e.g. extremely time consuming/expensive/difficult to manufacture.
null
0
1316565288
False
0
c2ldorr
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldorr
t1_c2lc3w7
null
1427626168
4
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
ChaosMotor
null
>So you know that the previous system was absolutely no better, right? The entire thing is a big fat pile of horse shit and the only thing good about it was what has just been removed - first to invent. >And seriously, if it is "extremely useful", it won't take a long time to get funding. Have you *ever* invented *anything*!? And are you a disadvantaged group? Stop assuming everyone is born fucking privileged.
null
0
1316565318
False
0
c2ldowb
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldowb
t1_c2ldnfg
null
1427626169
-2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
k3n
null
Did you reply in the wrong place? I don't think they were talking about `for` vs `for-in`.
null
0
1316565331
False
0
c2ldoy0
t3_kketr
null
t1_c2ldoy0
t1_c2l2dtr
null
1427626170
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
a_redditor
null
Please don't post stupid memes in /r/programming.
null
0
1316565408
False
0
c2ldpa3
t3_km6bo
null
t1_c2ldpa3
t3_km6bo
null
1427626175
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
RedSpikeyThing
null
This is correct and, IMO, one of the major sources of problems with software patents.
null
0
1316565455
False
0
c2ldphf
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldphf
t1_c2lcz8c
null
1427626180
3
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
[deleted]
null
blood sucking lawyers allowed to breed out of all decent control are directly responsible for this half trillion dollar patent travesty.
null
0
1316565477
False
0
c2ldpl4
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldpl4
t1_c2ldize
null
1427626178
0
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
generalT
null
>It is possible to grasp a problem without devoting your life to a subject. yeah, if the problem is something like doing the dishes, cooking a pizza, or driving a car. i assume patent law is fucking *complex*, and, the last time i checked this thread, it struck me as if people didn't have a damn clue what they were talking about. this happens *all* the time on reddit. wander into any sub-reddit where a discussion of something reasonably complex is taking place. all i see are a bunch of blow-hards spewing nonsense with astounding arrogance, as if they actually *knew something*.
null
0
1316565556
False
0
c2ldpwh
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldpwh
t1_c2ld3qu
null
1427626183
-2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
generalT
null
thank god, someone who actually knows something joined the thread. welcome.
null
0
1316565591
False
0
c2ldq0v
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldq0v
t1_c2lde9h
null
1427626190
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
RedSpikeyThing
null
That's fucking sneaky, though I'm not convinced there is anything wrong with it. That is, of course, assuming they allow actually sell the rights to the solution to their competition. If they keep it to themselves then they're stifling innovation, which is bad.
null
0
1316565608
False
0
c2ldq3g
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldq3g
t1_c2lbdzi
null
1427626187
-1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
a_redditor
null
Try /r/learnprogramming, but please read the [guidelines for posting homework problems](http://www.reddit.com/r/learnprogramming/comments/czcnf/guidelines_for_posting_homework_problems/) first.
null
0
1316565646
False
0
c2ldq9e
t3_km5t1
null
t1_c2ldq9e
t1_c2ldihf
null
1427626189
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
grauenwolf
null
I can see it going either way.
null
0
1316565647
False
0
c2ldq9m
t3_kl1qp
null
t1_c2ldq9m
t1_c2ldm9i
null
1427626189
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
mr_chromatic
null
You can test the former with mock objects and pretend that you have confidence that your software works when you put it all together. I suppose that's one definition of *better*.
null
0
1316565657
False
0
c2ldqb6
t3_klypn
null
t1_c2ldqb6
t1_c2ldm68
null
1427626189
3
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
[deleted]
null
[deleted]
null
0
1316565665
False
0
c2ldqc1
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldqc1
t1_c2ldf3f
null
1427626197
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
[deleted]
null
Then get an x86 one...
null
0
1316565688
False
0
c2ldqfa
t3_kl1qp
null
t1_c2ldqfa
t1_c2ld60u
null
1427626190
0
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
[deleted]
null
[deleted]
null
0
1316565700
False
0
c2ldqgx
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldqgx
t1_c2lde9h
null
1427626190
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
conjury
null
No.
null
0
1316565811
False
0
c2ldqzu
t3_klhlv
null
t1_c2ldqzu
t1_c2lcovi
null
1427626198
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
reddit_clone
null
RMS is the rude uncle who says what he thinks. Obviously hip kids don't like him.
null
0
1316565853
False
0
c2ldr6t
t3_kl7h0
null
t1_c2ldr6t
t1_c2lb1yv
null
1427626211
7
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
conjury
null
It's not a valid variable name in OCaml. It's just the wildcard pattern.
null
0
1316565889
False
0
c2ldrce
t3_klhlv
null
t1_c2ldrce
t1_c2lazk2
null
1427626205
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
[deleted]
null
Obviously it doesn't. I was just saying it's common, and commonly accepted.
null
0
1316565912
False
0
c2ldrgb
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldrgb
t1_c2ldm1m
null
1427626205
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
ogtfo
null
s/([^\w])i([^\w])/\1bannapudding\2/g
null
0
1316565946
False
0
c2ldrll
t3_klhlv
null
t1_c2ldrll
t1_c2l938z
null
1427626207
0
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
mr420
null
ahh yeah, I see the fallacy in my thinking now. thanks...
null
0
1316565986
False
0
c2ldrs7
t3_kl1qp
null
t1_c2ldrs7
t1_c2ldgg8
null
1427626210
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
ethraax
null
Perhaps, but only if loading up the "replay" is a painless process.
null
0
1316565990
False
0
c2ldrsv
t3_klhlv
null
t1_c2ldrsv
t1_c2ld7m8
null
1427626210
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
SonOfTheLorax
null
Bury it in a header file waaaaay down in the system. *That's* evil.
null
0
1316566000
False
0
c2ldru7
t3_klhlv
null
t1_c2ldru7
t1_c2lccaz
null
1427626210
3
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
reddit_clone
null
Sadly Apple opened the door and MS will follow slavishly.
null
0
1316566004
False
0
c2ldrup
t3_kl7h0
null
t1_c2ldrup
t1_c2lb9l8
null
1427626210
3
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
RedSpikeyThing
null
Presumably the smaller company would know what it is worth and would wait for the bigger company to bid at least that amount. Sure the bigger company ends up with the patent, but this doesn't bother me if a) the patent is being used, and b) the inventor is appropriately compensated. Also, if you could somehow make the amount of tax paid proportional the size of the company then it could work.
null
0
1316566007
False
0
c2ldrux
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldrux
t1_c2ldjvb
null
1427626210
-1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
[deleted]
null
Not sure what that has to do with anything. First to file changes very little about the patent system. We are the only major country in the world (maybe the only country *period*, I'm not sure) that uses (or used, I guess) first to invent. It's not as if Europeans have been rampantly stealing other peoples' ideas and patenting them.
null
0
1316566087
False
0
c2lds6v
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2lds6v
t1_c2ldlmt
null
1427626216
4
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
soviyet
null
> It's extortion plain and simple. It is not extortion, at all. It's patent law. The problem is, the law sucks. But the companies that this particular study looked at (hint: *publicly traded companies*) want it both ways. They want to protect their interests using the patent system, and want to whine when patent holders who aren't them enforce their patents. Best example is Apple -- simultaneously crying that a patent troll (who isn't even a troll, instead is a *licensor* to Apple) is griefing them at the same time they try every legal tactic available to stop Samsung from releasing tablets based on their patents. The whole fucking thing stinks.
null
0
1316566137
False
0
c2ldseg
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldseg
t1_c2lc8mp
null
1427626219
12
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
RedSpikeyThing
null
>patents are vague and useless pretty much except to sue with. This is the fundamental problem. Patents should allow someone knowledgeable in the art to create the thing you patented. If there isn't enough information to do so then the patent is specific enough.
null
0
1316566157
False
0
c2ldshl
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldshl
t1_c2lcge9
null
1427626220
4
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
soviyet
null
> you have no intention of putting any sort of product to market that relies on said patents. And how might you prove that someone has no intention of putting any sort of product to market?
null
0
1316566203
False
0
c2ldsoo
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldsoo
t1_c2laok4
null
1427626222
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
YesButIThink
null
To expand on this, grauenwolf's example of using a subclass and overriding the method that'll be called by the class you're testing can work fine, but something like mockito lets you do the same thing much more succinctly and flexibly. And if you start wanting to verify that a certain method was called with the right arguments, then mockito is really going to save you a lot of trouble.
null
0
1316566217
False
0
c2ldsqp
t3_klypn
null
t1_c2ldsqp
t1_c2ldqb6
null
1427626223
3
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
drewhenson
null
From the codebase I inherited from some Indian outsource team: private int converIpAddress(String IPAddres){ String converIp=""; for(int i=1; i<IPAddres.length();i++){ if(IPAddres.charAt(i)=='.'){ continue; } else{ converIp = converIp + IPAddres.charAt(i); } } return Integer.parseInt(converIp); }
null
0
1316566245
False
0
c2ldsvc
t3_klhlv
null
t1_c2ldsvc
t1_c2l8c6h
null
1427626224
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
ethraax
null
Doesn't it feel *good* to see those squiggly lines go away? I'm pretty certain one could climax from it if there were enough of them.
null
0
1316566308
False
0
c2ldt4e
t3_klhlv
null
t1_c2ldt4e
t1_c2ld1ul
null
1427626226
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
hobbitlover
null
My balls shrunk a little reading this...
null
0
1316566432
False
0
c2ldtp5
t3_klqte
null
t1_c2ldtp5
t1_c2lddr9
null
1427626232
3
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
True
godless_communism
null
If all I do is ASP.NET, can I safely assume that I don't need to give a flying duck about any of this?
null
0
1316566448
False
0
c2ldtrt
t3_kl1qp
null
t1_c2ldtrt
t1_c2l8d14
null
1427626233
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null