"Ted Byers" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
.. .

"Reka" wrote in message
...

"Ted Byers" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
.. .

I will grant that the
keyboard can be done away with (as can the mouse) by resorting to a
touch
screen, but that makes entering a new recipe tedious at best.

I am really trying hard to picture this, Ted. Pizza dough on my
fingers,
pizza dough on the screen, chocolate frosting on my fingers...well, you
get
the picture. ;-)

;-)

You must make some wild pizza! Chocolate frosting? Never heard of THAT
on
pizza. And my sister learned how to prepare real Italian cuisine from her
mother-in-law (my brother-in-law's family is from the area near Galabria
(sp.?))! She has made some strange stuff, but nothing quite like that.
;-)
You DO have running water and a sink and towels (or a granny apron would
do)
in your kitchen, don't you? ;-)

Silly! I didn't mean all at the same time! I even have a microwave, so
there! ;-)
--
Reka

I don't give a damn for a man that can only spell a word one way.
Mark Twain (1835 - 1910)
http://www.rolbox.it/hukari/index.html



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.573 / Virus Database: 363 - Release Date: 28.01.04

"Ted Byers" writes:
When I cook, I tend to wash my hands repeatedly, every time I handle a
different food; especially meats. And I clean my work area thoroughly when

And what do you do when you are handling a dough? You can't keep
washing your hands every time you touch it, can you?

Alas, I don't do much cooking any more because I like things a little
diverse and interesting but my sister and neice and nephew prefer things I
find bland and won't eat the kinds of things I'd prepare (if I made a meat
sauce for pasta, they won't eat it if I put in garlic or chili or cumin or
mushrooms or beans or onion ...). :-( And I can't be bothered just for
me.

Not even onions? You _are_ in trouble.

The single biggest benefit of my product is that it does a thorough analysis
of the ingredients of a recipe (including especially quantities) in order to
estimate the nutritional properties of the recipe (e.g. calories, fats,
protein, carbohydrates, sodium, &c.) and supports the entry of limits on
nutrient intake (e.g. at least so many grams/day but not more than this
number of grams/day) and food allergies.

I can't see why I need this function, but I may of course be wrong. I
eat more or less whatever I want. Luckily, I am fond of healthy
food. If I had liked chips, french fries or other fatty foods, I would
be in trouble.

I had thought of using XML, but I post-poned that since I didn't want to
take the time to develop fully fledged XML parsing code. XML is easy,
almost as easy as basic HTML, but the code to manage it isn't.

This is why people use things like xerces, xalan, xpath and the
like. You do _not_ want to write your own parser. I like the ability
to be able to say "give me the nodes that has a "keywords" element
attached containing a "keyword" element with the word "indian" in it".

There are no production-quality (as I define production-quality) free
as in beer XML databases out there yet. This is probably the biggest
problem to my solution. Xindice is getting close. Hibernate may help
out, though, but I would think there is a need to serialize the xml to
text for storage. I haven't tried yet. YMMV.

My opinions may be skewed. We are an all-objects, all-xml shop.

Geir

Maybe I got lucky, or have weird kids - mine wouldn't even touch most meats
until I started going nuts with garlic....

--

Ray Barkalow - First Rays Orchids - www.firstrays.com
Plants, Supplies, Books, Artwork, and Lots of Free Info!

.. . . . . . . . . . .
"Ted Byers" wrote in message
.. .

"Geir Harris Hedemark" wrote in message
...
"Ted Byers" writes:
computer located in or adjacent to the kitchen. I will grant that the
keyboard can be done away with (as can the mouse) by resorting to a
touch
screen, but that makes entering a new recipe tedious at best. With
software

You would also need a power washer to clean the gunk off the touch
screen if you are anything like me when cooking.

;-)

When I cook, I tend to wash my hands repeatedly, every time I handle a
different food; especially meats. And I clean my work area thoroughly
when
I have finished with a major step in a given recipe. I guess that is a
habit learned from Mom.

Alas, I don't do much cooking any more because I like things a little
diverse and interesting but my sister and neice and nephew prefer things I
find bland and won't eat the kinds of things I'd prepare (if I made a meat
sauce for pasta, they won't eat it if I put in garlic or chili or cumin or
mushrooms or beans or onion ...). :-( And I can't be bothered just
for
me.

We have thought along the same lines, by the way. My employer makes a
customizable XML publishing system. I had thought of using that,
interlinking ingredients and categories to make something you can tell
what you have, and get a list of possible recipes along with skill
level needed and preparation time. This would also make it possible to
get derivatives of sauce hollandaise by navigating the "genealogy" of
recipes.

The single biggest benefit of my product is that it does a thorough
analysis
of the ingredients of a recipe (including especially quantities) in order
to
estimate the nutritional properties of the recipe (e.g. calories, fats,
protein, carbohydrates, sodium, &c.) and supports the entry of limits on
nutrient intake (e.g. at least so many grams/day but not more than this
number of grams/day) and food allergies.

I had thought of using XML, but I post-poned that since I didn't want to
take the time to develop fully fledged XML parsing code. XML is easy,
almost as easy as basic HTML, but the code to manage it isn't.

It hadn't occured to me to add the ability to search the recipes on the
basis of an ingredient list, or to add skill level and preparation time as
fields describing a recipe. I think I'll add that, as well as categories,
to the "premium" version of the product. :-) I am intrigued by the
notion
of interlinking ingredients and categories, but I haven't yet done an
analysis of that kind of feature so I don't yet have a good idea as to how
to implement it.

I already have an old laptop I had figured on using as an LCD screen
donor. I don't want a touch screen. I want a touchpad which is easily
detached from the LCD and which can be cleaned by washing under
running water (epoxy is your friend, at least at a steady 22C), chassi
would be a homegrown fibreglass/carbon fibre molding with Daddys
Heatsink on the back, eliminating the need for a fan and the fan
opening, which is a good way for water to get inside. The recipes
would be located on the stationary box, which has a keyboard. IP
interconnection by 802.11b, which just leaves the power cord for the
laptop/webpad thingy. Power outlets are readily available in fully
sealed variants. I don't work designing military electronics any more,
which is a hassle. A handful of weatherproof connectors and a few
metres of sealing gaskets would come in handy. There seems to be no
limit to the amount of money stuff like that can cost when you buy a
few at a time.

I don't normally want a touch screen. Using it is usually a royal PITA
when
it comes to designing a user friendly interface that doesn't care if there
is a keyboard attached or not.

I like your design, but I don't know enough about hardware to hazard
making
one of my own (plus, as a result of a diabetes related neuropathy, I am
slowly losing my manual dexterity). When it comes to hardware, I rely on
my
brother-in-law to handle the details.

The problem is time. The problem is always time.

Ah yes. You ARE prone to understatement, aren't you?!?!?! ;-)

Cheers,

Ted

Maybe I got lucky, or have weird kids - mine wouldn't even touch most meats
until I started going nuts with garlic....

--

Ray Barkalow - First Rays Orchids - www.firstrays.com
Plants, Supplies, Books, Artwork, and Lots of Free Info!

.. . . . . . . . . . .
"Ted Byers" wrote in message
.. .

"Geir Harris Hedemark" wrote in message
...
"Ted Byers" writes:
computer located in or adjacent to the kitchen. I will grant that the
keyboard can be done away with (as can the mouse) by resorting to a
touch
screen, but that makes entering a new recipe tedious at best. With
software

You would also need a power washer to clean the gunk off the touch
screen if you are anything like me when cooking.

;-)

When I cook, I tend to wash my hands repeatedly, every time I handle a
different food; especially meats. And I clean my work area thoroughly
when
I have finished with a major step in a given recipe. I guess that is a
habit learned from Mom.

Alas, I don't do much cooking any more because I like things a little
diverse and interesting but my sister and neice and nephew prefer things I
find bland and won't eat the kinds of things I'd prepare (if I made a meat
sauce for pasta, they won't eat it if I put in garlic or chili or cumin or
mushrooms or beans or onion ...). :-( And I can't be bothered just
for
me.

We have thought along the same lines, by the way. My employer makes a
customizable XML publishing system. I had thought of using that,
interlinking ingredients and categories to make something you can tell
what you have, and get a list of possible recipes along with skill
level needed and preparation time. This would also make it possible to
get derivatives of sauce hollandaise by navigating the "genealogy" of
recipes.

The single biggest benefit of my product is that it does a thorough
analysis
of the ingredients of a recipe (including especially quantities) in order
to
estimate the nutritional properties of the recipe (e.g. calories, fats,
protein, carbohydrates, sodium, &c.) and supports the entry of limits on
nutrient intake (e.g. at least so many grams/day but not more than this
number of grams/day) and food allergies.

I had thought of using XML, but I post-poned that since I didn't want to
take the time to develop fully fledged XML parsing code. XML is easy,
almost as easy as basic HTML, but the code to manage it isn't.

It hadn't occured to me to add the ability to search the recipes on the
basis of an ingredient list, or to add skill level and preparation time as
fields describing a recipe. I think I'll add that, as well as categories,
to the "premium" version of the product. :-) I am intrigued by the
notion
of interlinking ingredients and categories, but I haven't yet done an
analysis of that kind of feature so I don't yet have a good idea as to how
to implement it.

I already have an old laptop I had figured on using as an LCD screen
donor. I don't want a touch screen. I want a touchpad which is easily
detached from the LCD and which can be cleaned by washing under
running water (epoxy is your friend, at least at a steady 22C), chassi
would be a homegrown fibreglass/carbon fibre molding with Daddys
Heatsink on the back, eliminating the need for a fan and the fan
opening, which is a good way for water to get inside. The recipes
would be located on the stationary box, which has a keyboard. IP
interconnection by 802.11b, which just leaves the power cord for the
laptop/webpad thingy. Power outlets are readily available in fully
sealed variants. I don't work designing military electronics any more,
which is a hassle. A handful of weatherproof connectors and a few
metres of sealing gaskets would come in handy. There seems to be no
limit to the amount of money stuff like that can cost when you buy a
few at a time.

I don't normally want a touch screen. Using it is usually a royal PITA
when
it comes to designing a user friendly interface that doesn't care if there
is a keyboard attached or not.

I like your design, but I don't know enough about hardware to hazard
making
one of my own (plus, as a result of a diabetes related neuropathy, I am
slowly losing my manual dexterity). When it comes to hardware, I rely on
my
brother-in-law to handle the details.

The problem is time. The problem is always time.

Ah yes. You ARE prone to understatement, aren't you?!?!?! ;-)

Cheers,

Ted

Maybe I got lucky, or have weird kids - mine wouldn't even touch most meats
until I started going nuts with garlic....

--

Ray Barkalow - First Rays Orchids - www.firstrays.com
Plants, Supplies, Books, Artwork, and Lots of Free Info!

.. . . . . . . . . . .
"Ted Byers" wrote in message
.. .

"Geir Harris Hedemark" wrote in message
...
"Ted Byers" writes:
computer located in or adjacent to the kitchen. I will grant that the
keyboard can be done away with (as can the mouse) by resorting to a
touch
screen, but that makes entering a new recipe tedious at best. With
software

You would also need a power washer to clean the gunk off the touch
screen if you are anything like me when cooking.

;-)

When I cook, I tend to wash my hands repeatedly, every time I handle a
different food; especially meats. And I clean my work area thoroughly
when
I have finished with a major step in a given recipe. I guess that is a
habit learned from Mom.

Alas, I don't do much cooking any more because I like things a little
diverse and interesting but my sister and neice and nephew prefer things I
find bland and won't eat the kinds of things I'd prepare (if I made a meat
sauce for pasta, they won't eat it if I put in garlic or chili or cumin or
mushrooms or beans or onion ...). :-( And I can't be bothered just
for
me.

We have thought along the same lines, by the way. My employer makes a
customizable XML publishing system. I had thought of using that,
interlinking ingredients and categories to make something you can tell
what you have, and get a list of possible recipes along with skill
level needed and preparation time. This would also make it possible to
get derivatives of sauce hollandaise by navigating the "genealogy" of
recipes.

The single biggest benefit of my product is that it does a thorough
analysis
of the ingredients of a recipe (including especially quantities) in order
to
estimate the nutritional properties of the recipe (e.g. calories, fats,
protein, carbohydrates, sodium, &c.) and supports the entry of limits on
nutrient intake (e.g. at least so many grams/day but not more than this
number of grams/day) and food allergies.

I had thought of using XML, but I post-poned that since I didn't want to
take the time to develop fully fledged XML parsing code. XML is easy,
almost as easy as basic HTML, but the code to manage it isn't.

It hadn't occured to me to add the ability to search the recipes on the
basis of an ingredient list, or to add skill level and preparation time as
fields describing a recipe. I think I'll add that, as well as categories,
to the "premium" version of the product. :-) I am intrigued by the
notion
of interlinking ingredients and categories, but I haven't yet done an
analysis of that kind of feature so I don't yet have a good idea as to how
to implement it.

I already have an old laptop I had figured on using as an LCD screen
donor. I don't want a touch screen. I want a touchpad which is easily
detached from the LCD and which can be cleaned by washing under
running water (epoxy is your friend, at least at a steady 22C), chassi
would be a homegrown fibreglass/carbon fibre molding with Daddys
Heatsink on the back, eliminating the need for a fan and the fan
opening, which is a good way for water to get inside. The recipes
would be located on the stationary box, which has a keyboard. IP
interconnection by 802.11b, which just leaves the power cord for the
laptop/webpad thingy. Power outlets are readily available in fully
sealed variants. I don't work designing military electronics any more,
which is a hassle. A handful of weatherproof connectors and a few
metres of sealing gaskets would come in handy. There seems to be no
limit to the amount of money stuff like that can cost when you buy a
few at a time.

I don't normally want a touch screen. Using it is usually a royal PITA
when
it comes to designing a user friendly interface that doesn't care if there
is a keyboard attached or not.

I like your design, but I don't know enough about hardware to hazard
making
one of my own (plus, as a result of a diabetes related neuropathy, I am
slowly losing my manual dexterity). When it comes to hardware, I rely on
my
brother-in-law to handle the details.

The problem is time. The problem is always time.

Ah yes. You ARE prone to understatement, aren't you?!?!?! ;-)

Cheers,

Ted

"Geir Harris Hedemark" wrote in message
...
"Ted Byers" writes:
When I cook, I tend to wash my hands repeatedly, every time I handle a
different food; especially meats. And I clean my work area thoroughly
when

And what do you do when you are handling a dough? You can't keep
washing your hands every time you touch it, can you?

No. But I work in the kitchen in a manner similar to how I used to work in
a wet lab. I'd have everything that I need paid out in an orderly fashion,
wash my hands before beginning a given procedure, start and finish the
procedure, and then wash my hands again. I almost never interrupt a given
procedure, but if it is necessary, I'd wash my hands before and after the
interruption also. One of the advantages of working in a wetlab was that
interruptions are not tolerable (at least in most situations I have seen)
and no-one interrupts because everyone there knows that any interruption in
many procedures will result in the entire effort being scrapped and started
over.

Alas, I don't do much cooking any more because I like things a little
diverse and interesting but my sister and neice and nephew prefer things
I
find bland and won't eat the kinds of things I'd prepare (if I made a
meat
sauce for pasta, they won't eat it if I put in garlic or chili or cumin
or
mushrooms or beans or onion ...). :-( And I can't be bothered just
for
me.

Not even onions? You _are_ in trouble.

Yep. But I suspect it is, in part, a consequence of how their father's
mother cooks. You wouldn't believe some of the aweful things she prepares.
But to be fair, there are some things she prepares that are quite nice.
They're just fewer in number than the disgusting things she'd feed the kids.

Sometimes there's reasons why a kid is finicky. And my sister is rather
indulgent.

The single biggest benefit of my product is that it does a thorough
analysis
of the ingredients of a recipe (including especially quantities) in
order to
estimate the nutritional properties of the recipe (e.g. calories, fats,
protein, carbohydrates, sodium, &c.) and supports the entry of limits on
nutrient intake (e.g. at least so many grams/day but not more than this
number of grams/day) and food allergies.

I can't see why I need this function, but I may of course be wrong. I
eat more or less whatever I want. Luckily, I am fond of healthy
food. If I had liked chips, french fries or other fatty foods, I would
be in trouble.

I became aware of it as a consequence of being diabetic. While there are
now some cookbooks with recipes where some of this information is provided,
they are of no help with things like Grandma's favourite butter tart recipe,
or with my efforts to modify it so that the revised version doesn't put my
blood sugar ten times higher than it is supposed to be. And on checking, I
found plenty of other health issues affected by diet. Then I recalled that
my mother had trouble finding and preparing foods that my father could eat
(because he was often ill, and had chronic problems greatly influenced by
diet). She would complain that she didn't know what or how to cook for him
because it seemed that no matter what she prepared, someone told her that he
couldn't eat it because it was bad for him. It seemed to me that if she had
had a product like this, and obtained instructions from her physician
regarding what the minimum and maximum daily intake for each nutrient should
be given Dad's health, she could rather easily find recipes and construct
meal plans that would have met Dad's dietary needs. But in adition to those
who have diet related health issues, there are increasing numbers of people
taking steps toward improved health by taking some preventative measures
such as exercising and studying healthy eating (according to the latest data
I saw, some 80% of folk in north america have done something along this line
in the past year). Many people may not need such a feature, but it seems
there are plenty of people who would be interested in it.

I had thought of using XML, but I post-poned that since I didn't want to
take the time to develop fully fledged XML parsing code. XML is easy,
almost as easy as basic HTML, but the code to manage it isn't.

This is why people use things like xerces, xalan, xpath and the
like. You do _not_ want to write your own parser. I like the ability
to be able to say "give me the nodes that has a "keywords" element
attached containing a "keyword" element with the word "indian" in it".

There are no production-quality (as I define production-quality) free
as in beer XML databases out there yet. This is probably the biggest
problem to my solution. Xindice is getting close. Hibernate may help
out, though, but I would think there is a need to serialize the xml to
text for storage. I haven't tried yet. YMMV.

My opinions may be skewed. We are an all-objects, all-xml shop.

Isn't everyone's? Almost all of the development I have done in recent years
has been in C++ and very object oriented. I do do some structured and
procedural programming when the occassion calls for it, but most of that is
now deeply embedded in some class. While I am very familiar with VB and
Java, I find the object model in VB seriously broken and the Java runtime a
major performance problem (but Java is a very interesting language - it just
doesn't have much utility in the kinds of programming I do).

Are you familiar with SQL? If so, how would an XML database provide an
advantage over combining SQL with C++ and perhaps COM/DCOM? I can see how
one can relatively easily find all objects satisfying your search criterion
using SQL and C++ and a suitable class inheritance tree (and one of the
things making it easy is the availability of the STL in C++ and the power of
SQL).

Cheers,

Ted

"Ted Byers" writes:
interruptions are not tolerable (at least in most situations I have seen)
and no-one interrupts because everyone there knows that any interruption in
many procedures will result in the entire effort being scrapped and started
over.

You must be fond of souffles.

they are of no help with things like Grandma's favourite butter tart recipe,
or with my efforts to modify it so that the revised version doesn't put my
blood sugar ten times higher than it is supposed to be. And on checking, I

I guess you have a problem with the apples themselves, then.

diet). She would complain that she didn't know what or how to cook for him
because it seemed that no matter what she prepared, someone told her that he
couldn't eat it because it was bad for him. It seemed to me that if she had
had a product like this, and obtained instructions from her physician
regarding what the minimum and maximum daily intake for each nutrient should
be given Dad's health, she could rather easily find recipes and construct
meal plans that would have met Dad's dietary needs. But in adition to those

You are now assuming that we know the full and final truth about
nutritional needs.

If you look ten years back in time, it is easy to see how things have
progressed. I can't see any reason why todays answers aren't wrong
tomorrow.

This is why I think most people should eat a varied diet. People who
tell you to eat something or other usually have a book to sell.

Isn't everyone's? Almost all of the development I have done in recent years
has been in C++ and very object oriented. I do do some structured and

C++ went out of style around here in the early 1990s. Come to think of
it, it never really took off. Awful language, by the way. It feels
like C with a huge great big roof rack on top where are the objects
are kept, making the whole thing waddle through corners.

Java, I find the object model in VB seriously broken and the Java runtime a
major performance problem (but Java is a very interesting language - it just
doesn't have much utility in the kinds of programming I do).

Performance problem? Strange. I can't see more than a 10 or 20%
degradation over using vanilla C. CPUs are inexpensive. Out-of-control
pointer bugs are not.

I wouldn't use Java for low-level OS stuff. For a recipe database, I
think it is a good match. That may be because I use Java every day.

Are you familiar with SQL? If so, how would an XML database provide an
advantage over combining SQL with C++ and perhaps COM/DCOM? I can see how

The query bits of SQL is a relational query language. If something
can't be expressed in terms of static relations, you are out of luck.

The inverse problem also applies - XML is, IMNSHO, truly awful at
efficient static relations.

XQuery may be what XML bigots are waiting for. I am not holding my
breath. I will build the best solutions I can right now with the tools
that are available.

one can relatively easily find all objects satisfying your search criterion
using SQL and C++ and a suitable class inheritance tree (and one of the
things making it easy is the availability of the STL in C++ and the power of
SQL).

How do you propose to do this while at the same time allowing the
user to define his own relations? You place some constraints on the
top-level nodes ("I want a keywords node around here somewhere if it
exists") the rest is left as a user-defined application space.

I sincerely hope you are not telling me you want to create tables for
every node the user may want to dream up on the fly. That
would be maintenance hell.

Many people split things. The topmost information is kept in
relational tables, the rest is put into blobs or object databases as
XML or something else that may be adapted by the user.

Geir

"Geir Harris Hedemark" wrote in message
...
"Ted Byers" writes:
interruptions are not tolerable (at least in most situations I have
seen)
and no-one interrupts because everyone there knows that any interruption
in
many procedures will result in the entire effort being scrapped and
started
over.

You must be fond of souffles.

Can't say that I've tried them. But there are a geat many things, both in
the kitchen and in the wetlab, where an interruption can cause trouble. In
the kitchen, one of the common consequences of interruptions is that the
item burned.

they are of no help with things like Grandma's favourite butter tart
recipe,
or with my efforts to modify it so that the revised version doesn't put
my
blood sugar ten times higher than it is supposed to be. And on
checking, I

I guess you have a problem with the apples themselves, then.

Actually, I have to watch almost all fruits because of their sugar content,
as well as starchy foods (almost all root crops) because of their starch.
Beets are so high in sugar and starch that I can almost never have them, and
I love them. Nothing is trictly forbidden, but quantities haveto be vry
carefully controlled.

diet). She would complain that she didn't know what or how to cook for
him
because it seemed that no matter what she prepared, someone told her
that he
couldn't eat it because it was bad for him. It seemed to me that if she
had
had a product like this, and obtained instructions from her physician
regarding what the minimum and maximum daily intake for each nutrient
should
be given Dad's health, she could rather easily find recipes and
construct
meal plans that would have met Dad's dietary needs. But in adition to
those

You are now assuming that we know the full and final truth about
nutritional needs.

No I don't.

I assume only that the measurements that have been taken of nutrient content
for a given food are reasonably accurate. It is to be expected that there
will be some error in them, though. So we're talking about estimates; not
claims that a given number represents "the TRUTH" with respect to the
nutrient content in a given food.

If you look ten years back in time, it is easy to see how things have
progressed. I can't see any reason why todays answers aren't wrong
tomorrow.

When it gets right down to it, todays answers are wrong today! The
existence of error in empirical data is inevitable. But that doesn't mean
we don't try to do the best we can with the data presently available.

This is why I think most people should eat a varied diet. People who
tell you to eat something or other usually have a book to sell.

You are quite right. A varied diet is indispensible.

This isn't an effort to tell anyone what to eat or not eat.

Rather, it is only to provide the best available information about the
nutrient content of given foods.

It is up to the individual to get advice from his primary health care
provider as to what the daily recommended intake ought to be for each
nutrient; and I have no doubt that that advice will change through time, but
that does not affect how my product would, or could, be used. In fact, I am
planning a custom version for the health care industry in which the user can
maintain a log of what is eaten, what medication is taken, what kinds of
health issues have arisen and when and for how long, &c., so that primary
health care providers can have sufficient data to examine how a given
patient responds to given foods and medications and combinations thereof.

Isn't everyone's? Almost all of the development I have done in recent
years
has been in C++ and very object oriented. I do do some structured and

C++ went out of style around here in the early 1990s. Come to think of
it, it never really took off. Awful language, by the way. It feels
like C with a huge great big roof rack on top where are the objects
are kept, making the whole thing waddle through corners.

That is debatable. I don't mind C either. Like all languages, there are
nasty synactic corners, but overall, it is the most useful language I have
studied, with Perl being a close second.

Java, I find the object model in VB seriously broken and the Java
runtime a
major performance problem (but Java is a very interesting language - it
just
doesn't have much utility in the kinds of programming I do).

Performance problem? Strange. I can't see more than a 10 or 20%
degradation over using vanilla C. CPUs are inexpensive. Out-of-control
pointer bugs are not.

That depends very much on what you're doing. The bulk of my work has
involved intensive number crunching and simulation modelling. Between the
overhead of the runtime and the programming idioms supported, I have
personally observed improvement in performance, WRT a JAVA version of a
product, of a factor of well over 100: simulations that took several hours
in the Java version ran to completion in seconds when I reimplemented the
program in C++. One of the big factors proved to be supported idioms;
idioms that could be used trivially easily that would have been quite
painful to adapt to Java. Yes, I know both Java and C++ are Turing
complete, so anything that can be done in one can be done in the other in
theory, but that sidesteps the important issue practicability.

If I were developing a distributed database application, the runtime
overhead would probably not be an issue for a network or website that
doesn't see enormous amounts of traffic.

If a given application has out of control pointer bugs, that speaks directly
to the competence of the team that developed it; not the utility of being
able to use pointers.

I wouldn't use Java for low-level OS stuff. For a recipe database, I
think it is a good match. That may be because I use Java every day.

That is quite possible.

Please note I am NOT saying that Java is a bad language; only that it isn't
appropriate for most of the development I do.

As a point of fact, I am looking at a new database development that will
likely use Java applets for client side processing and PHP+SQL for server
side processing, along with some server side development using either C++ or
fortran (for the number crunching requirements). This project is, in fact,
a database that will include a substantial amount of orchid data (along with
comparable data for all other plants as well as animals).

Are you familiar with SQL? If so, how would an XML database provide an
advantage over combining SQL with C++ and perhaps COM/DCOM? I can see
how

The query bits of SQL is a relational query language. If something
can't be expressed in terms of static relations, you are out of luck.

The inverse problem also applies - XML is, IMNSHO, truly awful at
efficient static relations.

OK, so a little multiparadigm analysis will show that for one part of a
given development, one would use SQL and XML for a different part of it;
given their current strengths and weaknesses. I have no qualms about mixed
language development.

one can relatively easily find all objects satisfying your search
criterion
using SQL and C++ and a suitable class inheritance tree (and one of the
things making it easy is the availability of the STL in C++ and the
power of
SQL).

How do you propose to do this while at the same time allowing the
user to define his own relations? You place some constraints on the
top-level nodes ("I want a keywords node around here somewhere if it
exists") the rest is left as a user-defined application space.

This really isn't an onerous problem. It just takes careful design;
something I have plenty of experience with. Some of my more successful
applications not oly supported but required theuser to establish
relationships for themselves. A careful analysis of what is required (along
with the features of, and idioms supported by, C++ ;-) would show how
simple this really is. In this case, the static relations would be
maintained using SQL, and the dynamic ones by C++. I haven't done the
analysis required to know if what is to be done here using C++ could in
principle be supported by SQL with a suitable abstraction.

I sincerely hope you are not telling me you want to create tables for
every node the user may want to dream up on the fly. That
would be maintenance hell.

Nope! Not a chance! But tables are not the only tool in the toolbox.

Many people split things. The topmost information is kept in
relational tables, the rest is put into blobs or object databases as
XML or something else that may be adapted by the user.

The very act that some relational information might be stored in blobs or
object databases suggests a possible approach to using a mixture of C++ and
SQL to obtain the functionality you require.

These issues are faced in the interaction between orchid growers and
taxonomists all the time when the latter decide to cause us trouble by
changing how species are classified. Relationships are changed, and so hard
coding such information is problematic. I have an advantage in this because
of the importance of numerical taxonomy in my background. But there are
ways around dynamic relationships, even if one is using the mix of languages
I intend to use in my next database project.

Cheers,

Ted

"Ted Byers" writes:
It is up to the individual to get advice from his primary health care
provider as to what the daily recommended intake ought to be for each

In my case, my doctor also tries to sell me books and
stories. *grumble*

He _will_ be swapped for someone else if I actually need serious
medical care.

That is debatable. I don't mind C either. Like all languages, there are
nasty synactic corners, but overall, it is the most useful language I have
studied, with Perl being a close second.

Perl is nice for small scale stuff that needs to be done in a
hurry. We were in for quite a ride when we tried to do a 2000+ line
publication engine in it.

I cut my teeth on Simula. Ole Johan Dahl and Kristen Nygaard were some
of my tutors. That may have caused my innate hate of all things
C++-ish.

Performance problem? Strange. I can't see more than a 10 or 20%
degradation over using vanilla C. CPUs are inexpensive. Out-of-control
pointer bugs are not.
That depends very much on what you're doing. The bulk of my work has
involved intensive number crunching and simulation modelling. Between the

In that case, Java is out. No discussion.

painful to adapt to Java. Yes, I know both Java and C++ are Turing
complete, so anything that can be done in one can be done in the other in
theory, but that sidesteps the important issue practicability.

Yes, they are theoretically equivalent, but not necessarily in the
same time frame.

As a point of fact, I am looking at a new database development that will
likely use Java applets for client side processing and PHP+SQL for server

I don't envy you that task. Applets are notoriously hard to do in such
a way that they actually work consistently with what passes for
browsers in Redmond and elsewhere.

Geir

"Geir Harris Hedemark" wrote in message
...
"Ted Byers" writes:
It is up to the individual to get advice from his primary health care
provider as to what the daily recommended intake ought to be for each

In my case, my doctor also tries to sell me books and
stories. *grumble*

He _will_ be swapped for someone else if I actually need serious
medical care.

This presupposes there are doctors available who are taking on new patients.
My diabetes is being taken care of by the specialist who made the diagnosis
yeas ago because I have yet to find a doctor in this area who is taking on
new patients.

That is debatable. I don't mind C either. Like all languages, there
are
nasty synactic corners, but overall, it is the most useful language I
have
studied, with Perl being a close second.

Perl is nice for small scale stuff that needs to be done in a
hurry. We were in for quite a ride when we tried to do a 2000+ line
publication engine in it.


Is that all? ;-) The smallest commercial application I have worked on
required 20,000+ LOC, while 100,000 is more typical. You must have had
quite the library to be able to do something with so little code! Come to
think of it, it seems to me that the library that comes with the latest
version of Perl is quite large: a great many more features than anythng
shipped with any C++ compiler.

I cut my teeth on Simula. Ole Johan Dahl and Kristen Nygaard were some
of my tutors. That may have caused my innate hate of all things
C++-ish.

;-)

While I DO do comparisons of languages, for the purpose of multiparadigm
development, I tend to avoid language wars since every computer programming
language I have seen has its uses. EVEN VB has a role as a pwerful
scripting language for MS Office. But it doesn't have a significant role
elsewhere, IMHO.

[snip]
painful to adapt to Java. Yes, I know both Java and C++ are Turing
complete, so anything that can be done in one can be done in the other
in
theory, but that sidesteps the important issue practicability.

Yes, they are theoretically equivalent, but not necessarily in the
same time frame.

Yes, everything that can be done in C++ can be done in assembler, but the
project I finished last year (after three years, and six man-years of
effort) would probably not have been completed in my lifetime had anyone
been silly enough to try to develop it in assembler. But that project has
so far brought to the company for which I developed it over $800,000 since
it was finished, and at least another $700,000 is expected from it this
year.

As a point of fact, I am looking at a new database development that will
likely use Java applets for client side processing and PHP+SQL for
server

I don't envy you that task. Applets are notoriously hard to do in such
a way that they actually work consistently with what passes for
browsers in Redmond and elsewhere.

Alas, my options are limited. I like VBScript and JScript even less than
VB. And ActiveX controls in a web page are problematic since so many of
them introduce major security risks. What else is there for client side
processing? While I don't LIKE the idea, I see no opton other than to test
for the version of the Java runtime on the client machine and, if it is too
old, direct the user to keep the version of the runtime he's using up to
date. At least with Java, I don't have to worry about whether or not the
user is running Windows or Linux or something else.

Cheers,

Ted

"Ted Byers" writes:
This presupposes there are doctors available who are taking on new patients.
My diabetes is being taken care of by the specialist who made the diagnosis
yeas ago because I have yet to find a doctor in this area who is taking on
new patients.

Norway is a bit easier in that respect. There is an abundance of
doctors (good ones seem to be hard to find, though), and seeing a
general practitioner costs something on the order of $15 for the first
consultation - the doc gets more money from the state for having you
on "his list". After you spend a couple of hundred this way, the state
foots the rest of the bill. A number of drugs that are judged to be
essential are also included in this sum - insulin is one of them.

Hospitals are free, but you have to wait your turn. This can take a
while.

The tax rates are a bit higher than would be feasible in the US, and
there is a significant amount of money from the petroleum industry
that goes into providing this service.

required 20,000+ LOC, while 100,000 is more typical. You must have had
quite the library to be able to do something with so little code! Come to

It is amazing what you can cram into a line of Perl. If you search for
"obfuscated perl contest Gisle Aas" you will find an entry made by a
guy I have worked with. Luckily, his production code is beautiful.

Our problem was more a - compact - data model. Hashes of arrays are
fun only in limited amounts, and the free-form syntax of Perl gives
you new and unexpected ways of shooting yourself in the foot. "perl
-w" gives only so much aid.

Alas, my options are limited. I like VBScript and JScript even less than
VB. And ActiveX controls in a web page are problematic since so many of
them introduce major security risks. What else is there for client side
processing? While I don't LIKE the idea, I see no opton other than to test

Nothing. I just said I am glad I am not you.

date. At least with Java, I don't have to worry about whether or not the
user is running Windows or Linux or something else.

I don't think this is true. Our friends over at Redmond usually manage
to put subtle features in their browsers which make it necessary to
put adaptations into code that should run within the browser
environment.

If you find a way to do applets reliably without having duplicate test
platforms, please tell me.

Geir

"Rob Halgren" wrote in message
...
This is precisely why I drink diet soda instead of coffee. I can
still read the keys, and they don't stick to my fingers. Otherwise I'd
be skroood. *grin*

But you still need to take care. A fellow I worked with maintained a home
ofice, and routinely let his five year old aughter play games on office
computers. On one occassion, he allowed her to have a soda and play on the
company's NEWEST computer. The soda was placed a little too near the new
computer's keyboard. You can guess what happened. A little elbow came a
little too close to the glass. Everything in the computer was fried:
motherboard, video card, everything. But he realized his own folly in
letting her have soda so close to the company's computers, so he didn't
scold her or take any action to discipline her, and he was willing to
replace the ocmpany's computer at his own expense. Can you imagine
replacing a machine you've had for less than one week in this circumstances?

The electrolytes in soda are high enough that it is an extremely good
conductor of electricity, and thus it is very effective at shorting out any
circuit it is poured over.

The ONLY way your keyboard is going to be really safe is if a) you ban
liquids from within a metre of the keyboard, or b) you install a keyboard
condom (a flexible plastic envelop molded to the shape of your keyboard -
flexible so that you can type with it in place, but guaranteed to keep
liquids out of your keyboard unless it is torn or punctured).

Cheers,

Ted

"Rob Halgren" wrote in message
...
This is precisely why I drink diet soda instead of coffee. I can
still read the keys, and they don't stick to my fingers. Otherwise I'd
be skroood. *grin*

But you still need to take care. A fellow I worked with maintained a home
ofice, and routinely let his five year old aughter play games on office
computers. On one occassion, he allowed her to have a soda and play on the
company's NEWEST computer. The soda was placed a little too near the new
computer's keyboard. You can guess what happened. A little elbow came a
little too close to the glass. Everything in the computer was fried:
motherboard, video card, everything. But he realized his own folly in
letting her have soda so close to the company's computers, so he didn't
scold her or take any action to discipline her, and he was willing to
replace the ocmpany's computer at his own expense. Can you imagine
replacing a machine you've had for less than one week in this circumstances?

The electrolytes in soda are high enough that it is an extremely good
conductor of electricity, and thus it is very effective at shorting out any
circuit it is poured over.

The ONLY way your keyboard is going to be really safe is if a) you ban
liquids from within a metre of the keyboard, or b) you install a keyboard
condom (a flexible plastic envelop molded to the shape of your keyboard -
flexible so that you can type with it in place, but guaranteed to keep
liquids out of your keyboard unless it is torn or punctured).

Cheers,

Ted

"Rob Halgren" wrote in message
...
This is precisely why I drink diet soda instead of coffee. I can
still read the keys, and they don't stick to my fingers. Otherwise I'd
be skroood. *grin*

But you still need to take care. A fellow I worked with maintained a home
ofice, and routinely let his five year old aughter play games on office
computers. On one occassion, he allowed her to have a soda and play on the
company's NEWEST computer. The soda was placed a little too near the new
computer's keyboard. You can guess what happened. A little elbow came a
little too close to the glass. Everything in the computer was fried:
motherboard, video card, everything. But he realized his own folly in
letting her have soda so close to the company's computers, so he didn't
scold her or take any action to discipline her, and he was willing to
replace the ocmpany's computer at his own expense. Can you imagine
replacing a machine you've had for less than one week in this circumstances?

The electrolytes in soda are high enough that it is an extremely good
conductor of electricity, and thus it is very effective at shorting out any
circuit it is poured over.

The ONLY way your keyboard is going to be really safe is if a) you ban
liquids from within a metre of the keyboard, or b) you install a keyboard
condom (a flexible plastic envelop molded to the shape of your keyboard -
flexible so that you can type with it in place, but guaranteed to keep
liquids out of your keyboard unless it is torn or punctured).

Cheers,

Ted

The ONLY way your keyboard is going to be really safe is if a) you ban
liquids from within a metre of the keyboard, or b) you install a keyboard
condom (a flexible plastic envelop molded to the shape of your keyboard -
flexible so that you can type with it in place, but guaranteed to keep
liquids out of your keyboard unless it is torn or punctured).



ACKKK!!! First carpal tunnel and now I can't even drink the
programmer's friend? (Diet Mountain Dew...) I'm going to have to build
that greenhouse now, it is all over for me as a computer jockey.

Rob

--
Rob's Rules: http://www.msu.edu/~halgren
1) There is always room for one more orchid
2) There is always room for two more orchids
2a. See rule 1
3) When one has insufficient credit to purchase
more orchids, obtain more credit