Aren't they doing some kind of goofy open source/proprietary differentiation, just like FoundationDB was doing? It looks like "the full copy of HyperDex Warp" (whatever that means) is what people are expected to pay for.
Hyperdex is the result of their ongoing research at Cornell University. They have a commercial spinoff which sells Hyperdex Warp which adds full ACID transactions on hyperdex. So if you don't need full acid transactions, you can use the OSS version, if you want the extra services you have to pay.
It's the same with all software, really: to be able to do a large scale project you have to have funding from somewhere, as you need developers full time working on it to fix/write the stuff no-one wants to fix/write. Some OSS projects get this funding indirectly by sponsored developers who work at company X and write OSS code all day for the project (this is what Linux uses). Other projects are funded by VC money, licenses, support contracts or ads. It's not common a large scale OSS project is successful and stays successful without any funding from the outside.
Thus, if a piece of software gets its funding by selling licenses (like with Hyperdex Warp), it's the same as with a company getting funding by sponsoring: if the cashflow stops, the show ends. In the case of OSS you can grab the sourcecode at least, but in the end, to successfully maintain that it takes a lot of effort most of the time, as the projects are often large, complex and the internals unknown to the user.
finally! looks great and I hope sony doesn't mess this up.
and please make a external monitor version! preferably 24" so I can have a secondary monitor dedicated to word-processing.
even though refresh times might be slow for anything else having an e-paper external monitor for word-processing would make total sense from an ergonomics perspective. a lot of people spend many hours a day writing/editing text and e-paper is much more eye-friendly.
This is not fast, as 13ms is only ~75Hz. I'm not sure why they claim that the results are surprising. What's surprising to me is that they had a test setup that supported only 75Hz.
As for Carmack, I belive he has been onboard for even 200Hz displays for qutie some time already.
could you point to documents explaining proof checking in aerospace industry?
I am especially interested in the history leading to software verification in avionics, the involvement of insurance companies and government regulation.
I actually cannot off hand. I speak from meeting folks in the industry who actually do the proof checking for aeronautical software. Unfortunately some dude's word on the Internet probably isn't very appealing. I'm sure Google would pull something up, though.
adaption of ML style languages suffers from the unfamiliar syntax, the pretty steep learning curve for those trained in imperative dialects at 'java-school'.
at least when it comes to syntax mythryl might someday provide an option. its basically SML/NJ with a c-like syntax and multithreading support. still very much in development but looks promising: mythryl.org
that said Haskell certainly seems to be the winner of the current functional language trend.
I don't think people really care about syntax that much. OCaml, F#, Haskell all have similar looking syntax, Scalla has a particularly ugly one (maybe if it wasn't supposed to be C/Java-like it wouldn't have ended like this).
...the only times I heard people bitching about syntax to the point of staying away from a language for it was either about Lisps ("undistinquishable paren soup") or about Python's significant indentation and lack of multiline lambada. MLs have a pretty familiar math-like syntax and apart from some operators seems "normal looking" even for Java and C programmers.
Mr. Carmack. Linus is famous, but not a particularly good programmer, and doesn't use C over C++ for technical reasons, but for "ability to offend people" reasons.
