What to learn next?

Originally Posted by Village Idiot Isn't someone a little grumpy today?

Yes, in fact, I have to do C++ on linux in the kate editor because eclipse gets out of memory exceptions when trying to compile C++ code.

Also, the following are not programming languages: PHP (scripting language) ASP (scripting language) Javascript (scripting language)

Yes they are. Haven't you tried PHP on the CLR for example? Can access any other class in the framework. ASP's VBScript is a programming language. Javascript is a fullfledged programming language as well. http://www.aptana.com/jaxer (one example of it)

HTML (markup language) CSS (style data) SQL (application with an advanced querying language).

Never said these were programming languages.

Yelling at us for SQL not being a programming language is like yelling at someone for referring to a sedan as a car. SQL is for all intents and purposes, a programming language.

MySQL isn't. It's an application. Is Visual Studio a programming language? Or PostgreSQL? Recursion panic! I said SQL was a data manipulation language. SQL in a database is also a data specification language and then with stored procedures and flow control constructs it becomes a programming language, as you say.

Another thing, t-SQL can only in theory be applied to all SQL databases, in practice they must be converted (I had to convert about 200 at work some time ago from MySQL to SQL, don't try and tell me that they are compatible).

Yes, there are dialects, but what's your point? I never said they weren't programming languages as much as I never said they were.

SELECT * FROM users;
if users is a table,
works on both PostgreSQL, MySQL and MS SQL as far as I'm concerned. That MySQL has - INNER JOIN t USING `attribute`, while MS SQL would require you to do an explicit - ON t.attribute = t1.attribute doesn't really matter much in my opinion, when we are talking about learning SQL, since MySQL also supports the ON notation which how you learn it initially anyway (unless you talk about theta or equivalence joins an relational algebra, in which case you need the two tuples to be union compatible and then you can simply do a NATURAL JOIN (postgresql can do that)).

As far as I'm concerned, an operating system is a big program. It's run with the same fetch-execute cycle as any other program, besides that the CPU has hooks for virtual memory, interrupts and traps which not normal programs in user space have access to, but only because of the layered security model in operating systems (which if you take an operating system like singularity, doesn't exist, instead they have software isolated processes). Care to tell me why it's not?

Originally Posted by echoSwe As far as I'm concerned, an operating system is a big program. It's run with the same fetch-execute cycle as any other program, besides that the CPU has hooks for virtual memory, interrupts and traps which not normal programs in user space have access to, but only because of the layered security model in operating systems (which if you take an operating system like singularity, doesn't exist, instead they have software isolated processes). Care to tell me why it's not?

Our difference is just that of semantics it seems. In my view, an OS is a collection of programs, libraries and tools that offers an abstraction to the hardware (through the kernel). Its true, an OS facilitates the programming of the processor, but strictly calling it a program is like calling a consortium a company. In effect, a consortium is not a company, but rather multiple companies acting together.

Anyway, when linking to that post I was referring more to the general advice in the thread. I just linked to the first post with misleading information. There are many more examples like this I've run into recently, this was just one from this community that I read through only minutes before.

Originally Posted by unclekyky Our difference is just that of semantics it seems. In my view, an OS is a collection of programs, libraries and tools that offers an abstraction to the hardware (through the kernel). Its true, an OS facilitates the programming of the processor, but strictly calling it a program is like calling a consortium a company. In effect, a consortium is not a company, but rather multiple companies acting together. Anyway, when linking to that post I was referring more to the general advice in the thread. I just linked to the first post with misleading information. There are many more examples like this I've run into recently, this was just one from this community that I read through only minutes before.

So you're saying operating systems have to be big? By what standard? What about mobile/sensor networks/smart dust research operating systems? Aren't they operating systems? http://www.tinyos.net/ for example? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tinyos It's 579 812 bytes long, in its current size. I would wager to say, that's not a big collection of programs. And what about monolithic kernels where most of the actual OS is in kernel space?

Originally Posted by echoSwe So you're saying operating systems have to be big? By what standard? What about mobile/sensor networks/smart dust research operating systems? Aren't they operating systems? http://www.tinyos.net/ for example? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tinyos It's 579 812 bytes long, in its current size. I would wager to say, that's not a big collection of programs. And what about monolithic kernels where most of the actual OS is in kernel space?

I don't recall ever saying anything about how large an OS needs to be. You did though

Originally Posted by echoSwe As far as I'm concerned, an operating system is a big program.