8751
Borland C++ Builder Contest / Re: Entering SMIRF 8x8 + 10x8 Chess Program
« Last post by f0dder on April 10, 2006, 02:30 PM »Nice to see your entry, Reinhard 
Recent Posts
a) one could interprete that, as if I would have intended the source to be seen by a lot of people;
b) I use to comment my sources using my own (German) language, not willing to translate it into every other relevant language;
that is fine, but where in the rules could I find the names of all people, who will be authorized to look into contributed program's sources? And why is in not sufficient to simply verify their compilability?Good point, didn't think of that. But I assume that sources would only have to be looked through by one or two persons (mouser and perhaps a borland guy). And why not just verify their compilability? Because somebody might implement a backdoor or other malicious code in their program. Consider that the programs from this contest will probably reach a *lot* of users, that would be a perfect occasion to sneak in a backdoor. Paranoia? Perhaps. But better being a bit paranoid than risk legal problems.
Maybe I have got the wrong impression from some postings, that the contest seems to be interested more in sources than in resulting programs.I don't care about the sources, and my impression was that it's indeed about the resulting programs, with source screening just to avoid bad code.
If after such a verification all transferred source code would be deleted and the people involved would be made known to the programmer it could be an acceptable compromise.That sounds fair to me as well. If I had a closed-source program I wouldn't accept other people looking at my source except under similar conditions.
They are fast but is that sacrificing accuracy - 'board' for 'bored' wouldn't be picked up by a spell check so careful checking would be required - if that checking was included in the time taken to complete the typing task ...-Carol Haynes (April 09, 2006, 03:12 AM)
- I do make lots of mistakes when speedtyping, but they're more of the "real" typo kind., and I bet people who are less fluent in English (and french) will have trouble understanding it...
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storm_P
I hope so-f0dder (April 05, 2006, 05:06 AM)
Maybe a sign of my age but ... I thought all hard drives have odd bad sectors. Low level formatting with the drive manufacturers tools hide them from the user but there will always be odd sectors that go bad for one reason or another over time without the drive necessarily dying - this is especially tru of the large format drives available now.-Carol Haynes (April 07, 2006, 10:49 AM)
Here's a little something -- upgrading the version of fsekrit. A utility would be handy, as upgrading a bunch of files is going to be a bit tedious!This is something that I have been thinking of myself. I'm already considering a "mass convert .txt -> .exe" utility, perhaps that could be suitable for version upgrading as well. I'm not entirely sure on how to construct it, though... I can understand that many people will be using the same password for all files, even if it's somewhat of a security risk. Oh well, once I add salt and random-block-prefix, it will be much less of an issue.
- let's see if we can rally a few more members from the winasm community? Or better, install the Microsoft Visual C++ 2003 toolkit. It's a better compiler, and it's free (as in money, not as in source... but who cares, I bet the majority of you haven't made tweaks to gcc or binutilsInstall MinGW or alike : DevCPP does this for you excellently...That's good, i'll give it a go next time I need to compile C. But by now, and for the next 4 months, I only see Lisp, Pov-Ray, VRML and Java-Gerome (March 16, 2006, 02:41 PM)
Maybe next semester. But thanks by the pointer, it'll surelly be useful!!-jgpaiva (March 16, 2006, 02:51 PM)
).As for Superboyac's problem, I note this from the GetDataBack website: "Recover even when Windows doesn't recognize the drive - GetDataBack can even recover your data when the drive is no longer recognized by Windows. It can likewise be used even if all directory information - not just the root directory- is missing."
Looks like it would be worth a closer look.-Darwin (April 05, 2006, 10:01 PM)