Rocket Man on 2012-10-19 23:28:43.000

comments... hmmm...

Rocket Man on 2012-10-19 23:31:25.000

the subject line doesn't show up at the moment. Will either add it or disable subject lines in comments. Not sure what approach is best...

Rocket Man on 2012-10-19 23:32:20.000

this is a longer one

with returns

and spaces

Rocket Man on 2012-10-19 23:34:28.000

hitting reply button goes to the post box, or at least as close as the page is able to.

Rocketeer on 2012-10-19 23:35:07.000

After your successful test of the emergency message system this is a fun surprise.

Rocketeer on 2012-10-19 23:36:12.000

This
is
a
one
word
per
line
comment.

Rocketeer on 2012-10-19 23:38:20.000

A modern objection raised against scholars impertinent enough to mention nullification today is that it violates the supremacy clause of the Constitution. That clause, found in Article VI, reads: “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.” A state that nullifies a federal law, the objection runs, is therefore at odds with the supremacy clause and is ipso facto engaged in illegitimate behavior. But a nullifying state does not deny the principle that the Constitution and laws made in pursuance thereof are the supreme law of the land. On the contrary, it defends that principle, as it disputes whether the law in question is itself pursuant to the Constitution in the first place. (Moreover, it’s probably safe to assume that Jefferson and his supporters, who knew a little something about the Constitution, were familiar with the supremacy clause.) To give the federal government the exclusive power to determine such matters is a recipe for federal domination. That was Thomas Jefferson’s point. If the federal government is allowed a monopoly on constitutional interpretation—that is, if the states have no real power to contest and resist the federal government’s interpretation—then in effect it gets to determine the extent of its own powers. Human nature being what it is, the federal government will tend to expand its own powers vis-à-vis those of the states as it hands down rulings in favor of itself. How could that be in any way unexpected?

Woods Jr., Thomas E. (2007-07-10). 33 Questions About American History You're Not Supposed to Ask (pp. 27-28). Random House, Inc.. Kindle Edition.

Rocketeer on 2012-10-19 23:39:13.000

newLISP is a LISP-like scripting language for doing things you typically do with scripting languages: programming for the internet, system administration, text processing, gluing other programs together, etc. newLISP is a scripting LISP for people who are fascinated by LISP's beauty and power of expression, but who need it stripped down to easy-to-learn essentials.

Kane-box is built with newLISP, a powerful network scripting language that allows you to quickly and abstractly construct and analyze network packets. Wait, what was that? It's easy to miss the subtle significance of that statement: newLISP allows you to create raw packets for penetration testing just by calling a function with a few arguments. It's a programming language with networking built-in and NOT included as a library. This saves you time by letting you stop copy/pasting your basic network code. Keep it simple and be DRY.

newLISP is extremely small/efficient and ideally suited to a number of network security related tasks.

· A modern built-in API
· Expandable API
· Complete Documentation
· Advanced Automatic Memory Management
· Multiprocessing
· Distributed Computing Support
· 64-bit support
· Fast and lightweight
· Small and portable
· Embeddable
· Internationalized
· Enterprise support
· Parallel processing support
· OS-specific installers
· IDE written using newLISP-GS

Rocket Man on 2012-10-19 23:41:49.000

okay that's pretty awesome...

Rocketeer on 2012-10-20 23:46:15.000

A framework sounds nifty but what does it do? Looking over Ruby on Rails
I found this quote:

"If you want to create frameworks for other languages, don’t start by copying Rails. Instead, understand why Rails works, then see what your target language has to offer and innovate with that."
— Dave Thomas

Does Rockets do this?

Rocket Man on 2012-10-22 17:59:32.000

That's a very open-ended question. What Rockets does (hopefully) is make the tedious and mundane tasks associated with writing web applications much simpler.

Instead of copying Rails, I'm looking at the <b>spirit</b> of Rails, which was made to try and make things easier for developers, and seeing how I can do that. Because I'm a web developer, I primarily want to make life simpler for myself. If I can do that, hopefully it will work for other people as well.

xerxes on 2012-10-29 15:10:30.000

Ok, I am obliging with this ...

Rocket Man on 2012-10-29 21:25:23.000

Welcome, xerxes! Glad to see you here.