Hi Richard, Thanks. I do have the VS2010 Express Edition at home. (I also have the 2010 Pro Edition at work, though for reasons like backward compatibility and all, I don't end up using it a lot.) However, the habit of using MFC and ATL is hard to break, and the absence of even ATL in Express Edition was a noticeable inconvenience. So, I was thinking of buying the Pro edition also for use at home, esp. now that they announced AMP right in VS 2010, too. Anyway, as Dango's reply (below) indicates, I will wait and watch for some time before actually buying the Pro version. Best, --Ajit [E&OE]

---------- http://www.JadhavResearch.net

Hi Dango, I do have the VS2010 express edition. I will begin with PPL and concrt. I also have some idea about the lambda calculus; thanks for highlighting its importance in using the AMP. Also, I wasn't aware of Thrust at all. I will look it up. All in all, thanks for a neat and informative reply. Best, --Ajit [E&OE]

---------- http://www.JadhavResearch.net

This is a request for MS "insider" info. At home, I've been using VC++ 6 Pro for all these years (> a decade). Postponed buying a new version out of many reasons, e.g. being out of money and job. (I did talk about it in 2001 at The Lounge here, while I was still in the SF Bay Area---but without any success. (Some (past) graduate students of astronomy/astrophysics from CA (probably of the Republican party disposition) might say: "of course!" (though party lines hardly seem to matter in such things, as far as Americans etc. and I go). And, BTW, MS Research had an office in the SF Bay Area right back then. And, BTW, I did support MS during the DoJ case times. I have learnt my lessons---and have begun using these too, say, as via exposing the dishonest money/prestige/reputation grabbers, whether at MS or at SUN/Oracle/etc., or from elsewhere.) Alright. Recently, I began thinking of buying Visual Studio 10 Pro. Then, I came across the recent C++ AMP announcements, e.g. here [^]. My questions are: When is C++ AMP actually coming? Why is there no excitement about it here at CodeProject? (Googling on "C++ AMP CodeProject" returns nothing.) How well would C++ AMP be integrated with VS 10? When? Is a newer version of VS (say, VS 11) expected soon? If soon enough (say after 6--8 months), would it be expected to have a better version/integration of C++ AMP than that in VS 10? Do you (or does Microsoft) think that for GPGPU, C++ AMP + VS 10 offer great value addition as compared to, say, using GPGPU on Linux via OpenCL? In short: Should I wait and watch, or is it OK to invest my hard-earned money into VS 10 Pro right away, given that GPGPU is of some serious interest to me (but not too much, as of today)? Thanks in advance. --Ajit [E&OE]

---------- http://www.JadhavResearch.net

Thanks, Stuart! BTW, in the meanwhile, I have already made use of TinyXML because my requirements were very very simple. My document has a very simple (and predictable) structure that is just two/three levels deep... It doesn't have to to have validation... Why TinyXML? Because, Google showed it above the others, that's why... Thanks again, anyway, and bye for now

---------- http://www.JadhavResearch.info

I know how to use the MS XML Parser in VC++ 6. For instance, I can do a #import the dll using the appropriate namespace. But this does not seem to work in VC++ 2005 Express Edition... What do I need to do so that I could use MSXML parser in my C++ sources which are to be compiled with the free VC++ 2005 Express Edition alone (and no other compiler)? Please provide pointers to any helpful articles/pages here or elsewhere. Thanks in advance.

---------- [" target="">http://www.JadhavResearch.info](http://www.JadhavResearch.info<br mode=)

Rama Krishna Vavilala wrote:

It is a great feeling to hold the book which has your contributions in it.

Congratulations!!

Rama Krishna Vavilala wrote:

... I ... have landed into a book deal ...

Could you please share what was the deal like, financially? You don't have to give your own deal... Average or indicative figures would do.

---------- http://www.JadhavResearch.info

I met a CEO of a small company (less than 10 developers) recently, a month back or so. (I am on the lookout for a job in 3D graphics of OpenGL sort for myself, right now.) He mentioned a formula that he said he had heard from the placement agencies. The formulae, applicable for the average case, are: -- for junior level developers, annual salary in Rs. lacs = no. of years of experience + 2. -- for senior level developers, annual salary in Rs. lacs = no. of years of experience X 2. BTW, 1 lac (aka lakh) means 100,000. I don't believe the formula. For the average case of senior people, the formula (or its multiplicative version) seems to overestimate somewhat. If this is your first time to outsource, esp. to India, then, unless you have someone local from Durgapur (or Assam) who has been exposed to international software development cycles--say by himself immigrating from Assam to Bangalore (or USA)--you would be better off taking this venture in an experimental spirit, rather than as a full-fledged production setup. I feel sure you don't mean the second anyways, but just thought of reminding. That way, to the extent I know, there is almost no difference in pay-scale in IT industries by region in India. Not the one that would matter at this stage of your project in any significant way! Now, something to all other CPians.... ----- In other replies to Harald's queries, I do see some sentiment against outsourcing to India. Not that I have a great regard for the Indian IT industry, but I want to raise a couple of questions--may be at the expense, once again, of my own career, but in the interest of truth anyways. 1. When was the last time you (clients, typically from the Western countries) outsourced any truly core development of any software product to India? Don't just keep mum and resolve to get even with me later on. State it. When was the last time? The point is simple: If you give out second-rate work to be done, be prepared to get a second-rate treatment to that work--whether the work is given out to another location within the USA/UK/Whatever other country, or out of country, to India. 2. I have repeatedly had the problem of people abroad understanding things the first time but feigning as if they didn't, and creating unnecessary issues. (I have only dealt with Americans from India.) There have been tactics like prolonging decisions by artificially means. For instance, creating long threads of emails. Or, pushing an MBA forth during *technical* discussions, thereby guarunteeing th

Let me answer the question negatively. The following aspects are what I don't like in young graduates of CS, but almost all of them exhibit it (may be, a result of the dilution of educational standards, perhaps, as engineering education got mobilized to masses--esp. in India). -- Inability to think differently about the same issue. Intransigence (as a virtue) is one thing. But the lack of that ability to think on the fly is quite another. Software is intangible. Even if I have to get the full meaning of an idea across, the other fellow has to be able to leave a repetitive (perhaps rotten) track, and think about the different dimensions of the problem. -- A queer obsession with what is "practical." A lot of university graduates think (and perhaps have been encouraged in the university to think) that what they do at the university / college is not going to be useful in practice. As a result, if I ask them to explain very basic things, they often do not know anything beyond superficial sort of knowledge. The CS graduates might be able to answer very basic things like, for instance, how quick-sort works. But scratch the surface and ask, e.g., something like the following: In quick-sort, you partition the data into two branches. Is this the reason why the complexity is O(N log_2 N)? The rationale being, the first term, N, because you partition N no of times, and the second term (the log_2 term), you have to divide the data by partitioning. It's surprising how many BS in CS will *very confidently* give you a perfectly wrong answer to *that* question--both here in India, and out there, in the US. (And note, I am *not* talking about *detailed* questions like comparing shell-sort with quick-sort. I am just asking a little bit below the surface about quick-sort. Yet, I've seen university-educated people go so easily wrong!) Of course, none is going to write his own quick-sort in the job. But the insights you gain in studying some great algorithms like that *always* come in handy in writing *any* good program. It's a question whether you have allowed your mind to develop in a disciplined way or not. If you are going to be negligent about some very basic things like quick-sort, by relying on an explanation like the standard library has already implemented it, and then start glorifying "practicality" in your answers, well, even if you keep a whole Web site explaining the relativity theory, it is obvious that both your software and your physics is going to be mediocre. -- A tendenc

El Corazon wrote:

looking back at this, this is exactly what 3D texturing does for you. You can define the CT data as the 3D texture, not a voxel list. Draw the plane where you want the cut, and you can view a slice at any oblique angle already smoothly textured and bilinear (or trinear) interpolated and fully antialiased. This is fully suppored by both OpenGL and DirectX.

I didn't know about *that*!! I thought texture mapping only meant taking a bitmap and laying or shrink-wrapping it over a surface. ... Actually a lot of my graphics knowledge is actually a bit dated. It consists of Foley, van Damme et al (ancient, I know!), F S Hill (to allow for an academic sort of mapping between Foley et al and OpenGL), and the practical OpenGL books like, e.g., OpenGL SuperBible by Wright and Sweet. Now, out of this range, only the last book talks about 3D texture mapping, but the topic is so small and hidden that I realized it is there only after you mentioned it! I also need to pick up on many other things... Now, coming back to the present thing. We can discuss it later at the Graphics forum, but just to let you know for now: The requirements could include millions of voxels (at least for the high-end, refined applications). Taking a cut through them using 3D textures is, it seems, practically not possible with OpenGL as of today. (Perhaps this is what you mean by out-of-core rendering.) Secondly, what I would like to have is customization of the interpolation--say, via a callback function facility. Third, the oblique cut could be a non-planar surface. I think the whole purpose differs. In OpenGL 3D texture, the idea is to help in rendering. What I have in mind is something more on the analysis side, but with a tighter integration with rendering as well... Alright. Thanks for your replies. I have learnt something useful. See you later in Graphics forum.

---------- http://www.JadhavResearch.info

Thanks for a lot of useful information and URLs. I will go through the links and come back later, probably at the Graphics forum. About octrees: Not all my ideas are so well thought as yet, and some parts of them go right across the domain and onto the mechanics side of computational mechanics. ... I wanted octrees not so much for culling of fine-grained 3D volume data, as for its seeming opposite: for progressive and non-uniform refining so as to get more accurate field computations in the regions of interest (or greatest change of field variable). Now, in abstract terms, this is not at all a new idea. Automatic mesh refining is something that is routinely done in engineering analysis methods like FEM. It's just that there would be some difference in the nature of field computations or mathematics (between FEM and what I want to do), and so, I would like to have a control over the process at the source code level. Also see my reply to your other answer. Let me think over all these matters and come back in Graphics forum. (Right now, the ideas are in a very fluid stage.) Thanks, again!

---------- http://www.JadhavResearch.info

Thanks (to you and to Jim Crafton). For some odd reason, nVidia SceneGraph hadn't come up in Internet search. I got to know of this SDK only now. So, special thanks to you (El Corazon). OK. Sorry if I misled you. But what I really needed was not so much a scene graph by itself as a ready-made and *simple* volume renderer, *and* a very small enabling frame-work on top of which the renderer rests. So, the frame-work would be a layer above DirectX/OpenGL, and the volume renderer will sit on top of the frame-work. I wanted *both*. (Ideally, I also wanted an octree based renderer on top of the framework.) The keywords are *small* frame-work (in source code terms--not thin clients etc. which isn't my concern), and an already existing and strongly object oriented implementation for the volume renderer (again, a small implementation). There *are* a few volume renderers in C++ like VolPack, VolVis, etc. But they are more or less stand-alone. I mean, the underlying framework is not even separately identifiable. (So, I can't use it to try out separate extensions in, say, CSG or octree rep.) There also are scene graph frameworks (like the ones you mentioned). But they come without any of the volume- or octree-renderers. Also, these frameworks tend to be a little too big. There also are some parallel processing volume renderers. (Too big.) And, of course, ray tracers. (Too big.) ----- I think by now I've got you confused thoroughly. :doh: So, let me rephrase the whole thing thus: Say, if a professor has written a scene graph *and* a volume renderer on top of it, both purely from educational (or teaching) point of view, then that code will suit my current requirements best. It would be nice if he had also written the CSG/octree based codes but this is not required right away. More important: It doesn't have to be optimal or industrial strength code. Does such thing exist in C++? :suss: The reason I got attracted to Java3D was (relatively) small size, *and* the fact that there is a simple volume renderer ready-made available. BTW, I have heard of Java to C# source code translator. Does it produce readable code? Thanks in advance.

---------- http://www.JadhavResearch.info

Thanks. Pl. see the reply below.

---------- http://www.JadhavResearch.info

Hi all, I have been programming C++ on Windows since 1994. However, it has not been possible to keep up with all the things on the programming side lately--I've been doing research in engineering science and mechanics. So, I thought of raising a question that I have, somewhere here at CodeProject. Hope to get your well thought out answers. (I posted a similar message in "General Discussions" but it didn't get any replies for 24+ hours, so I am posting in the Lounge now.) Recently I ran into Java3D and it seems to suit many of my requirements. I wanted a framework with which to rapidly write custom-built visualization programs for certain CAE applications that are based not on the routine tetrahedral meshes (B-Rep) but on the voxel or other representations (e.g. CSG and similar techniques, octrees, or, the points-as-primitives QSplat system of Stanford, etc.). My question is: Does anyone know anything comparable to Java3D, but on the Microsoft platform, preferably using C++? Please note a few things before you answer: This is not a platform-wars related thingie. ... As far as my personal preferences go, I would actually prefer something on VC++ 6/Win2K because that's what I am most acquainted with and find myself most comfortable in. However, I also find that DirectX technology is too inclined towards the games and X-Box sort of development. But CAE applications often do not require many of those advances in rendering as such. For example, CAE apps almost never need texture mapping, advanced translucency-based considerations, etc. At the same time, CAE (and medical, haptics, etc.) applications require some other things which are not provided by either OpenGL or DirectX. For example, consider the following. Imagine a field, say, a CT scan of an organ wherein there is some field value associated with each point/voxel inside the organ volume. Suppose someone wants to take an *oblique* cut through it--i.e. the plane of the cut is not parallel to the main reference system made by the scanning planes. Since the voxel is not a point, some interpolation would be required over the oblique plane, and perhaps, there would also be a need for anti-aliasing the values interpolated along the surface of the cut (not necessarily planar). Here, neither DirectX nor OpenGL gives me what is needed. This was just an example. There are several other considerations (or factors) too. Since many customizations as in the above paragraph would be necessary, I would rather play with an existing renderer. Yet,

Hi all, I have been programming C++ on Windows since 1994. However, it has not been possible to keep up with all the things on the programming side lately--I've been doing research in mechanical engineering. So, I thought of raising a question I have somewhere here at CodeProject. Hope to get your well thought out answers. Recently I ran into Java3D and it seems to suit many of my requirements, viz. a framework with which to rapidly write custom-built visualization programs for CAE applications. (In CAE, I do not mean rendering just tetrahedra or bricks as in FEM applications. I also include rendering for, say, voxels based object representations). The question is: Does anyone know anything comparable to Java3D, but on the Microsoft platform, preferably using C++? Please do note a few things before you answer: This is not a platform-war related thing. I would actually prefer something on VC++ 6/Win2K because that's what I am most acquainted with and find myself comfortable in. However, I also find that DirectX technology is too inclined towards the games and X-box sort of development. CAE applications often do not require all those advances in rendering as such. For example, CAE apps almost never need texture mapping, advanced translucency-based considerations, etc. At the same time, CAE applications require some other things not provided by either OpenGL or DirectX, like the following. Imagine a field, say, a CT scan of an organ wherein there is some field value associated with each point/voxel inside the organ volume. Suppose someone wants to take an oblique cut through it--i.e. the plane of the cut is not parallel to the main reference system made by the scanning planes. Since the voxel is not a point, some interpolation would be required over the oblique plane and perhaps, there would be need for anti-aliasing the interpolations too. Here, neither DirectX nor OpenGL gives me what is needed. This was just an example. There are several other considerations too. Since such customizations may be necessary, I would rather play with or implement my own renderer. However, highly powerful systems in C++ are not useful--even if their source code is available, the system would be too large and too complex. (e.g. PovRay). Here, Java3D seems to be small enough (at least as of today) to fit the bill. So, please do let me know if you know of any suitable free (public domain) framework or so, similar to Java3D, but using VC++ 6 or VC# Express Edition 2005. If there isn't any, I will proceed wit

I did threaten them with the consumer court. Seems like they are a very "hardened" lot. I am on the right side. Here is how. (The *sequence* of events is exact though the dates given here are only indicative.) June 8. The connection is down due to their fault. (The fault is at their intermediate box for their cables--not their remote server as such. It's a hardware fault.) July 1: They charge me for the whole month of June. The connection is still not restored on this date. Their representative confirms this (but on phone: I have no written proof) July 5: I stop checking if the connection is restored or not. July 10: They say they had repaired the fault (in hardware). But neither I nor other people in my home know about this because we were not at home. July 20: I speak with them--to let them know that the service is still not on. (But I have no documentary proof of having spoken with them.) They promise to check up and come back. July 22: They disconnect my service (in software), because, according to them, I didn't pay the bill for the month of June. [Do see and cross check below]. July 25: This is their official last date to pay the bill for June! Disconnections become effective at 5 PM on this day. But it's already 3 days they have already disconnected for non-payment. I fail to understand why!! July 26 2006 to July 25, 2007: The disconnected service is never restored. Any time I ask why, they ask me to pay, in effect, for the time that the service was down due to their fault. They also have sent 4-5 times strange-looking people, without any advance intimation, to collect the cable modem from me (while they had been sitting on my deposit). Every such a time, I have called them up and also sent message through these modem-collecting people that (i) Tata Indicom should confirm in writing or by email that they will return my deposit (after deductions, *if any*); and (ii) Tata Indicom should let me know in advance the name of the representative who will come to collect the modem, the date (and time, if possible) when he will come. But this one of Ratan Tata's MNCs hate committing themselves in writing anywhere. They do not send a single email--they always call!! BTW, out of approx. 15 times that I spoke with their *accounts* people, (i.e. over and above 100+ times I spoke with their customer service), out of these 15, approx. 5 people confirmed, over phone, that my point was valid and that I *will* "get credit" for the wrong billing. Apparently, other 10+ decided otherwise. Or p

Hi all, Long time... Just wanted to know if there are enough people from India here who also have had a bad experience of Tata Indicom Broadband. In my case... Well, let me tell the whole story later on (privately). But for the time being, suffice it to say that Tata Indicom *falsely* charged me, disconnected my service ahead of the payment due date (because I didn't pay that false charge), and then, have managed to drag on the whole matter in a very irresponsibe and harrassing manner for a year now! In the meanwhile, I finally decided to disconnect the whole connection. They agreed. But they still haven't settled the accounts. Their customer service department calls me anytime *on their own*, comes up with crazy questions or explanations, false accounts data, whatever... Then, the representative "promises" to check the matter again and "come back soon," and then whimsically disappears... I cannot track responsibility--forget customer service (those Indian BPO Success Story incompetnants), even Managers who answer the case do not stay the same... Even my family is completely lost as to how to deal with this particular thing (menace, actually)... I am wondering if calling together all the people who have suffered at Tata Indicom's hands might not be a good idea... That alone can teach this Ratan Tata led prestigious company a lesson! (Please note, I am right now only concerned with cable Broadband.... Their dial-up "solution" is another story.) Sorry I had to come back to the lounge after a really long time (years) only this way... But there simply was no other way left--they deal with my 'net connection!! And they just called me half an hour back, which was, literally, more than the 25th time (may be 100th time) in about a years' time, and I decided enough is enough!! So, just let me know if you too have been made to suffer by Tata Indicom, and now want to do something about it. Ajit -- modified at 12:57 Wednesday 25th July, 2007

------- Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed. (Francis Bacon) Nature, to be apprehended, must be obeyed. (Ayn Rand)

Keystrokes produced by (the shift-key down plus an assortment of the second row keys), all affectionately. Yes, you are doing a good job here, Chris! :rose: ------- Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed. (Francis Bacon) Nature, to be apprehended, must be obeyed. (Ayn Rand)

Does this make me the rule, or an exception? How does that matter when you are taking efforts to follow a perfect rule, namely, do your job the best way you can? ------- Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed. (Francis Bacon) Nature, to be apprehended, must be obeyed. (Ayn Rand)

I wish to recall the bugs not left in the code during Y2K switchover. Bank balances remained mostly intact, and milk arrived OK on Jan 1. Most of the ground-work in that mammoth project, the biggest in terms of $ that US industry has ever managed, was done by H1B visa holders. Now, consider the fact that there is the obvious disparity of - (salary + stocks + bonuses) - low horizontal mobility if you hold an H1B visa. The only way available to an H1B visa guy to remove such disparities, at equal skill levels is for an H1B to get the green card first. (Remember, any possible issues due to differences in background, culture, national origin, etc. are further down the road, after you get the green card.) To the end of removing the above mentioned disparities, H1B visa holders not only take up the even most insignificant but also most involved jobs (e.g. bug fixing in a codebase of 500+K LOC--a job no one else wants but still needs to be done) happily--just to buy the time to go through the Open American Immigration Process. (Sarcasm well deserved by the industry and lawmakers here.) When given truly challenging or significant or enjoyable tasks, as a pleasant surprise, H1B visa holders naturally put in even more effort. Further, realize that most H1B sponsoring companies have already weeded out incompetent people, as far as this can at all be determined by them. Typically, H1B candidates have had 2-3 years' solid experience in their native countries in an already fiercely competitive native job-market and proven their worth there, before a sponsoring company would consider risking their reputation and a legal paperwork for upto six years. Nobody wants to pick up additional tabs of legal responsibilities just like that. H1B visa phenomenon is nothing new. It certainly preceded the dot-com boom and bust. Most of the stable software you can vouch for, and see around today, has had major contributions coming in by the H1B visa holders. One would not expect to see specific credits given to them, once understands how the system works. Taken as a whole, therefore, there is a general impression in the companies that H1B visa people are "smarter." By IQ tests they may not necessarily be so. But by way of their sheer hard work, displayed ability, and the selectivity of the process that gets them here, one would expect them to be so, anyways. No surprise, is there any? As a final remark, should people from USA be forced to go through similar process, it's a matter beyond betting

http://www.iasf.org/waiting.htm ------- Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed. (Francis Bacon) Nature, to be apprehended, must be obeyed. (Ayn Rand)