Well, after days of scouring the Evanston area, I found a copy of the extended version of
After our traditional Thanksgiving dinner—Margaret’s Spectacular Enchiladas—we were reporting to the boys about the online fan clubs for elves-without-speaking-roles (Figwit and Rumil), when I clicked on the Hobbit Name Generator, which reported (to general mirth, and mild pleasure) that we turned out to be Mungo (me) and Autumn (Margaret) Moss of Lake-by-Down, with children Olo, Bolo, and Flora Moss.
Then Nate—or “Olo,” pardon me—followed the link to the Elvish Names companion site, which revealed that our family comprises Fëanor and Isil Vardamir, with children Findecáno, Findaráto, and Nindë Vardamir.
I think I came out pretty well as an elf, but Margaret started snickering uncontrollably when Si told her my name was “Mungo.” And that’s despite the fact that St. Mungo was among the saints who evangelized Scotland (his proper name was “Kentigern,” which may explain why he let people call him “Mungo”) and we visited his cathedral in Glasgow on our tour of Scotland several years ago.
Tonight we watch Koyanisqaatsi. I can’t wait; one of my most vivid movie-going experiences is of heading down to the York Square Cinemas on Broadway in New Haven to see the plotless movie with the funny name. Wow. It won’t be the same on the small screen, but maybe someday I can commandeer the projector and screen in the Seabury Lounge.
Posted by AKMA at November 28, 2002 07:37 PM | TrackBackA Happy Thanksgiving to ya, AKMA.
Posted by: Ryan at November 28, 2002 07:55 PMpeeking in...see the mention of Koyanisqaatsi, my daughter still talks about the time she came with me to see Koyanisquaatsi. The ad and the echoing of the name made her think it might be interesting to a 13 year old. LOL
Posted by: meg at November 29, 2002 11:36 AMWhen the machine compiles your code, however, it does a little bit of translation. At run time, the computer sees nothing but 1s and 0s, which is all the computer ever sees: a continuous string of binary numbers that it can interpret in various ways.
Posted by: Adlard at January 13, 2004 08:58 AMSince the Heap has no definite rules as to where it will create space for you, there must be some way of figuring out where your new space is. And the answer is, simply enough, addressing. When you create new space in the heap to hold your data, you get back an address that tells you where your new space is, so your bits can move in. This address is called a Pointer, and it's really just a hexadecimal number that points to a location in the heap. Since it's really just a number, it can be stored quite nicely into a variable.
Posted by: Guy at January 13, 2004 08:58 AMLet's take a moment to reexamine that. What we've done here is create two variables. The first variable is in the Heap, and we're storing data in it. That's the obvious one. But the second variable is a pointer to the first one, and it exists on the Stack. This variable is the one that's really called favoriteNumber, and it's the one we're working with. It is important to remember that there are now two parts to our simple variable, one of which exists in each world. This kind of division is common is C, but omnipresent in Cocoa. When you start making objects, Cocoa makes them all in the Heap because the Stack isn't big enough to hold them. In Cocoa, you deal with objects through pointers everywhere and are actually forbidden from dealing with them directly.
Posted by: Rook at January 13, 2004 08:58 AM