I know C and C++ very well. I don't use either language unless I need to be as efficient as possible.

Yes, but it is good to have such debates. It allows the Linux community continuously to reassess its choice of a c-only environment. Such introspection is necessary, and when people are ready to move on, I think the community will.

Thanks, nice to read a sober judgment of the situation. As a both a C and C++ programmer I really appreciate your point. I would however argue that some effort should be done to enable the possibility to create some common culture. I am sure that some unbiased eyes could find subprojects where c++ (or other compiled oo/functional languages) would be better suited than c. I strongly believe that the paradigms all have their uses, and that in time the Linux project would be more powerful if it used the technology available. After all, isn't that one of the great strengths of openness?

Whoever invented the snooze button should have to account for all the agony that button has caused. Think of the number of heart attacks.

See, I've always thought that, when the alarm is going off, every button should snooze. Then, a minute later, the off button actually works. That way you can whack the thing to shut it up, and not worry about turning it off and falling back asleep (happens to me, especially when I'm tired. I turn it off instead of snoozing without even realizing it).

I've always wondered at the UI of alarm clocks. It seems like they gave up after "let's make the snooze button big!"

Now what I'd really like is a programmable alarm clock, allowing me to encode an optimal awakening algorithm. "at volume x, play song y. If snooze button is not pressed yet, double volume and play The Safety Dance."

I've been using an old mobile as an alarm clock for years. It's UI is much easier than a clock-radio (I was never able to figure those out), you can change the song and volume and it has a builtin battery. It's most well-designed not-alarm-clock alarm I've ever had.

"The Safety Dance" == lmao

About the only thing I've seen that could do that is a Chumby. I've never used one myself, but I believe it's effectively "fully" programmable: http://www.chumby.com/

The Chumby has no battery backup, which for an alarm clock is just inexcusable.

EDIT: Looks like the new one does. Now I want one :)

Programmable would be nice. I'd like the "snooze" functionality to change after x presses.

For example, "If snooze has been pressed 2 times today, on next press, double volume instead."

I think it was the Japanese in retaliation for WWII...

Ha, good point, my cat actually attack my legs if I try to leave the kitchen without feeding it.

I would look at Thinking in C++ by Bruce Eckel (http://mindview.net/Books/TICPP/ThinkingInCPP2e.html)

It is a free resource, and gives you the whys and hows on most aspects of c++. Buy the book when you decide that you like it, I did. It is especially good if you have some prior experience to programming, like java or C

And boost is almost an extention to the std libraries, so get to know them, those are tomorrows standards.

I like that book too. I am reading it atm. But it might be difficult if you don't have already a programming experience. But for those like me who know C already it is great because it explains all the differences between C and C++ and helps you to fill the gap between both. You can download it for free at the link mentionned above. I find it much more helpfull to learn C++ than Bjarne Stroustrup's book which should be better used as a reference once you know the language.