A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Windows 10 » Windows 10 Help Forum
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Why do we need Q#?



 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old November 16th 18, 03:45 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c
😉 Good Guy 😉
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,483
Default Why do we need Q#?


https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/visualstudio/2018/11/15/why-do-we-need-q/

--
With over 950 million devices now running Windows 10, customer
satisfaction is higher than any previous version of windows.

Ads
  #2  
Old November 16th 18, 05:17 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c
Mr. Man-wai Chang
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,941
Default Why do we need Q#?

On 11/16/2018 10:45 AM, 😉 Good Guy 😉 wrote:

https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/visualstudio/2018/11/15/why-do-we-need-q/


We don't!

--
@~@ Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch! Live long and prosper!!
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty!
/( _ )\ May the Force and farces be with you!
^ ^ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10) Linux 2.6.39.3
¤£*ɶU! ¤£¶BÄF! ¤£½ä¿ú! ¤£´©¥æ! ¤£¥´¥æ! ¤£¥´§T! ¤£¦Û±þ! ¤£¨D¯«!
½Ð¦Ò¼{ºî´© (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_...sub_addressesa
  #3  
Old November 16th 18, 09:45 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c
Big Bad Bob
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 793
Default Why do we need Q#?

On 11/15/18 20:17, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:
On 11/16/2018 10:45 AM, 😉 Good Guy 😉 wrote:

https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/visualstudio/2018/11/15/why-do-we-need-q/



We don't!


we didn't/don't need C-pound, either. Nor '.Not'. But none of this
will stop Micro-shaft from cramming it at us and insisting we jump on
"yet another bandwagon" and chase "yet another moving target" as a
development platform, until they pull the rug from under us and decide
to stop supporting it...

Micro-shat has been "getting it wrong" since the ".Not" initiative in
the early noughties. It was wrong then, it's still wrong now, and
win-10-nic is just another example of them NOT having a clue.

now, where did I leave my clue-bat...

--
(aka 'Bombastic Bob' in case you wondered)

'Feeling with my fingers, and thinking with my brain' - me

'your story is so touching, but it sounds just like a lie'
"Straighten up and fly right"
  #4  
Old November 16th 18, 02:31 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c
Mayayana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,438
Default Why do we need Q#?

On 11/15/18 20:17, Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:
On 11/16/2018 10:45 AM, ?? Good Guy ?? wrote:
"Big Bad Bob" wrote

|
https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/visualstudio/2018/11/15/why-do-we-need-q/
|
| We don't!
|

Why don't you block those posts? Do you just like to
get mad? Neither of them posts anything but pro-MS
and anti-everyone else. I'm not convinced either one
is even a human. Though Good Guy's animosity seems
a bit too colorful to be cooked up by software.

Do you actually understand the page linked? I don't.
I wasn't aware that so-called quantum computing even
existed yet. Maybe it doesn't and they're just planning.
The fact the author uses "TL;DR" is a good indicator
that he thinks by piling popular, current cliches together.

Which is an interesting thing about programmers in general.
They tend to be people who are very good with math
but virtually incapable of intellectual thinking. By which
I mean that if the meaning of life or advice on dating can't
be rendered in a scientific formula then it doesn't count
for them as a relevant topic for their attention.

The piece is sort of interesting, though. It sounds like
Q is meant to be used like inline assembly. The main
difference I can see is that inline assembly does something,
going direct to the CPU, while it's not clear what, if
anything, Q does at this point. Their sample code looks
like randomization. But I don't think I have the curiosity
to figure out whether they're really talking about something.
(Nor do I want to install the latest VS.)


  #5  
Old November 16th 18, 02:38 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c
Mr. Man-wai Chang
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,941
Default Why do we need Q#?

On 11/16/2018 4:45 PM, Big Bad Bob wrote:

we didn't/don't need C-pound, either. Nor '.Not'. But none of this
will stop Micro-shaft from cramming it at us and insisting we jump on
"yet another bandwagon" and chase "yet another moving target" as a
development platform, until they pull the rug from under us and decide
to stop supporting it...

Micro-shat has been "getting it wrong" since the ".Not" initiative in
the early noughties. It was wrong then, it's still wrong now, and
win-10-nic is just another example of them NOT having a clue.

now, where did I leave my clue-bat...


A new/different programming language is just a change of words and
syntax!

--
@~@ Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch! Live long and prosper!!
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty!
/( _ )\ May the Force and farces be with you!
^ ^ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10) Linux 2.6.39.3
¤£*ɶU! ¤£¶BÄF! ¤£½ä¿ú! ¤£´©¥æ! ¤£¥´¥æ! ¤£¥´§T! ¤£¦Û±þ! ¤£¨D¯«!
½Ð¦Ò¼{ºî´© (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_...sub_addressesa
  #6  
Old November 16th 18, 02:40 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c
Mr. Man-wai Chang
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,941
Default Q# compiler? Written in C?

On 11/16/2018 9:31 PM, Mayayana wrote:
The piece is sort of interesting, though. It sounds like
Q is meant to be used like inline assembly. The main
difference I can see is that inline assembly does something,
going direct to the CPU, while it's not clear what, if
anything, Q does at this point. Their sample code looks
like randomization. But I don't think I have the curiosity
to figure out whether they're really talking about something.
(Nor do I want to install the latest VS.)



Anyone wanna bet that Q# compiler would be written in C?

--
@~@ Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch! Live long and prosper!!
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty!
/( _ )\ May the Force and farces be with you!
^ ^ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10) Linux 2.6.39.3
¤£*ɶU! ¤£¶BÄF! ¤£½ä¿ú! ¤£´©¥æ! ¤£¥´¥æ! ¤£¥´§T! ¤£¦Û±þ! ¤£¨D¯«!
½Ð¦Ò¼{ºî´© (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_...sub_addressesa
  #7  
Old November 16th 18, 03:48 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c
Mr. Man-wai Chang
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,941
Default Why do we need Q#?

On 11/16/2018 10:33 PM, Wolf K wrote:
On 2018-11-16 08:31, Mayayana wrote:
[...]
Do you actually understand the page linked? I don't.
I wasn't aware that so-called quantum computing even
existed yet. Maybe it doesn't and they're just planning.

[...]

Quantum computing is simulated in ordinary computers. Obviously not the
really big problems that a true q-machine could solve, but manageable
problems to test programming concepts and provide proof-of-concept. A
coding langauge for q-machines is part of that effort: it's kinda
difficult to think in terms of propositions that are both true and false
until the probability wave collapses (which IMO is a highly misleading
metaphor, aka "interpretation", but that's another issue).

FWIW, a recent report in New Scientists said that one of the players
(IBM?) has managed to isolate four or five q-bits IIRC. The technical
problem is to maintain q-bits long enough to actually do some real work.
Single-atom q-bits are very unstable. There are some hints that
molecular q-bits could be more stable, ie, could be made at higher
temperatures. In any case, portable q-machines will not be available,
since the chips will ahve to be cooled to near absolute zero.


Quantum is just a different magic wand! There is nothing new there!

--
@~@ Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch! Live long and prosper!!
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty!
/( _ )\ May the Force and farces be with you!
^ ^ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10) Linux 2.6.39.3
¤£*ɶU! ¤£¶BÄF! ¤£½ä¿ú! ¤£´©¥æ! ¤£¥´¥æ! ¤£¥´§T! ¤£¦Û±þ! ¤£¨D¯«!
½Ð¦Ò¼{ºî´© (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_...sub_addressesa
  #8  
Old November 16th 18, 05:59 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Paul[_32_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,873
Default Why do we need Q#?

Wolf K wrote:
On 2018-11-16 08:31, Mayayana wrote:
[...]
Do you actually understand the page linked? I don't.
I wasn't aware that so-called quantum computing even
existed yet. Maybe it doesn't and they're just planning.

[...]

Quantum computing is simulated in ordinary computers. Obviously not the
really big problems that a true q-machine could solve, but manageable
problems to test programming concepts and provide proof-of-concept. A
coding langauge for q-machines is part of that effort: it's kinda
difficult to think in terms of propositions that are both true and false
until the probability wave collapses (which IMO is a highly misleading
metaphor, aka "interpretation", but that's another issue).

FWIW, a recent report in New Scientists said that one of the players
(IBM?) has managed to isolate four or five q-bits IIRC. The technical
problem is to maintain q-bits long enough to actually do some real work.
Single-atom q-bits are very unstable. There are some hints that
molecular q-bits could be more stable, ie, could be made at higher
temperatures. In any case, portable q-machines will not be available,
since the chips will ahve to be cooled to near absolute zero.

Best,


The story has elements of cold fusion.

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/5...ntum-computer/

At least a few STEM people will earn a decent wage
and get free dental care out of it. The investors ?
Not so much.

Paul
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2024 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.