1amzave

4 lata temudiscuss

If the servers in question happen to be on the list of supported hardware, quite possibly. (I don't know of any up-to-date online list, but running `source setup` in the root of the source tree will print it.)

1amzave

9 lat temudiscuss

"The wise man speaks because he has something to say. The fool speaks because he has to say something."

(See also: comments by idlewords, pkw2017.)

1amzave

10 lat temudiscuss

Really? If you're going to do that, it seems like you might as well just merge all those users into a single account anyway, considering how trivial it would be for any one of them to execute arbitrary code as any other.

1amzave

10 lat temudiscuss

Until I can, as an unprivileged user, watch my own process's syscalls with dtruss, it's not an alternative to strace. Requiring root is a major hindrance.

1amzave

10 lat temudiscuss

Also (more specifically to one of the given examples), enabling `-A` on all your ssh invocations likewise seems like a pretty bad idea.

1amzave

10 lat temudiscuss

> When using little-endian, you imagine that the bits are in little-endian order, to be consistent with the bytes, and then everything is nice and consistent.

But isn't that kind of at odds with how shifting works? (i.e. that a left shift moves towards the "bigger" bits and a right shift moves toward the "smaller" ones.) Perhaps for a Hebrew or Arabic speaker this all works out nicely, but for those of us accustomed to progressing from left to right it seems a bit backwards...

1amzave

10 lat temudiscuss

According to their documented "Current Limitations" (https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/content/docum...):

> Case Sensitivity: Filenames are currently case-sensitive only.

First thought: they have seen the light!

A moment later: wait...they consider this a "limitation", and it's only "currently" the case. So maybe they're going to perpetuate the brain-damage anyway.

Sigh.

1amzave

10 lat temudiscuss

Fails to mention what is in my opinion the most devious, subtle potential pitfall with `set -e`: assigning (or even just a bare evaluation of) an arithmetic zero. `foo=0` won't do anything surprising, but `let foo=0` will return 1, and thus abort your script if you're not careful.

Also, as an alternative to the proposed `set +e; ...; set -e` wrapper for retrieving the exit status of something expected to exit non-zero (generally cleaner in my opinion, if slightly "clever"):

    retval=0
    count=$(grep -c some-string some-file) || retval=$?

1amzave

10 lat temudiscuss

While this is a legitimate complaint, it also applies (though in fewer ways) to C. How do you parse this?

  (x)(y);

Is that a call of function (or function pointer) `x` with argument `y`? Or is it a cast of `y` to type `x`? You need to have kept track of of all the typedefs in the code prior to that point to know.

1amzave

10 lat temudiscuss

I don't think the problems with that advice are singular. Perhaps the most ultimately-relevant is that looping exactly N times without a "ceremonial" counter is really only very rarely useful. Truly, how often do you see the canonical `for (i = 0; i < N; i++)` pattern in C with no references to `i` anywhere in the loop body? (Hint: if there are any, it's not "ceremonial".) Blindly repeating the exact same sequence of code just isn't something you want to do very often.

To address the issue of "okay, in what languages could we do this anyway?": taken in full mathematical generality, such a capability would necessarily require bignum support, which cuts down your options significantly. I'm not sure if that was actually the intent, but if we instead accept the limitation of "up to some largeish power of two", constructing a macro to do this "directly" in C would also be quite easy. So...(shrug)

1amzave

10 lat temudiscuss

Perhaps I should clarify -- I am (happily) not involved in web development, and from the developer's side browsers may very well be in pretty good shape these days (I wouldn't really know).

But speaking purely as a user, I think the statement "browsers suck, like really bad" still holds very true.

1amzave

10 lat temudiscuss

> For example, "back in the day" browsers sucked, like really bad.

I'm reminded of Mitch Hedberg: "I used to do drugs. I still do, but I used to too."

1amzave

10 lat temudiscuss

If I'm reading N1256 right (not sure how far back it actually dates, but that's a C standard draft dated 2007), section 6.7.2.3 also explicitly allows a trailing comma in that context as well, so if such a compiler exists its makers should get with the program, so to speak.

1amzave

11 lat temudiscuss

> So why the quad i7, 32GB RAM, and 480GB SSD?

It's right there in your quote:

> ...a web browser...

1amzave

11 lat temudiscuss

I'm reminded of an excellent quote from Bertrand Russell:

"Everything is vague to a degree you do not realize till you have tried to make it precise."

1amzave

11 lat temudiscuss

Why are they using MIPS as a metric for comparing integer CPU performance? When you're looking at two different compiler backends targeting two (very) different ISAs, it seems pretty thoroughly uninformative.

1amzave

11 lat temudiscuss

See other reply: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10363281

1amzave

11 lat temudiscuss

Realistically it's not going to be that simple though. The filesystem proper (e.g. ZFS) may verify checksums when pulling in data from a storage device, but then it's going to sit in the page cache for some arbitrarily long time. Whether by faulty DRAM, cosmic rays, or writes through stray pointers, that's a potentially major source of vulnerability to data corruption. There's of course a mirror-image vulnerability on the write path: you write into the page cache, and if something borks your data between that point and when it actually gets written back to storage, you end up persisting it (quite arguably worse, if perhaps less likely due to dirty data usually getting flushed within a reasonably short time).

Basically, the filesystem isn't the end point, and thus simply isn't positioned to really provide "end-to-end" protection.

1amzave

11 lat temudiscuss

I think a reasonable argument could be made that if it's in the filesystem it's not end-to-end.

1amzave

11 lat temudiscuss

> I don't get what the word "libre" has with the "great free software nomenclature war" or why that would make people avoid LibreOffice.

Personally, I avoid "office suites" in general like the plague and hence don't have much of a horse in this race, but "LibreOffice" has always struck me as a name that rolls off the tongue in approximately the way a refrigerator would roll off a flatbed truck.

Submissions

Re: compare memcmp with 0

The emperor’s new clothes were built with Node.js

Writing a Thumb Drive from Scratch

Darwin (1960s programming game)

20 Year Usenet Timeline

Panoramic ball camera; toss to snap a picture

SCADA Systems Are Online Now

comments