3 ms·

What am I looking for in the screenshot ?

_-___________-_ 7y ago
You would sadly have to find your way through the Twitter "thread" to fully understand. Someone at Docker and someone at Razer both copy-pasted the same faulty code from Stack Overflow for preventing multiple instances of their program running at once. Unfortunately the code took the assembly identifier and called GetType() on it which returns the same value for all programs. The Stack Overflow answer was later fixed but since the programmers no doubt both felt they'd "solved" the problem, they didn't see the fixed answer.
- Arnt 7y ago
  Which I suppose is an argument that pulling in eleventy thousand oneliners from npm is better than copying oneliners using the editor: At least you can run a batch upgrade without spending real brain cycles. I'm sure someone has written a thingy to upgrade npm dependencies, rerun tests, and bisect to tell you about the breaking upgrade if anything reaks. Left-pad, come back, all is forgiven.
polymatter 7y ago
Nothing. The screenshot is meaningless. The story is in the twitter comments underneath. > Both programs want to ensure you only run one copy of themselves. So they create a global mutex using the GUID of their .NET assembly, right? > So what happens is that both of them are creating a global mutex to ensure only one copy runs, but instead of basing the GUID on their own code, they're both using the GUID of a part of .NET itself. > And they're using the same one! > Back in 2009, the user "Nathan" asked how to get the GUID of the running assembly. Twelve minutes later, "Cerebrus" answered. And that answer was wrong. > A year and a month later, it was pointed out (by "Yoopergeek") that it gives the wrong GUID. > Three years later, Cerebrus returns and fixes the answer. They can't delete it, because it was accepted > That flawed stackoverflow post is here: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/502303/how-do-i-programmatically-get-the-guid-of-an-application-in-net2-0/502323#502323 https://stackoverflow.com/questions/502303/how-do-i-programm...

You would sadly have to find your way through the Twitter "thread" to fully understand. Someone at Docker and someone at Razer both copy-pasted the same faulty code from Stack Overflow for preventing multiple instances of their program running at once. Unfortunately the code took the assembly identifier and called GetType() on it which returns the same value for all programs. The Stack Overflow answer was later fixed but since the programmers no doubt both felt they'd "solved" the problem, they didn't see the fixed answer.

Arnt 7y ago
Which I suppose is an argument that pulling in eleventy thousand oneliners from npm is better than copying oneliners using the editor: At least you can run a batch upgrade without spending real brain cycles. I'm sure someone has written a thingy to upgrade npm dependencies, rerun tests, and bisect to tell you about the breaking upgrade if anything reaks. Left-pad, come back, all is forgiven.

polymatter 7y ago

Nothing. The screenshot is meaningless. The story is in the twitter comments underneath. > Both programs want to ensure you only run one copy of themselves. So they create a global mutex using the GUID of their .NET assembly, right? > So what happens is that both of them are creating a global mutex to ensure only one copy runs, but instead of basing the GUID on their own code, they're both using the GUID of a part of .NET itself. > And they're using the same one! > Back in 2009, the user "Nathan" asked how to get the GUID of the running assembly. Twelve minutes later, "Cerebrus" answered. And that answer was wrong. > A year and a month later, it was pointed out (by "Yoopergeek") that it gives the wrong GUID. > Three years later, Cerebrus returns and fixes the answer. They can't delete it, because it was accepted > That flawed stackoverflow post is here: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/502303/how-do-i-programmatically-get-the-guid-of-an-application-in-net2-0/502323#502323 https://stackoverflow.com/questions/502303/how-do-i-programm...