4 ms·

I looked into congestion control earlier in the year. It's hilarious to see the things which were hard coded in the first BSD implementation, like a 4 KiB sock

I looked into congestion control earlier in the year. It's hilarious to see the things which were hard coded in the first BSD implementation, like a 4 KiB socket buffer size. Also, as far as I can see, Bill Joy DID actually have linear backoff but it was hidden behind an always-false condition, so his hand-written lesser float backoffs were chosen instead. This seems like a fairly tragic coding error to me.

dtaht 3y ago
This is a really good (and rare) interview with van, where he and mike finally asked the question - "how did this EVER work?": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QP4A6L7CEqA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QP4A6L7CEqA
gabereiser 3y ago
Probably a case of “Logically this makes sense but let me branch and do it manually to make sure” and never got back to it. I have code like that. A return then some body of sane looking but outcome unknown code.
- PNewling 3y ago
  The old adage of "There is nothing more permanent than a temporary fix" comes to mind.
  - throwawaaarrgh 3y ago
    the PoC is production
- pcl 3y ago
  I use `#####` as a sentinel for things that must not be committed, and have a git hook that checks my commits to ensure that marker is not present in the `+` side of a commit delta.
  - TheDong 3y ago
    I feel like it's fine to commit and push that code to some non-master branch, and what really helps is a CI check to verify that code doesn't merge to master. I use git to sync work between multiple computers, and I want to be able to sync work-in-progress code that should absolutely never see the light of day, so I feel like committing and pushing it to a WIP branch is fine. Even if you only use one computer, I think it's a good idea to push these things so that if your HDD fails you can pick back up where you left off, even if it's code that's not ready to actually merge yet.
  - gabereiser 3y ago
    I try not to let code like that make it into git and into the wild. But this is a sane solution to prevent a very bad day.

dtaht 3y ago

This is a really good (and rare) interview with van, where he and mike finally asked the question - "how did this EVER work?": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QP4A6L7CEqA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QP4A6L7CEqA

gabereiser 3y ago

Probably a case of “Logically this makes sense but let me branch and do it manually to make sure” and never got back to it. I have code like that. A return then some body of sane looking but outcome unknown code.

PNewling 3y ago
The old adage of "There is nothing more permanent than a temporary fix" comes to mind.
- throwawaaarrgh 3y ago
  the PoC is production
pcl 3y ago
I use `#####` as a sentinel for things that must not be committed, and have a git hook that checks my commits to ensure that marker is not present in the `+` side of a commit delta.
- TheDong 3y ago
  I feel like it's fine to commit and push that code to some non-master branch, and what really helps is a CI check to verify that code doesn't merge to master. I use git to sync work between multiple computers, and I want to be able to sync work-in-progress code that should absolutely never see the light of day, so I feel like committing and pushing it to a WIP branch is fine. Even if you only use one computer, I think it's a good idea to push these things so that if your HDD fails you can pick back up where you left off, even if it's code that's not ready to actually merge yet.
- gabereiser 3y ago
  I try not to let code like that make it into git and into the wild. But this is a sane solution to prevent a very bad day.