3 ms·
I read this and your reply to the sibling, you seem to have reputation to be sensible - what are you trying to say? If someone re-implements or reverses a servi
by kreetx 11mo ago
I read this and your reply to the sibling, you seem to have reputation to be sensible - what are you trying to say? If someone re-implements or reverses a service then it doesn't need to be in the same language.
- almostgotcaught 11mo agoThis dude stays commenting on things he doesn't actually understand anything about. I have run into him multiple times in threads on what I do (compilers) and he's clueless but insistent.
- pjmlp 11mo agoThakfully that the Internet is full of analists with such deep understanding of others personality, otherwise we would all be lost. As for the matter at hand, I assume that such implementation is validated against which specification exactly? Gladly to be educated in my clueless.
- almostgotcaught 11mo agoI guess English isn't your first language so nbd but I have no idea what you're asking.
- pjmlp 11mo agoTo be educated on the public specification of Apple's Private Compute Cloud so that I become less clueless, according to you.
- almostgotcaught 11mo agoThis question makes zero sense - PCC is a (proprietary) system not an interface. There is no spec just like there's no spec for how you have the furniture arranged in your own house.
- pjmlp 11mo agoPlease explain the audience the title of this submission given that answer. Apparently some of us actually have a clue.
- pjmlp 11mo agoPedantic yes, sensible not really, sensible folks don't survive the level of BBS and USENET discussion forums. To make a full implementation of a Apple product, the specification for that Apple product must exist in some form.
- kreetx 11mo agoRight, but whatever the languages used by Apple to implement their cloud is not really related to the Swift language. I guess you should have said what you said just now first.