Arch-TK

30 ms·

481.
by Arch-TK 2y ago
You say you were a kid when you sold it. I could have sworn you weren't from conversations we had on IRC at the time. Although I most assuredly was a kid.
482.
by Arch-TK 2y ago
You're very right that this goes above and beyond anything the C standard specifies aside from stating that the end result should be the same as if the expressions were evaluated separately (unless you have -ffast-math enabled which ma
483.
by Arch-TK 2y ago
> First of all compilers disagree on many interpretations and consequences of abstract machine rules. List them. I am not aware of any well defined parts of the C standard where GCC and Clang disagree in implementation. Only in areas whe
484.
by Arch-TK 2y ago
"correctness-oriented C" definitionally cannot consider "[relying] on those casts".
485.
by Arch-TK 2y ago
> The reality is that most developers have subconsciously internalized the compiler behavior and assume that will always hold. I blame this on how people like to teach C and present C. It's very important that the second anyone conc
486.
by Arch-TK 2y ago
Unfortunately, I am not a network engineer. So I don't know how I would approach this problem other than to try to make sure that the resulting hardware is easy to deal with from firmware and software. I have worked with hardware direc
487.
by Arch-TK 2y ago
Abstraction leaks are usually a result of a worse is better approach. But yes, as I think I said in my original comment, its very difficult to successfully completely pave over a poor base. And yes, I agree that simplicity needs to start qu
488.
by Arch-TK 2y ago
I have a theory that the worse is better approach begets an environment where the worse is better approach is better. At least hypothetically, I think there's an approach which is not "the right thing" or "worse is bette
489.
by Arch-TK 2y ago
Really 3 points: * This was long ago enough that PayPal wasn't _quite_ as famous for its practices. * In Europe people generally assume that companies big and small won't try to fuck you over because there are usually repercussion
490.
by Arch-TK 2y ago
Neo900 is dead. Unfortunately. It was always on shaky ground (the nature of a hardware project) but what seems to have killed it was PayPal withholding its funds for long enough to take the wind out of key people's sails. PayPal just d
491.
by Arch-TK 2y ago
I have automatic light/dark mode tied to the daylight cycle on my laptop and the amount of colour emitting applications which break when I turn on light-on-dark mode is astounding. If you are writing a command line tool and you absolut
492.
by Arch-TK 2y ago
When people insist that code in the database is never acceptable, these are precisely the kinds of situations where the benefits outweigh the downsides. If I were to come up with a rule: A database should avoid having to rely on stored proc
493.
by Arch-TK 2y ago
Most short running scripts call into the standard library or into other packages. I think the trivial subset is too small to bother with such an optimisation.
494.
by Arch-TK 2y ago
Reliable implementation most likely involves solving the halting problem.
495.
by Arch-TK 2y ago
> The default matters. The default is no clear. It could be the default is to clear and then I would agree that an isatty check would be necessary. But an isatty check for an explicit option here would be as weird as an isatty check for
496.
by Arch-TK 2y ago
I mean there is an issue here with inflated line counts. It makes the whole solution more complex and more difficult to troubleshoot. It makes the binary size inflated. It likely makes the solution slower. And, probably most important, it m
497.
by Arch-TK 2y ago
This is strictly a miscalculation/fudge. In isolation (which is what CVSS is all about) this is not a network exploitable vulnerability, even if you can craft an attack chain which exploits it over the network. So: AV:N -> AV:L - re
498.
by Arch-TK 2y ago
CVSS scores are meaningless in a vacuum, and in this case it seems the redhat person who calculated them took the "fudge it until it looks bad" approach. Below is my professional scoring evaluation while trying to keep to the idea
499.
by Arch-TK 2y ago
> As I've noted elsewhere, you can't even safely use `char ` for file names in Windows; it should be `wchar_t ` in order to avoid any encoding problem. Yes, this is true. But I think the overhead of writing that kind of code wo
500.
by Arch-TK 2y ago
There's no standard way of doing file watching across BSDs, Mac OS and Linux. > it's just a fixed unconditional terminal sequence Are you referring to the clear feature? Yes, it's fixed. It's also pretty standard in t
501.
by Arch-TK 2y ago
I appreciate this is how a startup must run, but must every small tech company be a startup? Where do you find jobs for small companies which are just happy to exist and grow sustainably. Where you can come in at 9:00am, have an uninterrupt
502.
by Arch-TK 2y ago
> It is your responsibility to try. I don't agree that I have any responsibilities on the internet. (edit: Outside of ones I come up with.) > One of the best guidelines established for HN, is that you should always be kind. Kindn
503.
by Arch-TK 2y ago
Pipefail is not a fix. It is an option. It makes sense sometimes, it does not make sense other times. When you are using a pipeline in a script where you care about error handling then you should be asking yourself exactly what kind of erro
504.
by Arch-TK 2y ago
> BOFH much This made me chuckle. > Your tone is very dismissive. I know, but honestly when I see a post on the front page of HN with recommendations on how to do something and the recommendations (and resulting code) are just bad the
505.
by Arch-TK 2y ago
Addendum after reading the script: * #!/bin/bash instead of #!/usr/bin/env bash * [ instead of [[ * -z instead of actually checking how many arguments you got passed and trusting the end user if they do something we
506.
by Arch-TK 2y ago
This reads like what I've named as "consultantware" which is a type of software developed by security consultants who are eager to write helpful utilities but have no idea about the standards for how command line software beh
507.
by Arch-TK 2y ago
It's not a generalisation, it's an observation, most people do not drink black coffee. Even in Italy. And most of those that do, when asked, seem to provide a justification not based in flavour.
508.
by Arch-TK 2y ago
Some level of acidity is normal in any coffee, an increased level is common to lighter roasts. You can get a good darker roast espresso which won't be very noticeably acidic or you can get a good lighter roast espresso which tastes lik
509.
by Arch-TK 2y ago
I think I would agree that most people don't like their experience of black coffee. Whether that's because there is no coffee or brewing method out there that, when served black, would satisfy them, or because they've just no
510.
by Arch-TK 2y ago
>We're all test subjects for a worldwide experiment to put microplastices everywhere and see what happens. Honestly, I think if you think about it and look around, we are test subjects for a whole swathe of worldwide experiments of

More ›