JdeBP

49 ms·

781.
by JdeBP 2y ago
I was going to make the same point. With that slight modification it's an everyday thing for many U.K. drivers and fairly easy to navigate when one is used to such. The Beaconsfield junction on the M40 is a randomly selected example o
782.
by JdeBP 2y ago
It also kind of is not, inasmuch as it doesn't argue that there's the possibility of a universe where a "slower" speed of light (whatever that might mean) would not permit the existence of humans. It merely argues that
783.
by JdeBP 2y ago
The paragraph beginning "And yet c is also slow." in the article is pretty much what you said. If you now want to make the point that humans are fast on human-centric scales, which you did not really make above, you enter a wh
784.
by JdeBP 2y ago
It's the stumbling block that everyone has grasping this stuff, and it's rooted in the old faulty kind of speed calculations. Speeds don't add like you think. There are many ways to grasp this, and one has to try several of
785.
by JdeBP 2y ago
It's difficult to say that it has any given number, since our measurement units for both time and space are derived from it (via a short detour to the size of Terra, in the 18th century). It can have any finite number you like, just
786.
by JdeBP 2y ago
It's not observable by us, so we don't know. The figure is (to simplify) a deduction from what we can see, the observable universe, and the fact that we don't see any of the consequences that there would be in the observab
787.
by JdeBP 2y ago
It's not just Arvin Ash. That's actually fairly common terminology amongst physics educators nowadays. For starters: You'll find a lot of physics YouTube channels that say "speed of causality". It has even starte
788.
by JdeBP 2y ago
Yes, it takes forever to get anywhere at Warp 9. (-: More seriously: Your very point is already made near to the beginning of the headlined article, in the book quote. You might want to read beyond the headline question, otherwise you&#x2
789.
by JdeBP 2y ago
That's not at all how MetaWare implemented iterator-driven for, though. As Joe Groff said in the headlined post, MetaWare implemented it by turning the nested body of the for statement into an anonymous nested function, which is called
790.
by JdeBP 2y ago
It's a non-local goto, also a MetaWare language extension, out of the anonymous nested function that the for statement body becomes to (effectively) an anonymous label right after the for statement. Another part of the High C/C++
791.
by JdeBP 2y ago
It was not Fujitsu. It was MetaWare, which had a fair degree of experience with compilers. It had a contemporaneous Pascal compiler, which was quite well known, and Pascal already had nested functions.
792.
by JdeBP 2y ago
I suspect not. I am lucky enough to be consulting this copy: https://mastodonapp.uk/@JdeBP/113199154771277394 (-:
793.
by JdeBP 2y ago
Not "ages" in comparison to how long MetaWare had them. High C had this stuff back in the early 1990s and 1980s. The headlined article doesn't mention it, but High C/C++ had modules all of those years ago, too. Anybase
794.
by JdeBP 2y ago
It has no doubt come up again here because Joe Groff just drew attention to it today on the FediVerse. * https://f.duriansoftware.com/@joe/113195961485703110
795.
by JdeBP 2y ago
I wrote up the iterator-driven for back in 2011, because it was one of those things that had been long-since forgotten about; along with what it would look like were it to be incorporated into the (then) C++ standard. I am fortunate enough
796.
by JdeBP 2y ago
This is mistitled. The target page does not say "ANSI" and ANSI is not involved in this at all. (The "E" in "ECMA" does not stand for ANSI. (-: )
797.
by JdeBP 2y ago
And yet https://mastodon.scot/@rasteri/112683926331617000 was found within the first 2 hours of the FediVerse post. Honourable mentions go to the TARDIS picture at https://mstdn.ca/@Chigaze/1126838
798.
by JdeBP 2y ago
Ironically, I was looking to see whether Hacker News and anyone else had picked it up, from the FediVerse post. Bing found the Reddit thread from "One Million Checkboxes" as the search query. It's the second search result a
799.
by JdeBP 2y ago
You announced it on the FediVerse, where it has already been boosted almost 700 times as I write this 4 hours later, and it spread to Reddit within 2 hours of that, as you know because you replied to the Reddit post. There is definitely go
800.
by JdeBP 2y ago
Here's an extra part of the spec: Deliberately there is no correct WWW browser window width. So you'll also have to account for the swastika writers using a whole range of window widths. * https://news.ycombinator.com
801.
by JdeBP 2y ago
You can cheat and look at the JavaScript code. (-:
802.
by JdeBP 2y ago
Who is "we"? The developer also announced this on the FediVerse, and it spread to Reddit within 2 hours of that.
803.
by JdeBP 3y ago
Far longer than a decade. We've known that this has been coming since the days of Max Headroom. The interesting thing is that in the Max Headroom days we thought that it would come about because of scheming corporate interests, not be
804.
by JdeBP 3y ago
In fairness, there probably wasn't much going on with the source code for the internal COPY command in 1993. It had been stable for years by then. So I don't imagine it being particularly difficult to spot simply from what parts
805.
by JdeBP 3y ago
Most of the code pages had them, in fact, as they normally didn't vary in the C0 control character range.
806.
by JdeBP 3y ago
It's not even unreasonable. -caster, -chester, and -cester are related suffixes.
807.
by JdeBP 3y ago
As I said in another comment, just bear in mind the possibility that the map of 878 England from the 19th century could well be based upon the same evidence. Although it is significant that the names survive and show clear boundaries, it m
808.
by JdeBP 3y ago
It's worth remembering that the 19th century map of 878 could well have been constructed the same way from the same evidence.
809.
by JdeBP 3y ago
Have you read the Niven and Pournelle re-telling?
810.
by JdeBP 3y ago
There is of course the old rec.humour.funny posting, that was far earlier a humorous journal article from the 1970s, that demonstrates with Biblical references and basic chemistry and physics that Heaven is a lot hotter than Hell.

More ›