Jorengarenar

4 ms·

1.
by Jorengarenar 3y ago
Yeah, we didn't copy that one over precisely because it was kind of a blocker to introducing replacements for outdated design. But I think it can be weaseled into that principle. Thanks!
2.
The C Standard charter [pdf](open-std.org)
2 points by Jorengarenar 3y ago|3 comments
3.
by Jorengarenar 3y ago
As you probably already know, WG14 recently finalized work on C23 and began the cycle for a new revision of the C standard, for now called C2y. Traditionally, that means updating the charter, but this time around we decided to do things a l
4.
by Jorengarenar 3y ago
I mean... > Six years after the start of the Second Generation, a new generation of consoles appeared (...) For reasons that are not entirely clear, they are considered part of the Second Generation. As well as in last paragraph: > (.
5.
by Jorengarenar 3y ago
>the premise is sort of flawed. >The author says that the 3rd gen of consoles really begins with the NES, and so these early 1980s consoles can't belong to the 3rd generation. Rather than the author, I would say that it's ev
6.
Why the 2nd generation of game consoles is really two distinct generations(web.archive.org)
8 points by Jorengarenar 3y ago|6 comments
7.
by Jorengarenar 3y ago
> vim predates the fashion for dark backgrounds, If anything, the correct version of this statement would be "Vim was created when light backgrounds were a fad". The "natural" background of the terminal is dark, inclu
8.
by Jorengarenar 3y ago
> This is still the case in C11, Section 5.2.4.1. Did this change in the most recent standard? Well, no, it's still marked "just" obsolete. For it to be deprecated or removed there would need to be anybody caring about it
9.
by Jorengarenar 3y ago
@1: The limits are considered obsolete since C89 and implementations are encouraged to avoid them whenever possible. I think the same way we disregard non ASCII character sets, non two's complement encodings and similar, we are safe in
10.
by Jorengarenar 3y ago
Only handful of Vim plugins have dependencies and even then you need to install them explicitly
11.
by Jorengarenar 3y ago
Liking to have clean and empty inbox isn't related to limited memory
12.
by Jorengarenar 3y ago
LIBNAME_actual_function_name()
13.
by Jorengarenar 3y ago
Yeah, GOTO or global variables are usually a not so good idea... except in cases where those are actually the best tools for the job and any alternative makes code actually worse . Coincidentally, the same applies to "you&quot
14.
by Jorengarenar 3y ago
If everybody became a robot and there's no need for chairs, then to whom is the technical debt supposed to be paid? If there are still fleshbags who need chair, the one created 20 years ago, if properly cared for, works just fine.
15.
by Jorengarenar 3y ago
Don't worry, I personally know plenty of devs whose favourites are assembly, C, C++, Pascal, Perl... even BASIC, Fortran, COBOL or Forth! And surprisingly enough, among them, even the old farts aren't so old.
16.
by Jorengarenar 3y ago
It baffles me it's the only comment pointing this out and it's not even at the top. The rest of commenters for some reason seem to equate "technical debt" with old technology and "legacy" projects.
17.
by Jorengarenar 3y ago
Wait, wasn't Perl 6 rebranded as new language Raku?
18.
by Jorengarenar 3y ago
You forgot to put "\s" here. But I appreciate the Picasso joke. Too many devs try applying over-engineered abstraction to simple problems. ------ From this place I want to greet one such "Picasso" whose code from over 20
19.
by Jorengarenar 3y ago
> It's very rare to find someone who has C as their favourite language Hello, I visit here every day. Nice to meet you
20.
by Jorengarenar 3y ago
Python is great for stuff which could technically be a shell script, but really shouldn't; it essentially replaced Perl.
21.
by Jorengarenar 3y ago
Really? I don't notice difference
22.
by Jorengarenar 3y ago
Indeed, it had way less computational power, but other aspects were better. I should have worded it more clearly.
23.
by Jorengarenar 3y ago
> The Wii's remote wasn't 'underpowered', but it was relatively cheap and added an interesting feature. I'm not sure why you mention the controller or how to measure its power, but the console itself was definite
24.
by Jorengarenar 3y ago
> By your logic, why move past the Wii U or Wii or any console before it? They said " underpowered ", not " outdated " or " ridiculously weaker "
25.
by Jorengarenar 3y ago
> The GameCube was the weakest hardware-wise between the PlayStation 2, Xbox, and Dreamcast. It might have been weak, but definitely was comparable (sometimes even stronger) in power to PS2 and definitely not weaker than Dreamcast [0]. &
26.
by Jorengarenar 3y ago
> Always is a bit strong isn't it? Prior to the Wii their consoles tended to be similar to their contemporaries in processing power. Yup, you could say Nintendo always thrived on underpowered (compared to competition) hardware.
27.
by Jorengarenar 3y ago
So... unsigned overflow is defined, while signed is straight up UB... and for you it's the former that's wrong?
28.
by Jorengarenar 3y ago
I mean... you started by saying nobody writes Makefiles anymore...
29.
by Jorengarenar 3y ago
I just want to remind, typical GameDev experience can differ substantially from typical SoftDev experience, so I'd be cautious from extrapolating on whole industry.
30.
by Jorengarenar 3y ago
You are really unfair here. The management wasn't terrible at all! That's an insult to actual terrible managements! It was the most bizarre, horrifyingly dump, idiotic, horrible management I can imagine. The safety systems were ri

More ›