Quekid5

56 ms·

691.
by Quekid5 6y ago
> It sounds like the expected outcome of not enforcing an established style with automated tools. Unfortunately those also have significant downsides around large-scale refactoring. What I always do (and advise other code reviewers to do
692.
by Quekid5 6y ago
I guess it's not that surprising really[0], but it is quite amusing in combination with the company name. [0] If you tie your company's worth to a proprietary technology.
693.
by Quekid5 6y ago
Just out of morbid curiosity... have you actually experienced multiple 'seniors' giving conflicting code review comments about code style (of all things)? That sounds quite dysfunctional. (EDIT: Sure, nitpicks may differ, but...
694.
by Quekid5 6y ago
This usually a good time to apply the When In Rome rule. Do not reformat needlessly, follow the code style of the code you're modifying. Done. (If multiple people are arguing back and forth in code review -- when following the WIR rule
695.
by Quekid5 6y ago
> In Maven anybody could publish a package that starts with "com.google". I don't think that's the case. If you want to get on Maven Central (at least via SonaType OSS) you have to prove that you own an email address
696.
by Quekid5 6y ago
Pfft... The versioning scheme is the least of GTKs problems.
697.
by Quekid5 6y ago
I is giving up and rightly so. Numbers along a few axes cannot convey even close to the information needed. Only an honest changelog can do that. I appreciate that people try to do their best in determining the next version number, but we
698.
by Quekid5 6y ago
> You lose the ability to remove unused code, but for people using this, it doesn't matter, because it is cached anyway. I was under the impression that parsing (etc.) time matters as well, not just raw download time/latency?
699.
by Quekid5 6y ago
It depends a lot on where you live. It's not that bad where I live (EU, specifically Scandinavia), for example. Of course it goes without saying that we're generally quite privileged compared to a lot of the rest of the world. A
700.
by Quekid5 6y ago
> Former bound slaves are now employed as salaried servants, free to leave at any time. Except if they want to earn enough to feed their families, that is. I mean, I certainly have "issues" with the system we have, but at least
701.
by Quekid5 6y ago
I personally would avoid docker, but 'containers', yes. > Snaps are completely redundant there. Yes, they certainly are but it seems to be harder and harder to get rid of snapd. It's probably not going to be an actual is
702.
by Quekid5 6y ago
Not too seriously, but it kind of depends on the project which $OTHER_DISTRO we'll go with, I think. Debian stable is an obvious choice for projects that don't rely on too much "new stuff" because we already have a lot o
703.
by Quekid5 6y ago
Good correction, thanks! :)
704.
by Quekid5 6y ago
You absolutely nailed it and this is why -- if I have any say in this (and I do) -- we will be moving away from Ubuntu. It's a completely insane stance for server systems. (I believe it's still possible to run server systems witho
705.
by Quekid5 6y ago
My personal favorite along these lines are the Busy Beaver numbers. It's not just huge... it's actually impossible to calculate (beyond very low inputs).
706.
by Quekid5 6y ago
Indeed. I've been using FastMail for email (only) for a couple of years at this point, and I've literally never had to contact their support. It just works. (I'd actually be more worried about the AU legislation about permi
707.
by Quekid5 6y ago
Of course it's popularity is due to using C... but that's not what we were talking about, was it? > Sometimes worse is better and moaning about “what if” is neither constructive[...] ... and yet here we are talking about extrem
708.
by Quekid5 6y ago
Yes? A huge portion of what a database does is amenable to formal methods. You can even come up with a reasonable rudimentary formal model of a physical machine/CPU and check against that. Sure, the model of the machine may be wrong in
709.
by Quekid5 6y ago
SQLite is written in a manner/language which only really affords tests, not proof of correctness. (My point was that it might have been written in a language where many of these exploits would not have been possible without subverting
710.
by Quekid5 6y ago
100% code coverage explores an absolutely miniscule portion of the state space of any given program. This is why formal methods are a thing.
711.
by Quekid5 6y ago
Locks are physical devices and so are susceptible to all manner of wonderful and surprising physical attacks. Programming languages can artificially limit the attack surface. (Up to hardware exploits which can subvert the processor itself.)
712.
by Quekid5 6y ago
Oh, certainly. It was really just a nitpick :).
713.
by Quekid5 6y ago
> It hasn't aged very well, either. "Even today, the X server turns fast computers into dumb terminals" hasn't been true for at least a couple of decades... You're not wrong, but that's only because people w
714.
by Quekid5 6y ago
No, they aren't -- they are data.
715.
by Quekid5 6y ago
> C was once supposed to be a simple language closer to a portable macro assembler than a high-level language, and one for which writing a compiler is relatively straightforward and takes no longer than a year. Do you have a source for t
716.
by Quekid5 6y ago
How do much do you expect your compiler to yell? Undefined Behavior can result from extremely trivial things like x+1, where x is signed. Obviously, you don't want the compiler yelling at you for almost every single for loop or simple
717.
by Quekid5 6y ago
I realize I was quite off-putting in my original reply, but "have identity" in what way, exactly? A memory address?
718.
by Quekid5 6y ago
... by erlang-solutions.com.
719.
by Quekid5 6y ago
JS... the "winner" of the Accidental Complexity game. (It was made in a couple of weeks, so it's excusable, but... it just hurts so much that this was the language that conquered the web :| )
720.
by Quekid5 6y ago
You're talking about parser generators ... the article is about parser combinators . Fully agreed that parser generators are often very limited and often require hacks to do anything non-trivial. (IME MegaParsec basically solves most

More ›