RX14

16 ms·

151.
by RX14 9y ago
Because its a couple line patch to memtest and a short ruby script. It obviously works well, why bother over engineering it?
152.
by RX14 9y ago
In the case of large responses, bandwidth out is a much more interesting metric. I'm sure their number sounds more impressive though.
153.
by RX14 9y ago
The default for single devices is to have DUP metadata, and for raid1 devices the default is raid1 metadata. These are the defaults, somehow they got bypassed. I think you're right that you need to think a little more and know a little
154.
by RX14 9y ago
Which raid level were you using over those multiple disks? I've been using btrfs and never even experienced a hiccup despite continuous sector failures, continuous drive failures and even disk controllers disconnecting on the fly. And
155.
by RX14 9y ago
I'm looking at the rendered image and the letter spacing seems vastly better than it is when rendered on the page (Freetype, Linux, with a few simple fontconfig improvements).
156.
by RX14 9y ago
This is exactly what we do in Crystal: just mmap a new stack and let the OS deal with growing the stack through page faults. One thing I will say though is that you can't shrink the stack, which is a problem. You also may need to adjus
157.
by RX14 9y ago
Yes, it breaks on 32bit but that's an acceptable tradeoff in most places because the vast majority of places where a modern language like swift would actually be used are 64bit.
158.
by RX14 9y ago
I was viewing https://wiki.mozilla.org/Security/Sandbox and it appears that Firefox on Linux now has some kind of sandboxing. I presume it's not as good as Chrome but I'm sure it's raised the security le
159.
by RX14 9y ago
I heard somewhere that Firefox's security showing was pretty dismal before they introduces e10s with seccomp-bpf sandboxing. The anecdote I heard was that in "hacking competitions" a Chrome vulnerability was worth a serious h
160.
by RX14 9y ago
I've done many bad things to BTRFS, used it on multiple drives of differing sises, used it on drives connected over the cheapest USB to SATA adapters I could find, used it on disks with consistent corruption for over a year, and it&#x2
161.
by RX14 9y ago
In Crystal, we've decided that the dependency manager shards will have no centralised package repository, which we hope will solve problems like this. It makes forking shards very easy, it completely avoids name squatting, and it shoul
162.
by RX14 9y ago
Unfortunately, unless the IO in the stdlib uses or is modified to schedule these fibers around evented IO, they're essentially useless as soon as you use an external library. Go and Erlang do this, Crystal does this but with only N:1 m
163.
by RX14 9y ago
b2 is a really good alternative to s3.
164.
by RX14 9y ago
Off-topic but I wish 16:10 hadn't died with the move to 4k. I have an old 1200p dell ultrasharp in 16:10 and it's sublime compared to my other 16:9. You'd think it doesn't make much of a difference, but it really does. E
165.
by RX14 9y ago
I think you'd be very surprised what a lot of power and a shit antenna can do. Obviously won't last when someone comes along with DF equipment, but it really wouldn't be hard to conceal visually.
166.
by RX14 9y ago
Should be easy enough to make the installation process as simple as possible. Even after we get windows support complete you'll need some libraries and the msvc toolchain to compile for windows, so it's likely that we'll make
167.
by RX14 9y ago
Two things: 1. We need to get windows support to cover the entirety of the standard library (when it's possible of course). This will also allow us to cross-compile the Crystal compiler onto Windows, which bootstraps the whole Windows
168.
by RX14 9y ago
Currently a fork of Crystal is needed to cross-compile Crystal applications for Windows. However, we are working on merging that work into the standard library, and extending the work to the whole stdlib. Currently not enough of the standar
169.
How to build video games for Windows using Crystal(blaxpirit.com)
6 points by RX14 9y ago|6 comments
170.
by RX14 9y ago
It would be my impression that 1s of cpu time used per request is a very very high value for the given problem. Am I incorrect?
171.
by RX14 9y ago
Well I'm just reporting the reality that the keyservers are down when I want to use them, almost without fail. I suspect that gpg isn't trying multiple servers in the pool but only trying the first A record it finds. I've had
172.
by RX14 9y ago
I hope they spend some of that money on the keyservers, they seem to be down every time I want to grab some gpg keys.
173.
by RX14 9y ago
I think the commenter means that jerks are less likely to tip drivers who do deserve it.
174.
by RX14 9y ago
This is the worst thing I've ever found, still not solved: https://github.com/crystal-lang/crystal/issues/4127
175.
by RX14 9y ago
It's clear the author thinks it's a con, but I don't see why this article should justify that, it's a pretty unrelated topic to the one at hand.
176.
by RX14 9y ago
I'm a little confused as to why comparing single-threaded performance (for scaleway) is more "fair". Surely you should compare both, to allow people to compare for single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads.
177.
by RX14 9y ago
Scaleway are owned by one of the largest ISPs in France. Bandwidth is typically brought symmetric, but home traffic is nearly entirely download. It's my assumption that they use their server buisness to offset their bandwidth costs f
178.
by RX14 9y ago
Currently that's true, but we aim to have better concurrency than go at the point of 1.0. Crystal can probably also gain more architectures faster due to llvm. It's only about a week's worth of work (at most) to port Crystal
179.
by RX14 9y ago
Crystal actually has quite a few features unique to Crystal too! I'd love to hear the author's ideas of how he wants to improve Ruby, maybe some of those ideas are still applicable to Crystal.
180.
by RX14 9y ago
You mean $0.004 / GB? So only 20% cheaper than B2, but not realtime?

More ›