Sagiri

5 ms·

1.
by Sagiri 9y ago
The difference is that a big part of YT's appeal is how open it is. Anyone can post pretty much anything. With something like Udemy, where you have to pay for courses, Udemy needs to review every course before selling them. You need to
2.
by Sagiri 10y ago
Ethical violations are an endemic problem. If everybody named and shamed companies for every ethical violation they encounter, every company would end up named and shamed. And the really bad stuff would get buried in an avalanche of compara
3.
by Sagiri 10y ago
I'm not. Undefined behavior is 'anything goes'. An implementation can choose a particular behavior that you can rely on for a particular case of UB, because, if the only rule is that 'anything goes', it doesn't
4.
by Sagiri 10y ago
We just need to remove the Electoral College and use a straightforward majority wins (or plurality, as the case may be).
5.
by Sagiri 10y ago
It isn't? At least that would be a failure at compile-time, rather than run-time.
6.
by Sagiri 10y ago
You weren't replying to me, but I genuinely do keep my phone on silent (no, not vibrate) and will never answer it (both because it's rude and because I don't notice it). But I do try to check it regularly whenever I get the c
7.
by Sagiri 10y ago
Well, yeah. If you have any reason to suspect that you will need to run your code on other platforms or compile with other compilers, don't do compiler-specific things. Just do it cross-platform the first time. Hell, even if you don&#x
8.
by Sagiri 10y ago
If the semantics of casting pointers of wrong alignments were defined to be demons flying out of your nose, it would be perfectly acceptable to rely on that behavior.
9.
by Sagiri 10y ago
The correct and portable solution is to not use uint32_t, but to use uint8_t, and construct the integers manually.
10.
by Sagiri 10y ago
If a particular compiler specified that casting pointers of wrong alignments causes a segfault, it'd be perfectly acceptable to rely on that behavior. The standard would consider it UB, but that compiler has defined that behavior suffi
11.
by Sagiri 10y ago
Rust is basically a safe C++, written by people who like functional languages. Also, it has an official package manager in Cargo, something that C++ lacks completely. As such, it targets essentially the same niche as C/C++.
12.
by Sagiri 10y ago
Personally, I would rather builds be slow than have my build mysteriously break when I'm in that 1%.
13.
by Sagiri 10y ago
> There is no mechanism for you to mark a function as potentially crashing your teammate’s code or for specifying how to process an exception. Maybe I'm misinterpreting this, but is the author actually advocating for Java-style chec