SubjectToChange

7 ms·

31.
by SubjectToChange 2y ago
I can't imagine there's much overlap. Just look at the suppliers working on the SLS SRBs and those working on the LGM-35 program, perhaps then you'll see the extent of the overlap. Furthermore, you might want to look into
32.
by SubjectToChange 2y ago
The SLS being a government funded competitor to SpaceX has little hope SLS was never about being the most practical and/or efficient launcher. It is a pork barrel project, but one with an important role. In particular, it is maintain
33.
by SubjectToChange 2y ago
Ariane 501 as well.
34.
by SubjectToChange 2y ago
>Just from a quick glance: I see he's talking about things like stack overflows and std::bad_alloc. There are specific scenarios that a major issue, yes. But as the title of the video implies, the problem with exceptions runs far de
35.
by SubjectToChange 2y ago
>...honestly your welcome to implement your own compiler that turns it on by default just like the rust compiler which has no standard because "the compiler is the standard". The C and C++ standards are quite minimal and whethe
36.
by SubjectToChange 2y ago
(Apologies for necroing this thread) Fujitsu actually does sell their A64FX processors. In fact, they are running in one or two European super computers[1][2]. Still, that's not to say that buying them Fujitsu is easy and/or strai
37.
by SubjectToChange 2y ago
Mathematica notebooks give a glimpse of what Jupyter could be. But I have doubts whether or not Python could ever have something equivalent.
38.
by SubjectToChange 2y ago
My question: What stops Intel or AMD from providing an opt-in weaker memory model? Probably for the same reason Intel/AMD doesn't get rid of the rest of the cruft in x86-64, i.e. backwards compatibility. Additionally, there woul
39.
by SubjectToChange 2y ago
Note that Apple Silicon is TSO. Apple Silicon supports both Arm's relaxed memory model and Intel's TSO for backwards compatibility. Microsoft is doing the same for Windows on Arm.
40.
by SubjectToChange 2y ago
“My computer” is not “my work computer”.
41.
by SubjectToChange 2y ago
? I’m not going to pay thousands for a commercial license
42.
by SubjectToChange 2y ago
The numeric capabilities of Mathematica are far, far closer to Matlab's than the symbolic capabilities of Matlab are to Mathematica's.
43.
by SubjectToChange 2y ago
It isn't that simple. Yes, Mathematica has emphasized symbolic computation since day 1, but it has also had numerical capabilities like NIntegrate since day 1 too. There's no good reason why the symbolic capabilities of Mathematic
44.
by SubjectToChange 2y ago
Mathematica is freely available on the Raspberry Pi[1] and most universities have site-wide licenses. The "Home & Hobby" licenses aren't even that expensive, only $195/year for a subscription or $390 for a perpetual
45.
by SubjectToChange 2y ago
Major corporations are not paying exorbitant licensing fees to have checksumming enabled by default. In fact, for enterprises running things like vSAN, ECC DRAM, etc, database checksumming is probably nothing more than additional overhead.
46.
by SubjectToChange 2y ago
const can be cast away, auto can have some really nasty behavior, constexpr doesn't have to do anything, inline can be ignored, [[nodiscard]] can be discarded, exceptions can be thrown in noexcept functions, etc. Almost everything in C
47.
by SubjectToChange 2y ago
Yes, absolutely. But it is still easier and more practical for those codebases to write new functionality in a Safe C++ dialect than it would be to use Rust.
48.
by SubjectToChange 2y ago
>Why would someone use this new proposed C++-with-Rust-annotations in place of just Rust? Simply making C++ compilers compatible with one another is a constant struggle. Making Rust work well with existing C++ code is even more difficult
49.
by SubjectToChange 2y ago
>...I hope the committee ends up making the right call here. WG21 hasn't been able to solve the restrict type qualifier, or make a better alternative, in over twenty years. IMO, hoping that WG21 adequately solves Safe C++ is nothi
50.
by SubjectToChange 2y ago
Things like web browsers will continue to have millions of lines of C++ code regardless of how successful Rust becomes. It would be a huge improvement for everyone if such projects had a tractable path towards memory safety
51.
by SubjectToChange 2y ago
At this point I'm wondering if the purpose of safety profiles is simply to serve as a distraction. In other words, safety profiles are just something people can point to when the topic of memory safety comes up, that’s it. The objectiv
52.
by SubjectToChange 2y ago
>dude, trust me
53.
by SubjectToChange 2y ago
Look, I simply highlighted a major user of btrfs. Sorry if you have some complex emotions about them. But for some reason, I doubt you'd say the same thing when someone mentions Netflix using FreeBSD. >(a) You do not know how or
54.
by SubjectToChange 2y ago
The problem with ISO C standardization is dealing with absolutely impoverished implementations. Said implementations either object to anything moderately complex or can't be trusted to do it right.
55.
by SubjectToChange 2y ago
Rust ain't gonna displace C any time soon. For C++, you might have a better argument. Incrementally replacing C code with Rust is far, far easier than C++. For instance, passing null-terminated strings to Rust code is quite straigh
56.
by SubjectToChange 2y ago
so yes, c things are being ported to rust, but in situations they would have been ported to cpp. Not quite. I doubt librsvg would have been ported to C++ if Rust didn't exist. Nor do I believe that C++ would have been allowed into th
57.
by SubjectToChange 2y ago
Facebook (well, Meta, I guess) is famously a big user and developer of btrfs. It seems to work just fine for them.
58.
by SubjectToChange 2y ago
I think we should start putting details of the ABI in ELF That basically implies name mangling in some form or another, i.e. good luck trying to convince C programmers of such a thing.
59.
by SubjectToChange 2y ago
How is musl special when it comes to interposing malloc? As far as I’m aware, (dynamically) swapping out malloc implementations is a messy business no matter what. Most libc implementations only “support” the behavior in the sense that they
60.
by SubjectToChange 2y ago
As strange as it might sound, that’s basically what happened. I mean, let’s assume that Red Hat leadership initiated the systemd project, then we are immediately confronted by a number of problems. First of all, if Red Hat planned to ship s

More ›