barchar

8 ms·

121.
by barchar 5y ago
> In the end, steno itself is probably not a lot harder to learn than QWERTY (although I think more frustrating because the "hunt and peck" option for steno is less intuitive and often slower). But it requires sort of a "s
122.
by barchar 5y ago
I mean sure. If you can do this you can debug the process (how do you think debuggers are implemented?) and ofc once you're debugging a process you can introduce bugs and cause random havoc. Linux can do this too with ptrace. And mac h
123.
by barchar 5y ago
It's extremely likely for stuff from Kernel32.dll. > That's not true. You're not considering different virtual addresses backed by the same pages. technically I suppose, but PEs don't tend to be relocatable, so if it
124.
by barchar 5y ago
there's also unfork(2)! Do you unfork then unexec or unexec then unfork?
125.
by barchar 5y ago
Apple's OpenGL implementation has always been mediocre even when it was technically supported.
126.
by barchar 5y ago
have you looked at ParaSail. It's designed by the guy who led the Ada 9x ('95) design team and it's unique in being pointer free (not just like in ada or Fortran where pointers are discouraged, but the language literally does
127.
by barchar 5y ago
Macros get better as more people use them anyway, you build up a community knowledge of what the hell they generate. It turns out that unhygenic macros are really rather useful, if a bit dangerous.
128.
by barchar 5y ago
I'm definitely a massive fan of some of zig's ideas I like how flexible structs are, and the inclusion of structural subtyping for them. I do wish C's unnamed fields made an appearance, however. The way type constructors work
129.
by barchar 7y ago
yep! Clang-cl uses this library btw (I think it's possible to get libc++ sorta working on windows, but it's not something that's officially supported).
130.
by barchar 13y ago
Go is pretty much competing with java and not C, C++, FORTRAN, and Ada. Nimrod is up there with the best of them. Go is also somewhat designed around reducing build times, nimrod is not. However C and C++ (esp C++) pretty much manage to be
131.
by barchar 13y ago
RAII is sorta by definition immediate. They are freed right when they exit scope, this can be annoying for large tree structures. Yeah the GC not being thread safe can be annoying. CSP works OK and if you need more performance a thread safe
132.
by barchar 13y ago
well yes. This is true. But nimrod has (very fast) GC. And it also has destructors and RAII so if you really, really need unique_ptr style memory management you can do that. Rust has lifetime tracking but I would be interested to know how i
133.
by barchar 13y ago
Nimrod is indeed pretty similar to D, although I think it is a bit more uniform because of the way the object model works. Also "death to mustache braces"
134.
by barchar 13y ago
Nimrod's syntax is quite similar to scala (and Pascal!). Haskell can be really fast but fast Haskell and easy/safe Haskell tend not to overlap as much as one would like
135.
by barchar 13y ago
I like nimrod because it has a sane syntax. I can write a function declaration in one line of nimrod that would be 6 lines of c++. I also like Nimrod's focus on static dispatch and easy to use generics. Rust makes me uneasy because the