dataflow

37 ms·

721.
by dataflow 9mo ago
I'm not sure where you got your definition, but I basically copied Wikipedia's.
722.
by dataflow 9mo ago
Yup it's the oil. https://www.npr.org/2026/01/03/g-s1-104346/trump-venezuela-m...
723.
by dataflow 9mo ago
> Regardless of your opinion on Maduro, you can still acknowledge that the head of a sovereign state being captured (...) Note the US administration contends that he wasn't the legitimate head of state. [1] [2] [1] https:/&#
724.
by dataflow 9mo ago
Maybe worth mentioning I posted this before seeing the news about Maduro being captured. No idea whether/how that might change the calculus.
725.
by dataflow 9mo ago
It's explicitly about oil, right? Wikipedia [1]: > Andrew McCabe quotes Trump as saying of Venezuela "That’s the country we should be going to war with, they have all that oil and they’re right on our back door.” > In June
726.
by dataflow 9mo ago
> The program reads the logic from stdin and translates it into machine instructions. I can agree that there is not a lot of a freedom in what can be done, but I think it just means that the source language is not Turing complete. I don&
727.
by dataflow 9mo ago
> Usually, a program is being interpreted first, then switches to compiled code in the middle of execution. I agree what they have isn't JIT compilation, but not for that reason. Tiered execution was never a central part of JIT comp
728.
by dataflow 9mo ago
Thanks for the link. Like you said, that's not normative, so it doesn't really dictate anything about what the compiler would currently do if you violated borrow checking, right? > What you seem to be forgetting in this discuss
729.
by dataflow 9mo ago
> Disagreeing with your plainly incorrect assertion is not "not following" what you're saying. I'm sorry, that particular comment wasn't disagreeing so much as missing my point entirely. It gave an example that w
730.
by dataflow 9mo ago
I don't feel you're quite following what I'm saying unfortunately. In your specific example: couldn't the optimizer just optimize out all the mutations you've written, under the assumption that such a program woul
731.
by dataflow 9mo ago
> It will even work fine as long as you don't write code which invokes UB (which does include code which would not pass the borrow checker, as the borrow checker necessarily rejects valid programs in order to forbid all invalid prog
732.
by dataflow 9mo ago
This can't possibly be guaranteed to work just by disabling the checker, can it? If Rust optimizes based on borrow-checker assumptions (which I understand it can and does) then wouldn't violating them be UB, unless you also mess w
733.
by dataflow 9mo ago
I don't follow your publications so sorry if this is a dumb question, but do you modify/normalize or at least inspect the hidden power settings at all before running benchmarks? Like "processor performance autonomous mode&quo
734.
Why Are Cars Getting Rid of Android Auto?(bgr.com)
8 points by dataflow 9mo ago|5 comments
735.
by dataflow 9mo ago
One problem here is "smarter" is an ambiguous word. I have no problem believing the average LLM has more knowledge than my brain; if that's what "smarter" means, them I'm happy to believe I'm stupid. But I
736.
by dataflow 9mo ago
Of interest: - 8 U.S.C. § 1182(f): Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182#:~:text=(f)Su... - The case and decision text: https:/&#
737.
Alternative Christmas Message(en.wikipedia.org)
1 points by dataflow 9mo ago|0 comments
738.
by dataflow 9mo ago
Are they gonna keep doing this with Rust etc.?
739.
by dataflow 10mo ago
I think this might not be a shortcoming of MSVC but rather a deliberate design decision. It seems likely that MSVC is failing to apply strict aliasing, but that it's deliberately avoiding it, probably for compatibility reasons with cod
740.
by dataflow 10mo ago
That's amazing.
741.
by dataflow 10mo ago
> The worst possible scenario is that the data/power standard supported by the physical connection isn't optimal. But it will always work. I don't know what "always work" means here but I feel like I've had
742.
by dataflow 10mo ago
> It would not only mean that Congress can create independent agencies, but that all cabinet officers are independent by default. Nobody seriously thinks that’s true, but that’s the implication of the non-redundant reading of the Opinion
743.
by dataflow 10mo ago
I don't buy this at all: > otherwise, the implication is the only thing the President can do with principal officers is to ask them for an opinion. That's not at all the implication... how do you even reach that conclusion? The
744.
by dataflow 10mo ago
> Show me how you get from that to executive agencies exercising executive power independent of the President. "[The president] may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments&quot
745.
by dataflow 10mo ago
1. You're simply not going to achieve consistency across the board, because even if you dictate this by fiat, your dependencies won't be like this. The issue of the function name being hard to spot is easier to fix with tooling (j
746.
by dataflow 10mo ago
This makes things seem more complicated than they already are, I feel? There's nothing special about auto here. It deduces the same type as a template parameter, with the same collapsing rules. decltype(auto) is a different beast a
747.
by dataflow 10mo ago
Generally, you don't. I'm not sure why the parent suggested you should normally do this. However, there are occasional specific situations in which it's helpful, and that's when you use it.
748.
by dataflow 10mo ago
I did exactly this < 10 minutes ago. For my local area.
749.
by dataflow 10mo ago
In what architecture are those types different? Is there a good reason for it there architecturally, or is it just a toolchain idiosyncrasy in terms of how it's exposed (like LP64 vs. LLP64 etc.)?
750.
by dataflow 10mo ago
> the impact on the final assessment could be as high as $80 That's the financial impact. Depending on what you're missing, the nonfinancial might be opening yourself to perjury, because you're knowingly claiming a falseho

More ›