dwattttt

8 ms·

91.
by dwattttt 4mo ago
I think https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48766436 is a practical answer. A marker that can't be forged (without explicitly malicious code being written), which is needed by the "yield to suspend/shutdown&
92.
by dwattttt 4mo ago
You're also not restricted to 4 digits. A full passphrase is an option.
93.
by dwattttt 4mo ago
> 5. Therefore, anything that enables people to write faster is good for the students, who can get more paper written, or the paper better revised, during the finite time available for writing. I think you're missing some logic in t
94.
by dwattttt 4mo ago
If your test is bottlenecked on the speed it takes to write it, you're testing writing skills. I also challenge that "hand writing is harder to revise"; again, why is the speed it takes to write it at all relevant?
95.
by dwattttt 4mo ago
Yes. The work to assert each pointer passed into a function isn't "high"; it's purely mechanical, it could almost be refactored automatically. But most of all, the effort required to prove you don't need to is _way_
96.
by dwattttt 4mo ago
You're not "extending" the valid state space. That null value being passed to that function is already a potential state of your program. You're actually pruning the valid state space; before, when the null value is pass
97.
by dwattttt 4mo ago
Because no one is expecting it to work if a null is passed. Your total range of behaviours left are crashes, doesn't crash and is silently ok, or doesn't crash and causes something worse (data corruption, you get your product in a
98.
by dwattttt 4mo ago
No. I'm talking about adding the check to reject NULL. Then you don't have to spend time justifying or figuring out why a NULL can't turn up here.
99.
by dwattttt 4mo ago
I haven't seen hundreds of dependencies in C projects either. But I _have_ seen on the scale of 1s to 10s of libraries and algorithms vendored in (sometimes just a header or 5). It's also an indirect risk, but I've seen C pro
100.
by dwattttt 4mo ago
It takes a lot longer to figure out if it'll be a problem than to just add the check. And you don't have to ponder whether it's possible for a null to get there, because now it's fine if it does.
101.
by dwattttt 4mo ago
An assertion is an app crashing on a violation. The problem is when it's not guaranteed to crash, and instead does something very wrong.
102.
by dwattttt 4mo ago
That link says NTVDM uses the CPUs virtual-8086 mode, rather than emulating a CPU; NTVDM's approach can't be done on a CPU that's in 64bit mode (per Intel's docs), the CPU would have to be stepped back into protected mod
103.
by dwattttt 4mo ago
You're still missing a gap in the middle, where someone knows standards & specifications like "this material in a building this tall will collapse when it gets over 12 stories".
104.
by dwattttt 4mo ago
Yes, as sibling noted, 64bit Windows dropped support for running 16bit applications (which require real mode). I don't recall seeing a technical justification, however I suspect it's related to what CPU state transitions are allow
105.
by dwattttt 4mo ago
Intel backwards compatibility has meant that real mode is still with us more of less, but to give context to people who aren't as familiar: real mode was superseded by protected mode with the introduction of the 80286, in 1982.
106.
by dwattttt 4mo ago
To the extent that one doesn't try to suppress compiler warnings & errors / actively break the language, you get what the compiler confirms is true about a function signature. For Python, it's very little (nothing?). For
107.
by dwattttt 4mo ago
https://thecodelesscode.com/case/43
108.
by dwattttt 4mo ago
Play silly games, win silly prizes
109.
by dwattttt 4mo ago
"understanding" is overstating it. Correlation between tokens embedded in the weights via training, yes.
110.
by dwattttt 4mo ago
I don't think it's an elegant design at all; I think it's a workable design given the constraint of requiring fork. It's an achievable result with less specialised parts, but there's a reason we don't write all
111.
by dwattttt 4mo ago
And as noted elsewhere, what you want is a new process with a specific fd: duplicating your current process state is a path-dependent evolution, rather than a logic step. There have been plenty of comments here about effective workarounds,
112.
by dwattttt 4mo ago
Thermodynamics is a harsh mistress
113.
by dwattttt 4mo ago
Which special facilities are you referring to? If it's the ability to selectively inherit handles (fds) to a new process, Linux's lack of this "special facility" is nothing to be proud of. How do you selectively pass on
114.
by dwattttt 4mo ago
Doing the same thing on Windows, I create the pipe and get two ends in the same process. Then I'd call CreateProcess and indicate I want the pipe's handle (fd) inherited to the child, and I'd use a prearranged way to tell the
115.
by dwattttt 4mo ago
> Let's say you have 1GB RAM. You're running program that occupies 600 MB. Now this program wants to launch second small program that occupies 1 MB. > You're doing fork + exec. This is the clear problem: you don't
116.
by dwattttt 4mo ago
Your answer to "GPU driver updates on Windows are one click, how can Linux be easier" is "here's another distro, install this instead"? This is ridiculous
117.
by dwattttt 4mo ago
Yes, I do. And X11 is the "Or give up on whole classes of improvements, because you can't constrain package behaviour at all." Or really, give up on anything that might change behaviour, if you don't want to break back c
118.
by dwattttt 4mo ago
That's not actually a good thing. General purpose programming languages as configuration file formats also give you "can do anything"; but when it comes time to try to improve or update the Python package ecosystem, you'
119.
by dwattttt 5mo ago
You miss debug.com, wish there was an equivalent for the modern era, find out that windbg does almost all these things today, and say there's nothing of value there. I say this as something who does all the things you described debug.c
120.
by dwattttt 5mo ago
Actually, I didn't even get to this part of your message, windbg absolutely can patch currently running programs. It does all the things you think it can't do.

More ›