dwattttt

13 ms·

211.
by dwattttt 8mo ago
And if you grabbed the knife and went on a violent spree, I'd absolutely expect the knife manufacturer to refuse to sell to you anymore. The knife manufacturer isn't obligated to sell to you in either case, I'd expect them no
212.
by dwattttt 8mo ago
Mono! Doh!
213.
by dwattttt 8mo ago
> if I provide you with the document signed by my cousin, Honest Ahmed? You surely mean Honest Achmed? He gets a bad rap: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=647959
214.
by dwattttt 8mo ago
The word 'excited' in GP's post isn't decorative.
215.
by dwattttt 8mo ago
I don't know that I like this approach. It certainly works, but it's not specifically what (people expect) a .gitignore file to be used for. That confusion isn't good: https://thecodelesscode.com/case/222
216.
by dwattttt 8mo ago
This still confuses me. Do you mean to say "use the .gitignore functionality, and check in the .gitkeep file"?
217.
by dwattttt 8mo ago
> mark the old things as deprecated, but support it forever Is that 'supported'? A library that uses a callback that exists in 'log' but not in 'slog'; it'll compile forever, but it'll never work.
218.
by dwattttt 8mo ago
> It is much much better for an API to be kinda crappy (but stable) for historical reasons But this does more than just add a maintenance burden. If the API can't be removed, architectural constraints it imposes also can't be r
219.
by dwattttt 8mo ago
Using VS build tools for open source development is covered by the Community licence [0], separate from this Build Tools licence change. That license is more open than you might expect, working as an individual it even permits proprietary d
220.
by dwattttt 8mo ago
I wish the post was clearer (though I'm not sure what that looks like). I've made the same mistake interpreting it, then had to go back and reread it a few times.
221.
by dwattttt 8mo ago
It's actually not. It's complicated, but they're explicitly allowing Build Tools to be used to compile open source dependencies of closed source projects that do not need the MSVC toolchain for proprietary components. It&#x27
222.
by dwattttt 8mo ago
This does not apply if you're developing closed source: > if you and your team need to compile and develop proprietary C++ code with Visual Studio, a Visual Studio license will still be required.
223.
by dwattttt 8mo ago
From memory, the virtualisation operations themselves aren't nested. The VM instructions interact with the external virtualisation hardware, so it's more of a cooperative situation, e.g. a guest can create & manage virtualisat
224.
by dwattttt 9mo ago
Locks are there to keep honest people honest. To expand on the saying, they're not there to be insurmountable. Just to be hard enough to make it easier to do things the right way.
225.
by dwattttt 9mo ago
I wonder if you could replace the git commands exposed to an agent. A 'commit' 'happens' when you leave a change in jj, i.e. by moving to a new or existing change; that's when you'd run pre-commit hooks.
226.
by dwattttt 9mo ago
Multiple agents is definitely tempting fate. Concurrent modification of the same git repo by multiple entities? At that point you should use multiple repos so they can merge & resolve. EDIT: of course, if a single agent uses git to modi
227.
by dwattttt 9mo ago
It sounds like it's a design goal of this "wamedia" to _not_ maintain bug compatibility with media players.
228.
by dwattttt 9mo ago
Referencing the classic https://xkcd.com/2030 "I don't quite know how to put this, but our entire field is bad at what we do, and if you rely on us everyone will die" "They say they've fixed it with
229.
by dwattttt 9mo ago
Tar is not the pinnacle of "containers"; it has age and ubiquity, and that's about it at this point. Tar's purpose was to serialise files and metadata in 1979, accounting for tape foibles such as fixed or variable data b
230.
by dwattttt 9mo ago
This seems like something that shouldn't be the container formats responsibility. You can record arbitrary metadata and put it in a file in the container, so it's trivial to layer on top. On the other hand, tie the container struc
231.
by dwattttt 9mo ago
> they have to resort to solutions like the rust-analyzer. It's not really a bad thing. IDEs want results ASAP, so a solution should focus on latency; query based compilers can compile just enough of the source to get the answer to
232.
by dwattttt 9mo ago
That's not forced behaviour. If you want to do something more interesting, you'd use the raw/unsynchronised handles: /// The returned handle has no external synchronization or buffering layered on top. co
233.
by dwattttt 9mo ago
> Empirically, CTVP attains very good detection rates with reliable false positives A novel use of the word "reliable"? Jokes aside, either they mean the FPR as the opposite of what you'd expect, the table is not represent
234.
by dwattttt 9mo ago
Format C: /DevDrv /Q EDIT: Just to be clear, if you don't understand when you'd use this command, do not use it. I suddenly realised people might not be familiar with formatting, and don't want to be responsible for
235.
by dwattttt 9mo ago
> It's not Given that other posts solved the problem by scripting this feature on top of git, I guess you're telling them their solution isn't relevant too.
236.
by dwattttt 9mo ago
The feature of "there is no such thing as an uncommitted working directory" is very relevant to the situation.
237.
by dwattttt 9mo ago
The author also wrote in the same article: > This is also why you can't just write A = B+1: that unifies A with the compound term +(B, 1)
238.
by dwattttt 9mo ago
Is it your contention that the author doesn't understand that that Prolog predicates don't "return" anything, that they were expecting assignment rather than unification? I would read it again, their examples clearly sta
239.
by dwattttt 9mo ago
> In short, "Here are my gripes about Prolog, a language that I don't understand." > this article has the flavor of an impatient newbie getting frustrated because he can't be bothered to read the documentation. The
240.
by dwattttt 9mo ago
They probably should've worked harder to avoid the name "Dolby Unified Decoder", or DUD for short.

More ›