eximius

67 ms·

781.
by eximius 7y ago
Because that would be worse.
782.
by eximius 7y ago
Eh, if there are problems with the proof, it isnt because of that. All proofs by contradiction eventually claim the negation of their premise must be true. That's the point.
783.
by eximius 7y ago
> except if the user reuses that password on other sites Except you can't really except that.
784.
by eximius 7y ago
This is why there is client side hashing. You still hash+salt on the server side, but the client side hashing prevents the worst kind of exposure.
785.
by eximius 7y ago
What? $2/citizen? Somehow I thought I was worth more than that.
786.
by eximius 7y ago
> I don't find math to be "free and flexible," at least, not compared with prose. Then you haven't done math to a sufficient level. Which most people don't if they aren't math majors. I'm not talking ab
787.
by eximius 7y ago
Except he didn't. He created a way of assigning surrogate values to forms that otherwise wouldn't have one. To quote from the Wikipedia article you linked: > assigning a value to divergent infinite series Every time someone cla
788.
by eximius 7y ago
Someone did release a Pam module? That required confirmation before someone sudo-ed. I thought it was Stripe but I can't find it right now.
789.
by eximius 7y ago
We use the nonce feature to allow inline scripts because (for legacy reasons) we don't have server side rendering enabled for our React app
790.
by eximius 7y ago
> In some part, it is because they may have some powers. What. I will shamelessly admit to being an ardent fantasy fan, reading lots of silly things for the fun of it, imagining other silly scenarios for fun. But this sort of... mass del
791.
by eximius 7y ago
Is Svelte 3 production ready? I've been meaning to start a project with Svelte 3, but I'm not sure what tools to use. Is Sapper ready for v3 or is it still mostly on v2? I've also somewhat been hoping that Svelte 3 will get T
792.
by eximius 7y ago
> vec![] => exclamation mark squeezed between what appears to be a keyword "vec" and an array syntax vec![1,2,3] declares a vector of [1,2,3]. But it isn't `keyword` ! `array`, it's more like vec(1,2,3) where vec i
793.
by eximius 7y ago
> Sovereign immunity is the legal doctrine that the government can't be sued for anything unless it specifically allows you to do so. I recognize why this exists, but I can't help but wonder why people working in government are
794.
by eximius 7y ago
Semi-off topic: What is the latest and greatest in authorization mechanisms lately? I like capability-based at on OS level, but sadly I'm not doing anything that interesting. For things like webapps, is there anything better than ACLs
795.
by eximius 7y ago
> potential to fuel a very expensive, possibly even existential, crisis for your company. In terms of security breaches, this maybe SHOULD be true, but isn't. In terms of bad feature development, it's a little melodramatic. I&#
796.
by eximius 7y ago
I don't understand. Are we supposed to know that private schools are also bad? Private schools are a form of socioeconomic class segregation and there are problems with them, but I would definitely believe that private schools are, by
797.
by eximius 7y ago
... Does Google not have any data centers in Australia? (Granted, it isn't a given that Stadia might run out of those DCs, but with Borg, I don't see why they couldn't.)
798.
by eximius 7y ago
I'm on Ubuntu 18.04 at work and I don't have scdoc available. (base) eximius@eximius-nuc:~/go/src/aerc-0.1.0$ apt-cache search scdoc (base) eximius@eximius-nuc:~/go/src/aerc-0.1.0$ I&#x27
799.
by eximius 7y ago
I mean, that just means the compiler needs to ignore the `Future::await()` function scope and rewrite the context above. It's already being magical. A slight indirection in implementation would be worth the pedagogical clarity, I think
800.
by eximius 7y ago
impl Future { fn await(self: Self) -> Self::Target { intrinsic::await(self) # compiler magic } } Then you CAN do `fut.await()` or `Future::await(fut)`, etc. Assuming this wouldn't be imposs
801.
by eximius 7y ago
I am certainly being sloppy, though I think fundamentally misunderstanding it is a bit of an exaggeration. I know you can't await in a non-async function so, at the very least, you'd need (IDR the syntax for async closures?)
802.
by eximius 7y ago
I mean, why couldn't it? let newvec = vec![fut1, fut2, fut3].map(Future::await).collect() would be equivalent to let f1 = fut1.await(); let f2 = fut2.await(); let f3 = fut3.await(); let newvec = vec![f1,f2,f3
803.
by eximius 7y ago
hell, I'd support that. A function/method 'does a thing' while field access 'reads a thing'. Rust doesn't have implicit getters and setters like Python might have. It doesn't LOOK like `fut.await` sho
804.
by eximius 7y ago
To reinforce what others are saying, this is the only Rust decision that gives me even a moments pause. Everything else is pretty pleasant. Honestly, I hope that this backfires and gets fixed in a future Rust Edition. It's a very silly
805.
by eximius 7y ago
> There's no hint in that expression that it's anything other than a method call. Compared with `fut.await`... > There's no hint in that expression that it's anything other than a field access. At least there is pr
806.
by eximius 7y ago
Excited for the feature. Disappointed we didn't get something like a magic method (e.g., lang item) (which isn't without precedence [1] [2]) so we could have had `Future::await(fut)` or `fut.await()`. [1] - https://mani
807.
by eximius 7y ago
Even there, you only care that you aren't running on a particular thread, just NOT on one particular thread. You still pass it to an executor that has it's own thread pool and shouldn't be terribly concerned with the particul
808.
by eximius 7y ago
None of the above. It's compiler magic. It's a keyword that says 'await on this awaitable object' (currently only a Future can be await-ed). You can read the OP which contains links to more blog posts on the reasoning. I
809.
by eximius 7y ago
Okay, this is maybe more reasonable than I expected. I believe distros shipping non-default stylesheets are the target here? They seem to explicitly acknowledge users can do whatever they want. > If you like to tinker with your own syste
810.
by eximius 7y ago
Part of the problem is conceptualizing this as a reference (which, admittedly, it is without optimization). Instead, this is a borrow which indicates that the callee will not mutate the argument. It makes more sense in this context.

More ›