jordigh

55 ms·

631.
by jordigh 8y ago
The issue is that the optimised code is not the same as the unoptimised code, and debugging optimised code sucks. It appears to the debugger that your execution is jumping around erratically and often variables don't exist because the
632.
by jordigh 8y ago
The basic idea I like is, take x^2 + y^2 = z^2, but divide by z^2 to get (x/z)^2 + (y/z)^2 = 1. Now you're looking for the rational points on the unit circle. An important observation is that any two rational points define a
633.
by jordigh 8y ago
By the way, is it a secret to programmers that Pythagorean triples can be parametrised? I understand that the point of the code is to enumerate them without knowing that they can be parametrised, but the parametrisation in this case is not
634.
by jordigh 8y ago
Just that? With no extra help from them? No schematics or diagrams or documentation? Do you still have to reverse-engineer their work? Did AMD have to get permission from Intel to implement the i386 instruction set?
635.
by jordigh 8y ago
And again, what does it mean for the instruction set to be open? Does that mean that they are releasing circuit schematics and hardware documentation? Surely it means more than releasing documentation for the instruction set like we have fo
636.
by jordigh 8y ago
Donald Knuth shaved the ultimate yak. He wanted to write a book with mathematics in it so he implemented what for decades has been industry-standard mathematical typesetting system: TeX. That's remarkable. I just wish he'd finish
637.
by jordigh 8y ago
Did Confluent use Node? Python? Ruby? Django? Flask? Linux? Did they manage to avoid using any free and open source software? Would they have liked it any of the things that they used said "you're not allowed to put this on a serv
638.
by jordigh 8y ago
Could you be more explicit and say that it means the software isn't "open source"? Complying with OSI's definition of "open source" is what "open source" means. They defined the term, so they have a p
639.
by jordigh 8y ago
It's the same old thing since 1998. It's just a push back against free software as always. It's the same kind of attacks as always, back when Ballmer called the GPL "cancer", except that now that "open" an
640.
by jordigh 8y ago
That would be a lot of clutter. When you're on a codebase where people bother writing commit messages, reaching for blame/annotate output becomes second nature and reveals so much about your code. It's just as good if not bet
641.
by jordigh 8y ago
One thing I always want to tell people about commit messages: There’s no length limit. In fact, write as much as you can. Go crazy. Write some more. Explain. Talk about how your day went. Tell us how you found the problem. Put benchmarks th
642.
by jordigh 8y ago
That's why I qualified it with "if that's what you mean by closed source". I don't know if all source is either open or closed and anything that isn't OSI-approved is closed. I don't think that's what
643.
by jordigh 8y ago
Is the D GC actually that bad? Do we have benchmarks or something to prove that the GC means D is dead in the water? I always hear about this hypothetical danger of GC but my D usage hasn't found it and my D programs typically match or
644.
by jordigh 8y ago
D's compiler was never "closed source" if by that you mean "source not visible". It had a weird non-open source license for a long time, but the source has always been visible. The weird license did use to scare me
645.
by jordigh 8y ago
Well, Walter's company is Digital Mars so that's where he gets his naming scheme from. Nothing to do with Doom except they both are using the same Greco-Roman deity astronomical naming scheme.
646.
Automatic Shading(peppercarrot.com)
3 points by jordigh 8y ago|0 comments
647.
by jordigh 8y ago
Nooo, they stopped? The release songs were really great, and I always looked forward to a new release song.
648.
by jordigh 8y ago
I think the choice to showcase the polynomial chapter is deliberate. The topic is likely to be familiar to many, but he's using it as an example to explain why mathematicians do things they way they do. I've often expressed the sa
649.
by jordigh 8y ago
Here is my blog post for when I did this in D: http://jordi.inversethought.com/blog/advent-of-d/
650.
by jordigh 8y ago
In case anyone else was wondering what this jargon meant, "non-lexical lifetime": https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/43234 Took me a bit of websearching to figure out what people were excited
651.
by jordigh 8y ago
Maybe the simple mention of Stallman is what broke the attempt at surveillance. :-)
652.
by jordigh 8y ago
I hope the Data Liberation Front, while not exactly a "product", lives a long and prosper life for as long as Google hoards our data: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Data_Liberation_Front They were quite
653.
by jordigh 8y ago
I don't know anything about this question, but "neuromorphic photonics" sounds so cyber and I guess it's already kind of real: https://www.crcpress.com/Neuromorphic-Photonics/Prucnal-Shas...
654.
by jordigh 8y ago
I also like how DFeed looks. It's written in D and simultaneously serves forums, mailing lists, IRC and (lol) Usenet; all on an SQLite backend. It's also compiled to machine code, so it's pretty fast: https://forum
655.
by jordigh 8y ago
I love that it says "ProTip". How is that different than a "tip" by now?
656.
by jordigh 8y ago
I feel like Due South managed to give a good description of Canada: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryla4x-lQ58
657.
by jordigh 8y ago
So, can we also have a useful discussion about the evils of this?
658.
by jordigh 8y ago
You don't have to rely on your beliefs for what "equivalent access" means. The writers of the GPL have already written a FAQ for what it means, which I linked to you above. They wrote this line knowing how most judges would i
659.
by jordigh 8y ago
Yes, if you choose to distribute by CDs (lol who does that anymore) but it also allows for "equivalent access". You're allowed to charge for downloading the source code as much as you originally charged for the binary: https
660.
by jordigh 8y ago
What about selling to consumers, not to businesses? Couldn't you do gamedev this way? Given the big indie market as well as the modding community, I'm surprised it's not done more often.

More ›