krig

20 ms·

211.
by krig 12y ago
I'd say those numbers you link to are pretty amazing for a garbage collected language. Compared to Java, SBCL is roughly on par, with some benchmarks 2-3x slower and some 2-3x faster. edit: To clarify, I'm not saying SBCL makes Co
212.
by krig 12y ago
Considering that SBCL is among the fastest programming language implementations there is, 100x is actually not terrible for a first version.
213.
The modified “hydraIRC limited-use source license”(github.com)
2 points by krig 12y ago|0 comments
214.
by krig 12y ago
How do you determine what information is legitimately private and what is not? If the only information that is ever transmitted under encryption is that which your adversary doesn't want you to transmit -- that is, if the only encrypte
215.
by krig 12y ago
"major star" may have been a bit strong, of course you won't make it onto the top 100 lists since those are completely controlled and owned by the major labels. Making a comfortable living without a label contract is certainl
216.
by krig 12y ago
Wow, what a terrible article. First of all, the obvious biases of the author as an ex-Googler and java programmer shine through strong enough to make you blind, but the arguments he puts forward are just awful. Really, java is leaps and bou
217.
by krig 12y ago
I don't agree. I think it is more important to ensure free and private communications for people in oppressive regimes today than it is to ensure steady incomes for full-time musicians. Something that has, frankly, never been the cas
218.
by krig 12y ago
It has nothing to do with music. The sharing of music is only a side-effect of free and private sharing of digital information in general. There are a number of drawbacks with enabling private digital communications: It makes the sharing of
219.
by krig 12y ago
> I'm interested to know what people think about this. Do people think that the end (taking power away from big music industry) justifies the loss for those small-time players, or is it something that simply hasn't been conside
220.
by krig 12y ago
- Garbage Collection is handled via reference counting and ARC. No automatic cycle detection, the programmer has to manually track and resolve reference cycles. Same as using ARC in Objective C. - It is a statically typed language. Type inf
221.
by krig 12y ago
Documentation is something completely different from comments. Documentation is something you write for the interfaces you expose. This, I have absolutely no problem with. Interfaces are meant to be stable, they should be well defined, they
222.
by krig 12y ago
I don't think you understand what I'm saying. The people who maintain the system are not helped by incorrect information. The information describing how the code works in comments is invariably incorrect. None of the tools we usua
223.
by krig 12y ago
Um. You're right that code doesn't compile itself, though. That's the job of the computer operator , who takes the code I write in my notebook and flips the corresponding switches on the computer. If the computer operator is
224.
by krig 12y ago
Exactly. To me, even a comment expressing intent is usually a code smell unless it is in a function header. If the block of code is non-obvious enough that it needs an explanation, it should be its own named function, and the function name
225.
by krig 12y ago
You couldn't possibly be more wrong. Comments that describe the code and not the intent are terrible for obvious and clear reasons: They are not checked by the compiler, and they are not checked at runtime. There are no assertions that
226.
by krig 12y ago
Note that this only partially helps with a subset of the problem (and modules as proposed don't fix the issue, they just help a bit more): CPP still needs to make separate passes for each translation unit, for example. I'd recom
227.
by krig 12y ago
> Compilers can easily memoize the position and parsed content of preprocessor directives, and do a very quick skip of an #include file, as a much better way to resolve the problem. There are reasons why actual C/C++ compilers don&#
228.
by krig 12y ago
Ah, of course! My mind automatically filled in [bytes] where the [sic] is in that quote.
229.
by krig 12y ago
Well, this is a tangent, but... I do know how complex the JVM is, and I don't like it. Yes, clearly 12k won't get you the JVM. I do think there is a smaller, leaner runtime for java possible. Having everything under the sun in the
230.
by krig 12y ago
"The current basic LISP system uses about 12,000 of the 32,000 [sic] memory of the 704." 12k is pretty impressive for a complete interpreter, including standard library. I don't really have anything useful to add to that, oth
231.
by krig 13y ago
If all you want is virtual IP failover, the simplest tool I know of is ucarp as mentioned by pandemicsyn below. That's basically all it does. Note that ucarp and most (all?) virtual IP tools rely on being able to send fake ARP to updat
232.
by krig 13y ago
I think you misunderstood. These "weird entities" that I mention are all part of mercurial. I feel like many of the people who complain that git is too complicated and hold up mercurial as a bastion of simplicity don't really
233.
by krig 13y ago
Mercurial without enabling extensions such as mq is simple only in the same sense that quilt is simple compared to git. Things quickly become more complex as you try to actually use it and need to enable extensions to do what you can do wit
234.
by krig 13y ago
Those are all Mercurial concepts.
235.
by krig 13y ago
When you say "the currently checked out branch", do you mean the current branch, bookmark, head, local branch or mutable branch? Or maybe you are referring to the current phase, or a secret changeset? "Mercurial is so much si
236.
Site lets Swedes snoop on friends' criminal past(thelocal.se)
2 points by krig 13y ago|0 comments
237.
by krig 13y ago
Personally, I disagree. Sure, first you get time estimation. Then you get task-based time tracking, then you get average resolution time per committer, then you get weekly spreadsheet generation and analysis meetings on thursday afternoons
238.
Video archive from linux.conf.au 2014(mirror.linux.org.au)
1 points by krig 13y ago|0 comments
239.
by krig 13y ago
My understanding is that if one entity controls 51% of the network, they can push arbitrary modifications into the block chain. In effect, they can do whatever they want.
240.
by krig 13y ago
Ah, sorry for being unclear, I wasn't aware that this was such a loaded term. I am not against the GPL, and I don't mean that in a negative way. I meant that in the sense that it dictates conditions for the "combined work&quo

More ›