mdwrigh2

16 ms·

121.
by mdwrigh2 13y ago
That's not actually the codebase for code search though -- it's a re-implementation of it done in the original authors new language.
122.
by mdwrigh2 13y ago
> Chrome Apps are cool, Android is cool, but "Play Store" -- if it's just remotely as "submit for approval" as Apple, then thanks but no thanks. It isn't. There's no approval process. Pay your developer
123.
by mdwrigh2 13y ago
I'll give you that what you say about the Go team's motivations is entirely possible (though I don't believe it to be the case), but not responding to blog post comments shouldn't be indicative of anything.
124.
by mdwrigh2 13y ago
So because Russ Cox didn't respond to some comments on his blog, the Go team is trying to shield users from generics because they think they're too complicated? I don't buy that. If you follow the go-nuts mailing list, the pros and cons of
125.
by mdwrigh2 13y ago
Until they upgrade to hangouts from GTalk, federation will continue to work.
126.
by mdwrigh2 13y ago
I don't this contradicts the article, as I'd fully agree with both the article and you. The article just says that SAT scores and GPAs don't matter so much -- technical chops still do.
127.
by mdwrigh2 13y ago
CAH == Cards Against Humanity ( http://cardsagainsthumanity.com/ ), in case that wasn't clear to everyone.
128.
by mdwrigh2 13y ago
> One thing I noticed right away is this is clearly based off Eclipse, as many IDE’s are these days. That’s not really a bad thing, as Eclipse works really well in many ways and there isn’t any reason to reinvent the wheel. But if you d
129.
by mdwrigh2 13y ago
Of the products listed, only Reader has been deprecated.
130.
by mdwrigh2 14y ago
I don't think you really understood the Go example. In C if I have: struct SuperClass { int foo; }; struct SubClass { struct SuperClass super; }; Then to set the foo item I'd have to do: struct SubCl
131.
by mdwrigh2 14y ago
> the starting package for a just-out-of-undergrad Facebook engineer is around $2 million over four years Uhm. Not quite.
132.
by mdwrigh2 14y ago
They admitted it was a publicity stunt: http://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyclay/2013/03/10/seattle-bar...
133.
by mdwrigh2 14y ago
I would argue that "web browser" is a misnomer. I don't expect my browser to display IRC, Usenet, etc. etc. Besides, there's a lot of web content that requires plugins and extensions to view properly. I don't see why that can't be the case
134.
by mdwrigh2 14y ago
Note that I didn't say you shouldn't read your RSS feeds in the browser, just that it isn't necessary for it to be part of the core browser itself. Extensions, web apps, etc. are all ways of reading RSS in the browser without it being direc
135.
by mdwrigh2 14y ago
I'm not convinced that it needs to be a part of Chrome however. Honestly, it sounds like a great use case for a Chrome extension.
136.
by mdwrigh2 14y ago
No, I don't. RSS has been brought to the forefront over the last couple days, so the fact that someone thought of this bug is totally conceivable.
137.
by mdwrigh2 14y ago
This has nothing to do with thinking RSS is dead or needs to be replaced, or whatever. It's just closing a feature request that was never going to be implemented. It never really made sense for the web browser itself to also be an RSS reade
138.
by mdwrigh2 14y ago
It just requires cleaning the dock every 2 - 4 weeks in order for it to "stick". It's a nice accessory to sit on your desk though.
139.
by mdwrigh2 14y ago
I'm a big fan of moderncv: https://github.com/mdwrigh2/resume
140.
by mdwrigh2 14y ago
I don't think he is. He references creat, printf and jump, which happen to be a syscall, function and instruction, respectively.
141.
by mdwrigh2 14y ago
> I completely agree that it is a huge missed opportunity not to be able to call into Go from C code and I can understand complaints that mandatory gc might prevent Go from replacing C in some domains. As rsc has pointed out a few times
142.
by mdwrigh2 14y ago
Previous discussion: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4213806
143.
by mdwrigh2 14y ago
Point of reference: I ordered mine and had it 3 days later.
144.
by mdwrigh2 14y ago
Possibly because the monitor actually has a 1 year warranty (i.e. the OP was wrong). (Note that I didn't downvote, I'm just giving a plausible explanation as to why someone might.)
145.
by mdwrigh2 14y ago
> I have to either logout/login or re-request the share using the doc I want (which is the path I use). Have you tried multiple sign-in? http://support.google.com/accounts/bin/answer.py?hl=en&a...
146.
by mdwrigh2 14y ago
> No, the failure point here is, essentially, unknown hardware from Google's perspective. Android is not coded to work specifically with Samsung's configurations or hardware, so Samsung needs to provide drivers. As for "more rigorous" r
147.
by mdwrigh2 14y ago
> I suggested one that you quoted directly below your question. So far the two suggestions have been "Don't let anyone but Google write code", which is pretty much the antithesis of the Android project. Nevermind the fact that Samsung h
148.
by mdwrigh2 14y ago
> Some sort of certification process before being allowed to ship customized builds would seem to do it. You still haven't answered what the requirement is, just that Google should have requirements and enforce them. What requirement s
149.
by mdwrigh2 14y ago
So the "more rigorous requirements for OEMs" is "no OEMs at all"? Seems a little like throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Besides, part of the point of Android is having an OS which allows for companies like Samsung to build their own
150.
by mdwrigh2 14y ago
I'm curious what requirement you think would prevent this.

More ›