pcwalton

45 ms·

601.
by pcwalton 4y ago
No, a better standard does exist: https://iterm2.com/documentation-images.html In fact, mintty already supports it. Only xterm doesn't. Sixel really is just retrocomputing at this point.
602.
by pcwalton 4y ago
Yeah, I don't see the point in trying to resurrect a dead standard that isn't very efficient or widely supported. Backwards compatibility is important, but sixels aren't even that well supported nowadays†, so there's not
603.
by pcwalton 4y ago
To be fair, the first version of Foxit Reader is from no later than 2005. Its contemporaries were, like, Kazaa and Winamp.
604.
by pcwalton 4y ago
I would bet that if you profile Firefox WebRender there very little of the time is actually spent rasterizing glyphs. It takes like 10 microseconds to rasterize a small glyph, it's really nothing. Source: This is what I spent a ton of
605.
by pcwalton 4y ago
Honestly, there are so few different glyphs on a typical page, and CPUs are so fast, that it usually isn't that hard to just rerender every glyph on CPU and aggressively reuse glyph images in order to hit 60 FPS during pinch zoom, at l
606.
by pcwalton 4y ago
For most text rendering in the 2D UI use case, I'm not sure there is that much to solve anymore. Aggressive caching of rendered glyphs solves almost all the problems in practice. From what I can tell, Slug is targeted at games and 3D,
607.
by pcwalton 4y ago
The biggest problems with "colorless async" arise with FFI. You really can't abstract over the differences between a real OS mutex and a language mutex when you're interfacing with system libraries that expect locks to a
608.
by pcwalton 4y ago
> Pony does fearless concurrency better IMO Pony is garbage collected. Most of the reasons why Rust async/await are the way it is boil down to the fact that Rust is memory safe without using GC. > Forty2 shows how we can expand o
609.
by pcwalton 4y ago
The reason why games are tens or hundreds of gigabytes in size is that modern textures are high-resolution and models are high in detail; if you took away high-capacity storage, then you'd just end up with worse-looking games. The reas
610.
by pcwalton 4y ago
I highly suspect that a comprehensive accounting would show that any basic hardware optimization like speculative execution has saved the total worldwide computing industry hundreds of millions of dollars, if not more. At large scale, optim
611.
by pcwalton 4y ago
Note that https://github.com/bevyengine/rfcs/pull/45 is actually fairly active; it doesn't look like "very low priority" to me.
612.
by pcwalton 4y ago
I'm glad to see that this language has a garbage collector, in a time when "lightweight" languages increasingly forego GC and memory safety. Even in the Harvard architecture of WebAssembly which mitigates many of the security
613.
by pcwalton 4y ago
Here are a zillion memory safety problems in X libraries typical of what happens when you point a fuzzer at 1980s code: https://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/2013-May/036276.html
614.
by pcwalton 4y ago
I can't imagine anyone involved with Wayland wants to ban screen recorders. They just want to make sure they get the security right.
615.
by pcwalton 4y ago
But Wayland is far easier than that to secure, because it's reasonably secure today . Securing X11 would be a lot of work, which nobody has signed up to do. Far easier than fixing the relatively minor complaints about Wayland. Besides
616.
by pcwalton 4y ago
> I mean, c'mon, here's a simple X11 "any app can read out the contents of any other window" solution: add access controls to Xorg so that they can't. This exists and is called XSECURITY. It breaks everything, so
617.
by pcwalton 4y ago
> And let's be real: if you can do that then the game is up anyway. Local root exploits are cheap and pervasive That's why seccomp-bpf exists.
618.
by pcwalton 4y ago
macOS has a reasonable security model and it doesn't allow that without explicit (annoying-to-grant) user consent. On Windows, apps that are concerned about RCE can drop privileges and still access the desktop in a secure way. On X11,
619.
by pcwalton 4y ago
> That is not a concern in the world that I or many people live in; the desktop is not expected to provide this type of Web browser-level isolation to provide protection from adversarial programs running on our machines. Increasingly, it
620.
by pcwalton 4y ago
All of this is outweighed by the fact that any application using X11 has complete control of your entire desktop, including other applications. This fact makes Linux desktops using X11 significantly inferior in security to all other operati
621.
by pcwalton 4y ago
The 65816 has stack-relative addressing, and a relocatable direct page which can act as a sort of frame pointer, but it's still a far cry from being compiler-friendly. Severe annoyances include the painful lack of registers, having 8 a
622.
by pcwalton 4y ago
In some cases, they try to use that knowledge to teach the language to new generations so that it doesn't totally die out. Wašiw (Washoe) is an example that one of my professors worked on: https://www.americanindianmagazine.
623.
by pcwalton 4y ago
A huge amount of field linguistics is documentation of languages that are in danger of losing all their native speakers. Many Native American languages are in this category, for instance—it's common for these languages to have only a h
624.
by pcwalton 4y ago
The reason you're getting downvoted has nothing to do with the "progressive narrative" and everything to do with the fact that your posts are off-topic. Political complaints about Mozilla from a left perspective would be equa
625.
by pcwalton 4y ago
The approach described there is significantly different from Zig's approach, which doesn't use MTE and quarantines forever . Note that Chromium never seriously considered quarantining forever as Zig does because leaking every all
626.
by pcwalton 4y ago
Zig is not memory-safe (without quarantining allocations forever which is insufficient for production). Rust is. This is an enormous difference which affects everything about these languages. For example, the "gentler learning curve&qu
627.
by pcwalton 4y ago
Couldn't you fix that by just clearing the buffer in between the two calls? It won't be measurably slower to do that because the buffer should retain its allocated capacity.
628.
by pcwalton 4y ago
Even in this environment, you can still have dangling pointers to freed stack frames. There's no way around having a proper lifetime system, or a GC, if you want memory safety.
629.
by pcwalton 4y ago
People have done just that with, for example, Firefox components and found that yes, Rust gives you a safer product.
630.
by pcwalton 4y ago
> While not always the case, it is often the case that a good GC will beat all of those. A generational copying GC with parallel collection will treat most allocations as pointer bumps. Giving them the speed of a bump allocator with peri

More ›