rumcajz

81 ms·

751.
by rumcajz 14y ago
Are there societies that are notorious for being quiet? Finland, maybe?
752.
EINTR and What It Is Good For(250bpm.com)
1 points by rumcajz 14y ago|0 comments
753.
by rumcajz 14y ago
Nice. If there is a hardware patenet, just re-implement it in software and you are safe.
754.
The Merit of AMQP(250bpm.com)
6 points by rumcajz 14y ago|0 comments
755.
by rumcajz 14y ago
Pretty in line with classical music theory. Further, one would expect that I6/4 chord which was not functionally analysed in the article will be in majority of cases followed by V chord, possibly the two chords sharing the same bass note.
756.
by rumcajz 14y ago
There's a LOT of engineers in SV. If everyone get as little as one great idea each 10 years it's a lot of great ideas. The cognitive bias described in the article doesn't really matter because of the statistical nature of the process. The p
757.
by rumcajz 14y ago
epoll/iocp is the most visible difference, however, the amount of time spent porting is more due to subtle differences in every POSIX-like function. File discriptor is int? Nope, it's SOCKET. -1 means it is invalid? Nope. Use INVALID_SOCKET
758.
by rumcajz 14y ago
Well, I am from Slovakia and the privatisation lead to 10-15 of Mafia-style capitalism. Of course, the situation was and still is much worse further to the east.
759.
by rumcajz 14y ago
What are the alternatives? Transferring from state-owned economy to privately owned one has to happen somehow. The experiment with straightforward privatisation, as done in Eastern European countries after 1989 was a disaster at least compa
760.
by rumcajz 14y ago
My experience: When implementing ZeroMQ, porting it to a new platform normally took few hours. Porting it to OpenVMS, which is a real oddball among modern operating systems took several days. Porting it to Windows took several months. Even
761.
by rumcajz 14y ago
Opposite end of JMS would be pretty good still. AMQP/1-0 throws away the broker model which is well defined in JMS (Queues & Topics).
762.
Clarifying AMQP (kellabyte.com)
2 points by rumcajz 14y ago|0 comments
763.
Getting Rid of Domain Registrars Using Bitcoin Algorithm (250bpm.com)
2 points by rumcajz 14y ago|0 comments
764.
by rumcajz 14y ago
Nice. Imagine that domain names were mined for rather than assigned by random registration authorities.
765.
by rumcajz 14y ago
As with any self-sustaining system (politics, economy, ecology) you need a feedback loop to form among the parties with conflicting interests. If the feedback loop is broken, the system deteriorates and ultimately falls apart. If it's ineff
766.
by rumcajz 14y ago
How would you explain the double-hump distribution of grades then?
767.
"Enclave" programming pattern(250bpm.com)
2 points by rumcajz 14y ago|0 comments
768.
by rumcajz 14y ago
On the other hand, there's a lot of concepts that can't be articulated clearly in a programming language but are pretty clear if you draw a picture. For, example, specifying the boundaries of critical sections in the system with many classe
769.
by rumcajz 14y ago
Try copying a complex object with threads running inside it, open file descriptors being used etc. What does it mean, for example, to copy a running DB engine? Some objects are just non-copyable by principle.
770.
by rumcajz 14y ago
Why so? Linked list (the intusive version) has O(1) complexity insertion & removal. That's often exactly what you want.
771.
by rumcajz 14y ago
Yes. For me the biggest added value of an OO model is the encapsulation. If a language is not capable of delivering it why use it at all?
772.
by rumcajz 14y ago
Well, what kind of problem is that in C? It's C. It has no public/private keywords. Nobody expect struct in C to be well-encapsulated.
773.
by rumcajz 14y ago
Friend only allows others to access your private members. It doesn't allow you to define members in other classes though.
774.
by rumcajz 14y ago
Yep. That's the way it is done in C. See Linux kernel for example. No problem with that as there's no expectation of well-encapsulated objects in C.
775.
by rumcajz 14y ago
I've given an example of the language extension that would solve the problem at the end of the article.
776.
by rumcajz 14y ago
How would you implement an O(1) list without breaking encapsulation then?
777.
by rumcajz 14y ago
Yup. It's possible to do that. My point was that if you want to do that you break the encapsulation, i.e. contained object would have to know about its container(s). This applies to Boost intrusive lists as well AFAICS.
778.
by rumcajz 14y ago
My point was that the trade-off is not something unavoidable. A better language could allow you to syntactically decouple the tightly coupled objects. See the example at the end of the article.
779.
by rumcajz 14y ago
I've modified the text to address this comment: EDIT: A lot of people point out that iterator should be used instead of pointer. However, imagine the object is contained in 10 different lists. You would have to pass structure containing 10
780.
by rumcajz 14y ago
Why not pass iterators? Consider the case where the object is contained in two lists. You would have to pass a pair of iterators. What if it is in 3 lists? Etc.

More ›