saynsedit

13 ms·

91.
by saynsedit 10y ago
"Performs well" has no concrete meaning. It almost always requires a second question for clarification, e.g. "What does good performance specifically mean here?" Or "performs well compared to what ?" Scientist
92.
by saynsedit 10y ago
Performant is not a word. Use a word more specific to your meaning, perhaps "efficient" in this context.
93.
by saynsedit 10y ago
The original point is that this doesn't have to be a kernel. None of the current rationale gives any use-cases for the features you're offering, you're just saying "this feature requires kernel support" well what is
94.
by saynsedit 10y ago
No.
95.
by saynsedit 10y ago
* I don't see a time-slice accounting for the bus broker as an issue. If it's a system daemon, you can define away the problem. What's the use case for doing time-slice accounting where ignoring the system daemon's usage
96.
by saynsedit 10y ago
You can create a multicast-capable (n-to-n) IPC system in such a way that is safe, reliable, predictable, scalable, fast and lightweight in user-space. Kernel is not required!
97.
by saynsedit 10y ago
"Software must be provided as a package – not as a service – with each user running their own private copy." My ideology resonates with this statement. On a more rational level, I agree that an environment that promotes applicatio
98.
by saynsedit 10y ago
What would you say is the main driving rationale for bus1?
99.
by saynsedit 10y ago
I see, so basically assume the two end points are at zero and there is some rotation accounting for the endpoint offset in real space. It still doesn't seem fully accurate as I can imagine a non-rotated cubic curve with endpoints at an
100.
by saynsedit 10y ago
Is using a curve whose end points are fixed to zero to model the warping accurate? I can't see a rationale for why the end points should both be 0.
101.
by saynsedit 10y ago
News release from the future: After 2 years the original Otto product failed to get a footing in the market. Simultaneously, all attempts to integrate Otto technology into the core uber product failed due to internal politics and the funda
102.
by saynsedit 10y ago
Any examples? Even Debian packages include custom patches.
103.
by saynsedit 10y ago
Sure, you're correct on that. Thanks for staying on topic.
104.
by saynsedit 10y ago
No I very much did not make it my strawman. Look at the original announcement email, they themselves list performance as their main motivation. Please, I can argue down any allegedly rationale for creating Bus1. Try me. You have yet to pu
105.
by saynsedit 10y ago
This is still irrelevant. You were asserting that the majority of programmers think Linux == UNIX and have never tried to write a portable application. Thst is clearly false as the majority of programmers probably confuse Mac OS X for UNIX
106.
by saynsedit 10y ago
I don't buy these arguments... For priority inversion it seems dbus-daemon is at fault here, not user-space message routing in general. It's just as easy to have two message routing processes, one for low priority messages and one
107.
by saynsedit 10y ago
My point still stands. I don't think it's very likely that the main power hog in a mobile phone is the IPC mechanism. Unless IPC is happening in a tight loop, on the order of millions if times per second, it's just not common
108.
by saynsedit 10y ago
Irrelevant, if the vast majority of modern packages work with the big three, it's highly likely they work with other conforming POSIX systems.
109.
by saynsedit 10y ago
If people started writing about how Kaspersky was not to be trusted because of potential ties to the Russian government that would seriously harm their business!!! Kaspersky is a potential advertiser after all. Better to reserve the Russian
110.
by saynsedit 10y ago
Manafort's Russian ties aren't only known to Trump. The entire Republican Party establishment is well-aware of his background. Manafort is a part of that establishment and he's close to HW Bush. This isn't Trump using pr
111.
by saynsedit 10y ago
http://bfy.tw/7HAG
112.
by saynsedit 10y ago
The reasons are mostly performance reasons. As I said in my other post, IPC latency is way down in the priority list of things to optimize (relatively to network and disk latency). Unless the application is a HPC parallel computation that i
113.
by saynsedit 10y ago
There's no case for this usually marginal speed benefit. Most programs are dealing with vastly slower bottlenecks. Like network or disk latency. IPC latency is so far down the list of priorities in terms of things to optimize. Not to m
114.
by saynsedit 10y ago
Eh? The majority of modern POSIXy software runs on at least Linux, Mac OS X, and FreeBSD. In fact, Mac OS X is the most widely deployed UNIX-like system ever. What you're a claiming to be true probably more applies to Mac OS X than Lin
115.
by saynsedit 10y ago
What's more likely: Trump hires Manafort because he has Russian ties? Or Trump hires Manafort because he's connected to the Republican establishment?
116.
by saynsedit 10y ago
That's like saying "I use this hammer to tie my shoes and it's good because now I have a hammer."
117.
by saynsedit 10y ago
A simple cron job doesn't require managing uptime. It just needs to run frequently enough and then upload the generated HTML to github. I'm sure he uses his laptop at least once a day. This is crazy!!!
118.
by saynsedit 10y ago
The Lambda method seems like a more complex and unreasonable way to solve the problem. It's like using a hammer to tie your shoes. This can literally run from his laptop whenever it's online. You don't need a fully fledged se
119.
by saynsedit 10y ago
Run the Python cron job every five minutes. It checks the condition of all data sources. You don't need a server to do this, you can run this from your house!
120.
by saynsedit 10y ago
Why is this not a single Python script on a cron that uploads to github pages?

More ›