throwawayish

26 ms·

241.
by throwawayish 10y ago
An entirely different but similar issue is logs. If you aggregate logs in a simple, unstructed text file, then it becomes pretty easy to add faked log lines, or, if they're viewed in the terminal plain-and-easy, embed VT control charac
242.
by throwawayish 10y ago
Python 3 has mostly more stuff than Python 2 in the stdlib, some Syntax improvements, most of which are supported by Python 2.7 backports as well. So yes, arguably there are entire classes of problems were one doesn't need to care abou
243.
by throwawayish 10y ago
Actually I don't believe that "those are the most fought-about change", I think it's a very loud minority. In more personal circles I don't know anyone who knows anyone who ... It might be though that the new text m
244.
by throwawayish 10y ago
Which is something you can do in Python 3 as well, if you really want the broken behaviour of Python 2 or the behaviour of Py2 is "ok for me".
245.
by throwawayish 10y ago
> (Note: Personally I would love to have str always represented internally in UTF-8. If it were like this, I would say "cast" was acceptable vocabulary. But it's not like this). UTF-8 is a good choice for transmission and
246.
by throwawayish 10y ago
Oh, not at all. I'm just saying that no one did string handling right when Python was conceived. (And, evidently, much of the brokenness persists).
247.
by throwawayish 10y ago
Actually, no. There are many differences between K&R/UNIX C and C89. For example, in K&R string constants could be modified, and repitions of the same constant would be different strings. This is not the case in C89. Variadic f
248.
by throwawayish 10y ago
To be fair, broken string handling is extremely abundant.
249.
by throwawayish 10y ago
This specific example would not work, since NUL bytes are not allowed in file names. open(b'test-\xd8\x01.txt', 'w').close() Makes the same point. Note that b'test-\xd8\x00.txt' is totally val
250.
by throwawayish 10y ago
Everyone is running around talking about semver, but then tell you that you're supposed to rename your project when you do breaking changes? Sure. And it's not like there was no early announcement that it won't be 100 % compa
251.
by throwawayish 10y ago
Yes. It's also hard to know whether "they" didn't try "hard enough" to get "better" curves or whether "they" didn't know any better(†) or whether "they" intentionally made the
252.
by throwawayish 10y ago
I don't think the backdoor in the NIST curves, if any , is that the curves themselves are not secure, but that they are so hard to implement that it's practically guaranteed that implementations have more-or-less critical issues
253.
by throwawayish 10y ago
Asymmetric encryption adds constant overhead, independent of message size. Unless you're doing it wrong.
254.
by throwawayish 10y ago
My main gripe with them is, apart from being a bit obscure, is that they're bog-slow. They give me something like two dozen MB/s encryption/decryption speed, on a machine that can do AEAD at 2.5-4 GB/s (AES-GCM or Chapol
255.
by throwawayish 10y ago
Asymmetric cryptography transforms key distribution problems into key management problems. Which is just a different problem, not necessarily an easier one, like you say.
256.
by throwawayish 10y ago
The defaults he has chosen hints at a distro that ships GPG v1 / classic, which has stranger defaults than GPG v2. IIRC the default ciphers are CAST5, (very slow) compression is on by default, hashes are RIPEMD I believe and so on
257.
by throwawayish 10y ago
If you want to feed dozens of GPUs with compute tasks then there is more specialized hardware for that with way better density. (That goes into a rack of course).
258.
by throwawayish 10y ago
At least they're stable. I have bookmarks on HP datasheet pages from the early 2000s that still work.
259.
by throwawayish 10y ago
The power-to-POWER ratio of these G5s was a joke. The mechanical design is quite sound (forgetting about the HDD cage for a second), though, and they look fetching, even today. (imho much better than the trash cans)
260.
by throwawayish 10y ago
Of course not; this isn't even possible with a dual socket system, which would also lack the memory bandwidth to do anything except idling with that many PCIe lanes. (Plus, if your IO bandwidth is pretty much the same as your memory ba
261.
by throwawayish 10y ago
Indeed. For this use case to_bytes would be correct (writing this in the most verbose way possible :) >>> (-352).to_bytes(length=4, byteorder='big', signed=True).hex() 'fffffea0' >>> (352)
262.
by throwawayish 10y ago
There are also other interesting uses for odd word lengths. For example, many UARTs support word lengths from 5 to 9-ish bits (some do more). This is commonly used to implement out of band signalling for protocols running over these, eg. us
263.
by throwawayish 10y ago
So Rust essentially has the same design issue that Python had before PEP 328?