Protecting microsoft from the year of the linux desktop is the intended meaning.

The incredible thing is this is actually the result of an explicit design decision.

The compiler accepts most GCC flags. Unrecognized flags (e.g., architecture- specific -m flags, unknown -f flags) are silently ignored so ccc can serve as a drop-in GCC replacement in build systems.

They’re so committed to vibing that they’d prefer if the compiler just does random shit to make it easier to shove it haphazardly into a build pipeline.

maybe they were looking for extra special characters like 🁄 or ⶸ. Who am I kidding, RFC 1738 tells us that literally everything is unsafe and you know, we need to prepare for the inevitable occasion when the password somehow ends up inside an URL.

The characters “<” and “>” are unsafe because they are used as the delimiters around URLs in free text;
the quote mark (“”") is used to delimit URLs in some systems.
The character “#” is unsafe
The character “%” is unsafe

It ends up with

Thus, only alphanumerics, the special characters
$ - _ . + ! * ’ ( ) ,
are safe

it’s

while (true) {
    let t = Date.now();
    if (timeoutMap.has(t)) timeoutMap[t]();
}

of course. Clearly O(n).

“You want to use teams a bit? We have a session here” “I’d be happy to, actually. Not really, but it wouldn’t be bad” “Not really? If you say so, I have a teams session ready right here” “No. No. I’m not stupid” “People use it every day.” “Tell the truth” “It’s a good user experience.” “So are you ready to use it? For 5 minutes?” “No, I’m not an idiot.”

They already have almost all of the discrete gpu market, they’d have to expand to new markets (although they are kind of exploring that already)

Originally planned to post it in this format but thought too much reaction within reaction would be bad (and including mr. theo ai glazer felt questionable)

I wish I knew

club penguin (it’s ok, the twitter reply formatting is impossible to understand)

and with a good enough leak, the amount of unused memory will become negative!

The oxford that says this?

Acronym

1. A group of initial letters used as an abbreviation for a name or expression, each letter or part being pronounced separately; an initialism

or the merriam webster that says this?

Some people feel strongly that acronym should only be used for terms like NATO, which is pronounced as a single word, and that initialism should be used if the individual letters are all pronounced distinctly, as with FBI. Our research shows that acronym is commonly used to refer to both types of abbreviations.

Well eh, the binary seems to be about 130MB while the ffmpeg source repository is only 80MB (and the version with separate .so files (all part of the project as far as I can see) is even larger)

buffer overflows are critical for memory safety since they can cause silent data corruption (bad) and remote code execution (very bad). Compared to those a “clean” unhandled runtime error is far preferable in most cases.

We can avoid expensive branches (gasp) by using some bitwise arithmetic to achieve the so-called “absolute value”, an advanced hacker technique I learnt at Blizzard. Also unlike c, c# is not enlightened enough to understand that my code is perfect so it complains about “not all code paths returning a value”.

private bool IsEven(int number)
{
    number *= 1 - 2*(int)(((uint)number & 2147483648) >> 31);
    if (number > 1) return IsEven(number - 2);
    if (number == 0) return true;
    if (number == 1) return false;
    throw new Exception();
}

After working at blizzard for 51 years, I finally found an elegant solution by using the power of recursion

private bool IsEven(int number){
  if (number > 1) return IsEven(number - 2);
  if (number == 0) return true;
  if (number == 1) return false;
}

funny how well this fits for both meanings

Yeah, it’s in my edit I realized the same thing. I’m thinking it doesn’t actually really make sense and the real reason is more “the specific way C does it causes a lot of problems so we’re not poking syntax like that with a 10 foot pole” + “it makes writing the parser easier” + maybe a bit of “it makes grepping easier”

So I think it’s still probably unclear to people why “mix of keywords and identifiers” is bad: it means any new keyword could break backwards compatibility because someone could have already named a type the same thing as that new keyword.

This syntax puts type identifiers in the very prominent position of “generic fresh statement after semicolon or newline”

…though I’ve spent like 10 minutes thinking about this and now it’s again not making sense to me. Isn’t the very common plain “already_existing_variable = 5” also causing the same problem? We’d have to go back to cobol style “SET foo = 5” for everything to actually make it not an issue

You can still be snobby by instead insisting on “fold, scan, iterate”

I think this is talking about basic functionality, eg. can you do basic stuff with a clean install without everything immediately breaking

There’s a lot of programming tools that are primarily developed for and on linux, and “windows support” is an afterthought which will result in linux being a very frictionless experience but windows being a minefield of problems and requiring careful manual setup