HN user
I misread this as AI initially ...
The japanese have it harder because "ai" means love. But perhaps "love" will be written in kanji while "AI" in katakana, so writing form is not confusing.
I'm more amazed you run the same machine for 20 years. Another 20+ years user, but I've reinstalled 5-6 times when I change laptops.
Every time I try and learn Vulkan I end up getting confused and annoyed about how much code I need to write and give up.
Vulkan isn't meant for beginners. It's a lot more verbose even if you know the fundamentals. Modern OpenGL would be good enough. If you have to use Vulkan, maybe use one of the libraries built on top of it (I use SDL3 for example). You still have freedom doing whatever you want with shaders and leave most of resource management to those libraries.
But you're right: ulimately the kernel is just a program.
Play a bit with user mode linux [1] the kernel becomes literally a linux program, that I believe you can even debug with gdb (hazy memory as I tried uml last time maybe a decade ago)
In theory you can also attach gdb to qemu running linux, but that's more complicated.
It's 2000. Build failure was pretty much expected for any software. Probably a good idea to stay home and work through any problem. Nowadays you'll just fire up a build and go. And the build is probably finished before you're out of the door.
I get your point, but reviewing your own PRs is a very good idea.
Yes. You just have to be in a different mindset. I look for cases that I haven't handled (and corner cases in general). I can try to summarize what the code does and see if it actually meets the goal, if there's any downsides. If the solution in the end turns out too complicated to describe, it may be time to step back and think again. If the code can run in many different configurations (or platforms), review time is when I start to see if I accidentally break anything.
The top of the page links to this https://practical-scheme.net/oneday.html that explains more what practical means for the author (of Gauche Scheme). In short
One day, however, I will point this page, when the friend asks me if Scheme is feasible for daily chores and a practical choice.
fuse probably isn't a good example here because you still have to enter kernel space if i'm not mistaken, then out again to the fs driver in userspace then probably back to kernel space (block driver). fuse has many upsides, but I don't think performance is one of them.
If this is ad hoc solution, what's the "right" approach?
The author answered on lobster thread [1]. This is more of an io_uring exercise than an attempt to replace ls.
The only git-notes related issue I found is https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/issues/6385. So, probably because nobody has raised it.
past? I'm still running it. If I don't, I find something is missing on the right side of my screen. I got my theme off freshmeat.net. The original source is gone now [1], so I have to copy the theme to any new laptop I have.
[1] can't find a mirror anywhere. But if anyone knows the "Industrial" theme, I'd love to know.
because it's not worth the risk of breaking plenty applications out there (or in the case of office, documents). I have heard stories of MS making changes to keep older apps working. Imagine carrying all that to a new rewrite.
It was experimental to allow the developers to tweak UI, including breaking backward compatibility if needed. But I left Git shortly after these were added. I guess nobody picked this up to finish the job (even by just removing the experimental status, since nothing has changed for years and I assume nobody complained about them).
There were preview releases before, when they promised to not break ABI but could still add/refine things.
They mention this in https://github.com/asterinas/asterinas/blob/2af9916de92f8ca1...
While we prioritize compatibility, it is important to note that Asterinas does not, nor will it in the future, support the loading of Linux kernel modules.
As someone who also uses emacs, I type C-a a so often that sometimes I do the same in emacs and it leaves an extra a. It's quite rare though.
With XCOM 2 if you miss a tile in the last turn, you lose the mission. It's not a great execution even if it does apply time pressure. Long War or other mods handle this much better by bringing in reinforcement, so you can't stay for long, but you won't lose just because you miscount the tiles.
seems easily worked around with base64 and friends.
Gentoo Linux
I think you can see a modern CPU as a network. There are some beefy servers doing all the heavy lifting which is what the outsiders see. But there's also a few smaller servers here and there monitoring the system (or even responsible for powering on the entire network).
Curlhammer 40k is the ultimate one.
It's part of the language [1] [2]
Builtin operators && and || perform short-circuit evaluation (do not evaluate the second operand if the result is known after evaluating the first), but overloaded operators behave like regular function calls and always evaluate both
[1] https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/operator_logical [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short-circuit_evaluation
Or this [1]. A bunch of gauche.* modules are not listed there.
[1] http://practical-scheme.net/gauche/man/gauche-refe/Module-In...
A disadvantage of the RISC design was that since programs required more instructions, they took up more space in memory. Back in the late 1970s, when the first generation of CPUs were being designed, 1 megabyte of memory cost about $5,000. So any way to reduce the memory size of programs (and having a complex instruction set would help do that) was valuable. This is why chips like the Intel 8080, 8088, and 80286 had so many instructions.
But memory prices were dropping rapidly. By 1994, that 1 megabyte would be under $6. So the extra memory required for a RISC CPU was going to be much less of a problem in the future.
I think this is still a problem? Not memory size, but the speed of the memory bus.
Windows is not affected because it uses IBRS instead, which is less performant than retpoline. So the question is, is IRBS overhead less or more than 28% now?
since you can't really decrease your temperature you might as well learn to live at the upper extreme
There is a MinuteEarth video about this YouTube if I remember correctly and the reason is well.. more reasonable. Our body works better at higher temperature, but of course if it gets too high everything breaks down. So the optimum temp is somewhere closer to the upper limit.
What does it mean in British English?
one does not simply make pointer arithmetic by accident
I'm not sure about that. This has bitten me a few times (in more complicated form)
"hello " + 12